,! ,hi/orical ,evid5ce = ! ,virg9 ,bir? by ,v9c5t ,taylor1 ,b4,d4 7,lond47 ,cl>5don ,press ,ox=d #aibj ,,cont5ts ,preface ,abbreviations ,*apt] ,i4 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? ,& ,! ,new ,te/am5t ,outside ,! ,fir/ ,& ,?ird ,gospels ,i4 ,/4 ,paul ,,ii4 ,q ,,iii4 ,/4 ,m>k's ,gospel ,,iv4 ,acts ,v4 ,! ,epi/le to ! ,hebrews ,,vi4 ,! ,f\r? ,gospel ,,vii4 ,! ,pa/oral & ! ,ca?olic ,epi/les & ! ,apocalypse ,,viii4 ,summ>y ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? ,& ,! ,?ird ,gospel ,i4 ,n>ratives & ,passages ,said to be ,inconsi/5t ,) ! ,view 7a7 ,lk4 iii4 #bb1 accord+ to ! 8,we/]n ,text0 7b7 ,! ,lukan ,g5ealogy & ,lk4 iii4 #bc 7c7 ,! ,n>ratives ( ,lk4 ii 7d7 ,! ,ref]5ces to ,joseph & ,m>y 9 ,lk4 ii 7e7 ,lk4 ii4 #e ,,ii4 ,! ,passage ,lk4 i4 #cd f 7a7 ,! ,int]pretation ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f 7b7 ,! ,purport ( ! ,angelic ,ann\ncem5t 9 ,lk4 i4 #cjc 7c7 ,reasons = reg>d+ ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 z a ,lat] ,ins]tion ,,iii4 ,summ>y & ,conclusion ,*apt] ,,iii4 ,/4 ,luke & ! ,virg9 ,bir? ,i4 ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 & ! ,textual ,"q ,,ii4 ,l+ui/ic & ,/yli/ic ,exam9ation ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f ,,iii4 ,summ>y & ,conclusion ,*apt] ,,iv4 ,! ,place ,( ,! ,virg9 ,bir? ,9 ,! ,?ird ,gospel ,i4 ,a ,sugge/$ ,!ory ,,ii4 ,lit]>y ,conditions ,"u ,:i* ! ,gospels ,7 ,writt5 ,,iii4 ,! ,objections to ,:i* ! ,above ,!ory is ,expos$ ,,iv4 ,c]ta9 ,consequ5ces ,*apt] ,v4 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? ,& ,! ,fir/ ,gospel ,i4 ,! ,*>act]i/ics ( ! ,g5ealogy ,,ii4 ,! ,g5u95ess ( ,mt4 i1 ii ,,iii4 ,! ,unity ( ,mt4 i1 ii #a4 ,! ,g5ealogy #b4 ,! ,passage ,mt4 i4 #ahbe ,,iv4 ,implications1 ,s\rces1 & ,results ,app5dix ,to ,*apt] ,v4 ,! ,textual ,problem ( ,mt4 i4 #af ,*apt] ,,vi4 ,! ,hi/orical ,"q3 ,its ,limits ,& ,be>+s ,i4 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? 9 ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels ,,ii4 ,! ,date ( ! ,gospels 9 ,relation to ! ,virg9 ,bir? ,tradition ,,iii4 ,! ,relation ( ! ,"q ( ! ,hi/orical ,value ( ! ,gospels to ! ,problem ,,iv4 ,! ,"q ( ,alt]native ,!ories ,v4 ,doctr9al ,consid]ations ,index ,footnotes ,cov] ,art ,,preface ,?is book is int5d$ to be a lit]>y & critical exam9ation ( ! hi/orical evid5ce = ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,x is n ! writ]'s desire to discuss ! evid5ce f ! po9t ( view ( an advocate2 ) a view1 t is to say1 ( obta9+ an uncompromis+ v]dict4 ,8 aim is r to trace & to def9e ! e>lie/ ,*ri/ian tradition ^u ! subject1 & to %[ ! limits & ! be>+s ( ! hi/orical "q4 ,a limit$ aim su* z ?is ought n to require mu* ju/ification4 ,if1 h[ev]1 ju/ification is ne$$1 x is n f> to seek4 ,mu* ( ! lit]ature :i* treats ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? is controv]sial 9 po9t ( orig9 if n 9 =m1 &1 9 ! nature ( ! case1 x c\ld n h be5 o!rwise4 ,controv]sial lit]ature has1 ( c\rse1 a necess>y place 9 ! se>* = tru?4 ,nev]!less1 x is expos$ to s]i\s p]ils1 especially :5 su* a subject z t ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? is discuss$4 ,x is n always easy1 = example1 to avoid an arbitr>y treatm5t ( ! ,new ,te/am5t1 & to prev5t philosophic or dogmatic presuppositions f det]m9+ purely critical que/ions4 ,few w d5y t ! discussion ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? has suff]$ 9 ^! directions1 & t1 z a consequ5ce1 ! problem rema9s 9 consid]able confusion4 ,n only has ! evid5ce be5 v>i\sly e/imat$1 b !re are ! wide/ diff]5ces ( op9ion z to :at ! evid5ce really is4 ,nei!r side has succe$$ 9 conv9c+ ! o!r1 & v _m /ud5ts ( ! "q pres]ve an attitude ( susp5d$ judgem5t4 ,! po9t :i* x is important to make is t1 if any escape is to be made f ! pres5t impasse1 ! problem mu/ be approa*$ 9 ano!r way4 ,doctr9al presuppositions mu/ be resolutely laid aside2 !re mu/ be a common desire to asc]ta9 ! true facts ( ! evid5ce1 :atev] ! results may be4 ,n t dogmatic consid]ations h no place 9 ! problem6 ,x is "p ( ! conclusion rea*$ 9 ?is book t 9 ! end dogmatic consid]ations d det]m9e ! issue4 ,b x mu/ be 89 ! end02 n at ! beg9n+1 nor 9 ! middle4 ,x may be t ! writ] has n himself escap$ ! p]ils to :i* he has ref]r$4 ,he c only say t no pa9s h be5 sp>$ to a*ieve ?is purpose4 ,x is true t ! problem has be5 fac$ ) a conviction t1 :ile truly man1 ,jesus 0 mu* m ?an man z we "k him to be4 ,b ?is is n a presupposition :i* col\rs ! evid5ce4 ,on ! contr>y1 x is ! "o po9t ( view :i* recognizes t !re is a problem to be solv$4 ,if our ,"l 0 a prophet1 & no m1 !re is no real difficulty2 no "o w\ld def5d ! ,virg9 ,bir? ^u su* t]ms4 ,! "q becomes a liv+ issue only :5 ,jesus is believ$ to be m ?an man4 ,9 ,*apt] ,i ! ,new ,te/am5t evid5ce outside ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels is discuss$4 ,on ! "q ( ! attitude ( ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ to ! ,virg9 ,bir?--a "q z difficult z x is int]e/+--! writ] has be5 glad to accept & to "w out a /rik+ sugge/ion made by ,dr4 ,e4 ,f4 ,scott 7,! ,f\r? ,gospel1 its ,purpose & ,!ology74 ,"o reason = allott+ ?ree *apt]s to ! ,?ird ,gospel is ! complexity ( ! ,lukan problem4 ,! !ory :i* is outl9$ 9 ,*apt] ,,iv is "o :i* has n yet receiv$ suffici5t consid]ation4 ,! alt]native1 9 ! op9ion ( ! writ]1 is to reg>d ! ,miracul\s ,conception z a 8necess>y /one 9 ! /ructure0 ( ,lk4 i1 ii4 ,x is ! difficulties m5tion$ 9 ,*apt] ,,ii :i* h prev5t$ him f tak+ ?is view4 ,! writ] is conv9c$ t ,/4 ,luke believ$ & taught ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,nev]!less1 ! critical difficulties are su* t x has n be5 f\nd possible to accept ?is view 9 ! =m 9 :i* x is g5]ally held4 ,x is well to rememb] t he :o /ates a !ory 9 connexion ) su* problems contributes to _! solution1 :e!r 8 !ory /&s ! te/ ( "t or n4 ,ev5 9 ! case ( failure ! possibilities are r$uc$ & a bypa? is reveal$ z su*4 ,z an illu/ration ( ?is1 ref]5ce may be made to ! view :i* ascribes ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition 9 ,lk4 i1 ii to an unkn[n & lat] writ]4 ,"o *apt] 7,*apt] ,v7 has be5 assign$ to ! ,fir/ ,gospel4 ,! exposition !re giv5 is "o :i* is widely held 9 ?is c\ntry1 b an attempt has be5 made to emphasize ! unique "* ( ! ,evangeli/'s /&po9t1 :i*1 x is believ$1 is ! key to ! textual problem ( ,mt4 i4 #af4 ,! textual problem is treat$ 9 an ,app5dix to ! *apt]4 ,x may seem /range t 9 ,*apt] ,,vi no decid$ op9ion is express$ = or aga9/ ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,! ju/ification = ?is position is ! fact t1 9 ! end1 ! "q becomes "o ( ,!ology1 & t to attack ! !ological problem w\ld be to g beyond ! limit$ aim :i* ! pres5t "w has 9 view4 ,"o result ( ! inve/igation is t ! docum5t>y evid5ce = ! ,virg9 ,bir? is f\nd to be e>li] ?an 8negative0 criticism has all[$4 ,b to accept ?is conclusion is only to be br\ght face to face ) ! "q :i* ! mod]n ,new ,te/am5t /ud5t _c escape4 8,:5ce come ! s\rces ^u :i* ! ,evangeli/s drew80 ,at fir/ sight ! problem seems hopeless4 ,to recov] & to describe ) objectivity ( /atem5t ! sev]al s\rces :i* ! ,evangeli/s employ$ is a task beset ) difficulties3 to p5etrate /ill fur!r might well seem impossible4 ,if1 h[ev]1 ! problem is fac$ bravely1 ) an op5 m9d & an eag]ness to le>n1 x may be t z "t passes !re w be cause to rejoice ov] real progress made4 ,! j\rney is n ! plunge into ! d>k :i* x might be ?\ght to be4 ,if1 inde$1 x w br+ m5 ne>] to ! ,jesus ( hi/ory1 x is a que/ :i* _c be refus$1 h[ev] great ! difficulties may be4 ,9 a subject su* z ?is1 c]ta9 ?+s h necess>ily to be tak5 = grant$4 ,! au?or ( ! ,fir/ ,gospel is reg>d$ z unkn[n2 accord+ly1 he is spok5 ( z ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ or z ,/4 8,mat!w04 ,! writ] ( ! ,f\r? ,gospel is also ref]r$ to z ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/1 ! "q ( au?or%ip be+ left op54 ,/4 ,m>k & ,/4 ,luke1 ! companions ( ,/4 ,paul1 are assum$ to be ! au?ors ( ! ,second & ,?ird ,gospels respectively2 ,/4 ,luke is also believ$ to be ! au?or ( ! ,acts4 ,! read] :o does n accept ^! views may m5tally sub/itute su* phrases z ! ,second & ,?ird ,evangeli/s :]ev] ,/4 ,m>k & ,/4 ,luke are m5tion$4 ,su* abbreviations z ,mt41 ,mk41 ,lk41 ,jn4 are always meant to ref] to ! ,gospels1 n to _! au?ors4 ,x only rema9s = ! writ] to express 8 deep s5se ( gratitude to ^? to ^: k & help he is debtor4 ,h[ mu* he owes to e>li] work]s 9 ! field w be suffici5tly evid5t4 ,x has prov$ by no means an easy task to weigh & to diff]5tiate betwe5 oppos+ views1 & ! writ] is n unm9dful ( 8 tem]ity1 9 c]ta9 places1 9 diss5t+ f op9ions support$ by ju/ly hon\r$ names4 ,he desires p>ticul>ly to speak ( ! g5]\s enc\ragem5t he receiv$ 9 8 task f ! late ,dr4 ,s&ay4 ,dr4 ,s&ay _h made a provisional promise to write a brief introduction to ! pres5t "w4 ,8 lam5t$ dea? has prev5t$ ! c>ry+ out ( ?is promise1 & = ! lack ( su* an introduction ! book is s mu* ! poor]4 ,! writ] fur!r wi%es to express 8 gratitude to 8 =m] tutor1 ! ,rev4 ,pr(4 ,a4 ,s4 ,g$51 ,m4,a41 ,d4,d41 & to ! ,rev4 ,j4 ,wal!w ,simi/]1 = _! k9dness 9 read+ ! typescript1 & 9 sugge/+ improvem5ts1 & also to ! ,rev4 ,pr(4 ,f4 ,b]tram ,clogg1 ,m4,a41 = 8 valu$ assi/ance 9 ! read+ ( ! pro(%eets4 ,v9c5t ,taylor4 ,,ba?1 ,septemb]1 #aibj4 ,,abbreviations ,,dcg4 ,ha/+s's ,diction>y ( ,*ri/ & ! ,gospels 7#aijfh74 ,,eb4 ,encyclopa$ia ,biblica 7#ahiiaijc74 ,evan4 ,da,meph4 ,f4 ,c4 ,burkitt's ,evangelion ,da,meph>re%e 7#aijd74 ,,ghd4 ,v4 ,h4 ,/anton's ,! ,gospels z ,hi/orical ,docum5ts1 ,p>ts ,i & ,,ii 7#aijci74 ,,ght4 ,f4 ,c4 ,burkitt's ,! ,gospel ,hi/ory & its ,transmission 7#aijf74 ,gr4 ii4 ,j4 ,h4 ,m\lton's ,gramm> ( ,new ,te/am5t ,greek1 ,vol4 ,,ii 7#aiai74 ,,hdb4 ,ha/+s's ,diction>y ( ! ,bible 7#ahihaijd74 ,,hj4 ,! ,hibb]t ,j\rnal4 ,,hs4 ,horae ,synopticae1 ,sir ,john ,c4 ,hawk9s 7#bnd ed41 #aiji74 ,,icc4 ,! ,int]national ,critical ,comm5t>y4 ,,int4 ,jli*]'s ,introduction to ! ,new ,te/am5t1 ,eng4 ,tr4 7#aijd72 ,j4 ,m(fatt's ,an ,introduction to ! ,lit]ature ( ! ,new ,te/am5t 7#crd ed41 #aiah74 ,proleg4 ,vol4 ,i ( ,j4 ,h4 ,m\lton's ,gramm> ( ,new ,te/am5t ,greek 7#crd ed41 #aijh74 ,,%4 ,s&ay & ,headlam's ,comm5t>y on ,! ,epi/le to ! ,romans 7,,icc41 #ahie74 ,?,gr4 ,?ay],grimm's ,greek,engli% ,lexicon ( ! ,new ,te/am5t 7#aije74 ,,vgt4 ,m\lton & ,milligan's ,! ,vocabul>y ( ! ,greek ,te/am5t1 ,p>ts ,i to ,,iii 7#aiadah74 ,,*apt] ,i4 ,,! ,,virg9 ,,bir? ,,& ,,! ,,new ,,te/am5t ,,outside ,,! ,,fir/ ,,& ,,?ird ,,gospels ,outside ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels !re is no direct ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir? 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t4 ,!re are passages :i* h be5 said to imply a k ( ! doctr9e1 b1 = p>ticul>ity ( /atem5t1 none ( !m c be comp>$ ) ,mt4 i4 #ahbe & ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,?is fact mu/ be our ju/ification 9 ! pres5t *apt] = treat+ toge!r ! ,new ,te/am5t ,books outside ^! two ,gospels4 ,! inquiry is ma9ly a /udy 9 sil5ce2 x is = t reason bo? difficult & complicat$4 ,dr4 ,s&ay has express$ consid]able di/ru/ 9 ! argum5t f sil5ce 7cf4 ,! ,criticism1 ( ! ,f\r? ,gospel1 pp4 #ccda74 ,he quotes a /rik+ passage f ,dr4 ,drummond's ,"* & ,au?or%ip ( ! ,f\r? ,gospel 7p4 #aeg f471 9 :i* ref]5ce is made to ,!ophilus ( ,antio*1 :o1 9 a def5ce ( ,*ri/ianity1 relates no?+ ab\t ,*ri/ ,himself1 & ma9ta9s a rem>kable sil5ce conc]n+ ! ,gospels4 ,! quotation ends ) ! words3 8,we may le>n f ^! curi\s facts t x is n correct to say t a writ] kn[s no?+ ( c]ta9 ?+s1 simply because he _h n occasion to ref] to !m 9 8 only extant writ+3 or ev5 because he does n m5tion !m :5 8 subject w\ld seem naturally to lead him to d s40 ,dr4 ,s&ay has two ma9 objections to ! way 9 :i* ! argum5t f sil5ce is (t5 h&l$4 87#a7 ,! critic does n ask himself :at is sil5t--:at ext5t ( mat]ial4444 ,& 7#b7 exp]i5ce %[s t ! argum5t is (t5 mo/ fallaci\s0 7op4 cit41 p4 #ce74 ,no?+ c be lo/ 9 consid]+ ?is op9ion at ! outset ( our inquiry4 ,9 ! connexion 9 :i* x is urg$1 x has v great ju/ification4 ,dr4 ,s&ay is ref]r+ to ! paucity ( ref]5ces to ! ,gospels 9 ! second c5tury previ\s to #agj ,a4,d4 ,! real "q is1 he says1 8,:at is ! relation :i* ! extant evid5ce be>s to ! :ole body ( t :i* once exi/$1 & h[ f> c we tru/ ! inf]5ces drawn f x80 ,! available lit]ature is confess$ly small4 8,if we take ! :ole extant ,*ri/ian lit]ature betwe5 ! ye>s #acj & #agj ,a4,d41 x w\ld n fill m ?an a ?9 octavo volume1 & by f> ! great] "p ( t is tak5 up ) ext]nal controv]sy0 7ib41 p4 #ci74 ,! caution sugge/$ by ^! words is di/9ctly heal?y4 ,x may be que/ion$1 h[ev]1 :e!r ,dr4 ,s&ay's po9t ( view w\ld apply q s well z reg>ds ! alleg$ sil5ce ( s _m ,new ,te/am5t ,books ) ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,!re are good reasons = ?is op9ion4 7#a7 ,! exi/+ ,new ,te/am5t ,writ+s repres5t ! be/ ,*ri/ian lit]ature ( ! p]iod :i* !y cov]4 ,no "o w\ld comp>e !m 9 ?is respect ) ! extant works ( ! fir/ sev5 decades ( ! second c5tury4 7#b7 ,:ile n exhau/ive 9 _! treatm5t1 ! ,gospels are fai?ful to ! out/&+ ev5ts 9 ! life ( ,jesus4 7#c7 ,! ,epi/les are ri* 9 doctr9al tea*+4 ,occasional 9 po9t ( orig91 !y imp+e aga9 & aga9 ^u ! great doctr9es ( ! ,*ri/ian ,fai?4 ,! ,inc>nation & ! ,p]son ( ,*ri/ especially are c5tral4 ,if1 !n1 v _m ,new ,te/am5t ,writ+s are f\nd to be sil5t z reg>ds ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 ! sil5ce is n "o :i* c be ignor$4 ,x may 9 "p be expla9$1 b x mu/ n be expla9$ away4 ,if x exi/s1 x is n a sil5ce :i* c be reg>d$ ) equanimity2 x mu/ be significant1 & no pa9s c be sp>$ 9 try+ to und]/& t significance4 ,we believe1 !n1 t ! argum5tum ex sil5tio has a valid place 9 our inquiry4 ,all ! m1 !re=e1 mu/ we consid] :at ! possibilities ( sil5ce are4 ,obvi\sly1 sil5ce may be consi/5t ) k ( a fact or lack ( k4 ,b t is n all4 ,if x implies k1 x may mean tacit acceptance ( ! fact1 tacit rejection1 or comp>ative indiff]5ce4 ,lack ( k1 on ! o!r h&1 may be expla9$ by special circum/ances1 or by ! view t ! alleg$ fact is untrue4 ,9 treat+ ! ,new ,te/am5t ,books outside ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels1 our fir/ task mu/ be to det]m9e :e!r _! sil5ce is complete4 ,:]e ?is is ! case1 we h to try1 s f> z we c1 to int]pret ! sil5ce4 ,ea* /age is1 h[ev]1 a fur!r /ep into ! unkn[n1 & mu/ !re=e be tak5 ) increas+ c>e & caution4 ,i4 ,/4 ,paul ,we beg9 ) ,,/4 ,,paul1 ! e>lie/ ,new ,te/am5t writ]1 & ! au?or ( t51 if n ?irte51 ,epi/les4 ,sev]al passages h be5 quot$ f 8 writ+s1 9 support ( ! view t ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition 0 kn[n to him4 ,among ^! are ,gal4 iv4 #d1 ,rom4 i4 #c1 & passages 9 :i* ,/4 ,paul speaks ( ,*ri/ z ! ,second ,adam1 notably ,rom4 v4 #abae & #a ,cor4 xv4 #dg4 ,gal4 iv4 #d f4 reads z foll[s3 ,b :5 ! fulness ( ! "t came1 ,god s5t =? 8 ,son1 born ( a woman1 born "u ! law1 t he might r$eem !m :i* 7 "u ! law1 t we might receive ! adoption ( sons4 ,x is mo/ improbable t !re is "h any ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 or ev5 any indication t ! doctr9e is kn[n to ,/4 ,paul4 ,! phrase 8born ( a woman0 is "o t is us$ naturally ( an ord9>y human bir? 7cf4 ,job xiv4 #a2 & ,mt4 xi4 #aa 7,lk4 vii4 #bh7 8among !m t are born ( wom5074 ,! det]m9+ consid]ation is1 h[ev]1 ! argum5t ( ,gal4 iv4 #ag4 ,/4 ,paul is !re work+ out ! figure ( ! heir :o is yet a m9or 7v]ses #a1 #b74 ,:ile we 7 *ildr51 he argues1 we 7 9 bondage 7v]se #c74 ,b1 :5 ! fulness ( ! "t came1 ,god s5t =? 8 ,son to r$eem m5 f ! law4 ,to accompli% ?is purpose1 ! ,son mu/ ne$s make ,himself "o ) ^? ,he came to deliv]4 ,l !m ,he mu/ be 8born "u ! law02 l !m ,he mu/ be 8born ( a woman04 ,! "o clause ass]ts ,8 position z a *ild ( ! ,jewi% race2 ! o!r decl>es ! reality ( ,8 humanity4 ,!re is n ! slighte/ sugge/ion ( a miracul\s bir?47#a7 ,inde$1 ! m natural impression made by ! words is t ( a bir? common to all ! sons ( m54 ,if ,/4 ,paul _h wi%$ to avoid giv+ t impression1 he c\ld h done s ) ease1 s9ce he 0 p]fectly famili> ) ! di/9ction betwe5 7woman7 & 7virg97 7cf4 #a ,cor4 vii4 #cd74 ,rom4 i4 #c f4 reads3 8444 8 ,son1 :o 0 born ( ! se$ ( ,david accord+ to ! fle%1 :o 0 decl>$ to be ! ,son ( ,god ) p[]1 accord+ to ! _s ( hol9ess1 by ! resurrection ( ! dead40 ,"h ! ?\ght ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? is said to lie implicit 9 ! op5+ words ( ! passage 7cf4 ,orr1 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,*ri/1 pp4 #aai ff42 also ,kn[l+1 ,te/imony ( ,/4 ,paul to ,*ri/1 p4 #cac2 & ,sweet1 ,! ,bir? & ,infancy ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 p4 #bcg n474 ,aga91 ! exegesis _c be all[$4 ,/4 ,paul's words /ate an anti!sis2 !y speak ( ! ,son f two /&po9ts1 t ( ! body & t ( ! _s 7,,%41 ,rom41 p4 #g74 8,accord+ to ! fle%01 ,he 0 8born 77 ( ! se$ ( ,david01 b1 8accord+ to ! _s ( hol9ess01 ,he 0 designat$ 77 ,son ( ,god 8by ! resurrection ( ! dead04 ,x is v difficult to ?9k t ! anti!sis w\ld h be5 /at$ 9 ?is way1 if ! ,apo/le _h be5 ?9k+ ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 8,born ( ! se$ ( ,david0 conta9s no ref]5ce to ! doctr9e4 ,! ,div9e ,son%ip1 inde$1 is n m5tion$ until ! foll[+ clause1 & !re x is said to be pr$icat$1 n 9 ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 b 9 ! ,resurrection4 ,)\t press+ ! view t 8accord+ to ! fle% born ( ! se$ ( ,david0 implies an ord9>y human bir?1 we may c]ta9ly claim t ! ,miracul\s ,conception is a ?\ght entirely =eign to ! passage4 ,a fur!r implication ( ! doctr9e has be5 f\nd 9 ,/4 ,paul's ?\ght ( ! ,second ,adam 7,rom4 v4 #abba1 #a ,cor4 xv4 #ddi74 ,9 ,diss]tations 7new ed41 p4 #aa71 ,dr4 ,gore writes3 8,:at we c ma9ta91 ) great boldness1 is t ,/4 ,paul's conception ( ! #8,second ,adam' po/ulates ,8 miracul\s bir?0 7cf4 ,box1 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,jesus1 p4 #aej74 ,9 a "q ( ?is k9d1 we mu/ di/+ui% betwe5 :at ! doctr9e ( ! 8,second ,adam0 may or may n 8po/ulate0 9 our own m9ds1 & :at ,/4 ,paul's ?\ghts may h be54 ,c]ta9ly he gives u no reason to suppose t ! ,virg9 ,bir? 0 9 ! backgr\nd ( 8 m9d :5 he wrote ,rom4 v4 #abba47b7 ,!re w\ld be z mu* ju/ification1 if n m1 = ! contr>y sugge/ion4 ,s f> z #a ,cor4 xv4 #ddi is conc]n$--7v]se #dg reads3 8,! second man is ( heav507--! ref]5ce is to ! ,resurrection1 n ! ,inc>nation47#c7 ,none ( ^! passages is suffici5t to %[ t ,/4 ,paul 0 acqua9t$ ) ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 nor c any o!rs be cit$4 ,?is fact is ! m rem>kable :5 we call to m9d ! great ,paul9e passages :i* be> ^u ! ,inc>nation4 ,) ! close/ scrut9y1 n "o ( !m gives u reason to ?9k t ! ,apo/le knew ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,?is is true ( ! great ,*ri/ological passage ( ,phil4 ii4 #eaa1 & also ( ! wellkn[n words ( #b ,cor4 viii4 #i4 ,mo/ significant 9 ?is connexion are ,phil4 ii4 #g 78,be+ made 9 ! lik5ess ( man07 & ,rom4 viii4 #c 7:i* speaks ( ! ,son z s5t 89 ! lik5ess ( s9ful fle%074 ,^! passages are important because !y cle>ly imply a diff]5ce betwe5 ! humanity ( ,*ri/ & ord9>y humanity4 ,?is diff]5ce--indicat$ by ! ^w 8lik5ess0 77--is c]ta9ly n a diff]5ce 9 mode ( orig94 ,its "* is manife/ 9 ,rom4 viii4 #c2 x lies 9 ! s9lessness & moral p]fection ( ,jesus47#d7 ,!re is no indication t ! ,apo/le is ?9k+ ( any?+ fur!r1 & ! same is true ( ,phil4 ii4 #g4 ,view+ ! passages z a :ole1 we mu/ conclude t1 n only is ,/4 ,paul completely sil5t z to ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 b t he is sil5t j :]e 8 sil5ce is mo/ difficult to und]/&1 if he knew ( ! tradition4 ,c we g fur!r1 & say t ,/4 ,paul did n "k ( ! doctr9e8 ,%ort ( a h>d & fa/ conclusion1 we are at lib]ty to /ate :at w\ld seem to be ! probabilities ( ! case2 & z reg>ds ^! we c h little hesitation4 ,x is reasonable to urge t ,/4 ,paul w\ld h phras$ 8 ref]5ces to ! ,inc>nation some:at diff]5tly1 if he _h kn[n ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 & t1 on ! :ole1 8 words are be/ expla9$ by presum+ 8 ignorance ( ! tradition4 ,w4 ,c4 ,all5 has sugge/$ t ,/4 ,paul's sil5ce may h be5 due to reasons ( prud5ce4 ,he may h ?\ght t ! tradition w\ld prove 8a great /umbl+block to ! progress ( ,*ri/ianity1 & a cont9ual s\rce ( w\nd$ feel+ = ! rev]5ce ( ,*ri/ians = ! ,p]son ( _! ,ma/]0 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 #bj74 ,x is possible t ?is argum5t might g "s way to expla9 ! abs5ce ( direct allusions to ! ,virg9 ,bir? 9 ,/4 ,paul's writ+s4 ,x might cov] 8 failure to employ ! tradition z 8an argum5t = ,*ri/ianity 9 8 prea*+ to ! ,g5tiles04 ,b1 assur$ly1 ! !ory is /ret*$ to break+po9t1 if x is made to cov] ! abs5ce ( ! slighte/ indication t ! doctr9e 0 pres5t to ,/4 ,paul's m9d4 ,= ! mo/ "p1 ,/4 ,paul's ,epi/les 7 n public manife/oes1 b private lett]s1 writt5 to ,*ri/ian communities4 ,moreov]1 !y are int5sely selfreveal+4 ,!y p]mit u to appreciate h[ mu* ,/4 ,paul knew ( ! words & de$s ( ,jesus1 & ( ! ev5ts ( ,8 e>?ly life4 ,t !y reveal no k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? is h>dly to be expla9$ by a policy ( sil5ce4 ,unless1 on o!r gr\nds1 x c be %[n t ! tradition 0 kn[n 9 ,apo/olic circles dur+ ,/4 ,paul's lifetime1 8 sil5ce mu/ be int]pret$ to mean lack ( k conc]n+ x4 ,?is conclusion1 if e/abli%$1 w\ld n1 ( c\rse1 be fatal to ! hi/orical value ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition4 ,special reasons might be =?com+ to acc\nt = ! lat] spread ( ! belief4 ,! importance ( ,/4 ,paul's sil5ce is t x furni%es help 9 decid+ :5 ! belief became curr5t4 ,a fur!r inf]5ce1 ( consid]able !ological importance1 is t ! ,apo/le c\ld build up a mature & consi/5t ,*ri/ology1 )\t any ref]5ce to1 & app>5tly1 ?\ght ( ! ,miracul\s ,conception4 ,,ii4 ,q ,q 7,quelle1 8s\rce07 is ! symbol us$ to d5ote ! ma9 docum5t>y s\rce1 ^u :i* ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,evangeli/s drew1 9 addition to ,/4 ,m>k's ,gospel4 ,z reg>ds its "*1 !re is diff]5ce ( op9ion4 ,"s s*ol>s id5tify x ) ! ,mat?aean ,logia ( :i* ,papias speaks2 o!rs reg>d ! latt] z an indep5d5t collection ( ,messianic pro(texts4 ,by "s x is ?\ght to h be5 a ,gospel2 by o!rs x is look$ ^u z a collection ( ! ,say+s ( ,jesus1 ) a c]ta9 elem5t ( n>rative4 ,wellhaus5 dates x lat] ?an ,mk41 b mo/ s*ol>s ?9k t x is e>li]1 & date x f ! sixties & 9 "s cases f ! fifties47#e7 ,z reg>ds ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 x is almo/ c]ta9 t ,q did n conta9 ! tradition4 ,h>nack ?9ks t ,q's n>rative ( ! ,baptism1 ) its use ( ,ps4 ii4 #g1 8excludes all ideas ( preexi/5ce & miracul\s bir?0 7,say+s ( ,jesus1 p4 #bce71 & ,j4 ,m4 ,?ompson1 :o quotes ?is op9ion1 f9ds 9 ! ,bapti/'s "q1 8,art ?\ he t come?8017#f7 a passage :i* x is 8h>d to reconcile 444 ) ,lk4's /ory ( ! ,bir?1 z g5]ally int]pret$0 7,miracles1 p4 #adj74 ,:at is m important ?an ei!r ( ^! argum5ts1 is ! fact t nei!r ! ,fir/ nor ! ,?ird ,evangeli/ drew a ,virg9 ,bir? tradition f ,q4 ,! presumption is t ,q 0 sil5t z reg>ds ! ,virg9 ,bir?17#g7 b 9 view ( ! fact t x probably conta9$ only a small elem5t ( n>rative1 we ought n to say m47#h7 ,,iii4 ,/4 ,m>k's ,gospel ,9 treat+ ,,/4 ,,m>k',s ,,gospel1 our fir/ task is to ask if its sil5ce is complete4 ,?is leads at once to a discussion ( ,mk4 vi4 #c3 8,is n ?is ! c>p5t]1 ! son ( ,m>y44480 ,p>5tage among ! ,jews 0 trac$ on ! fa!r's side4 ,! passage may !re=e imply t ,joseph 0 already dead4 ,ar*deacon ,all5 ?9ks t 8son ( ,m>y0 is 8m naturally an allusion to ! sup]natural circum/ances ( ! bir? ( ,jesus0 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 #aef747i7 ,)\t go+ s f> z ?is1 ,canon ,box ?9ks t !re is some?+ 8decid$ly rem>kable & unusual0 9 ! phrase1 & sugge/s t x is probably contemptu\s 7op4 cit41 p4 #aci74 ,h[ev] we expla9 ! phrase1 we ought n to int]pret ,mk4 vi4 #c z imply+ a k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? on ! "p ( ! p ( ,naz>e?4 ,mt4 xiii4 #ee & ,lk4 iv4 #bb directly exclude ?is view47#aj7 8,:o w\ld allude to ! miracul\s bir? ( somebody z a reason = n believ+ 9 him80 7,?ompson1 ib41 p4 #ach n474 ,b did ! ,evangeli/ "k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?8 ,has a k ( ! doctr9e %ap$ 8 phras+ 9 ,mk4 vi4 #c8 ,! "q is complicat$ by critical consid]ations4 ,x is sugge/$ by sev]al s*ol>s t ! passage1 9 :ole or 9 "p1 is a lat] addition to ! ,second ,gospel47#aa7 ,!re is mu* to be said = ?is view1 b1 s f> z our imm$iate purpose is conc]n$1 we h no ne$ to discuss x 9 detail4 ,on ei!r view--t ( ! critical !ory j m5tion$1 or t :i* attributes ! passage to ! ,evangeli/--x is improbable t ,/4 ,m>k int5d$ to ref] to ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 or 0 influ5c$ by ! doctr9e4 ,on ! int]polationhypo!sis1 ?is is obvi\s en\gh1 b x is also true if ,mk4 vi4 #c is orig9al4 ,! sugge/ions t ,joseph 0 already dead1 & t a c]ta9 contempt brea!s 9 ! words1 h great =ce4 ,we may also note t ! passage goes on to ref] to ! bro!rs & si/]s ( ,jesus1 ) no sugge/ion t ! relation%ip 0 o!r ?an full & complete4 ,b :at is mo/ tell+ ( all is ! fact t1 if ,mk4 vi4 #c does imply ,/4 ,m>k's k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 bo? ,/4 8,mat!w0 & ,/4 ,luke1 9 _! own n>ratives1 h de/roy$ ! ref]5ce4 ,?is is all ! m rem>kable if ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/'s treatm5t ( ,mk4 vi4 #c is motiv$ by rev]5ce = ! ,p]son ( ,jesus47#ab7 ,f9ally1 c we suppose t ,/4 ,m>k w\ld h plac$ 8 sole ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir? 9 ! lips ( unbeliev+ ,jews :o speak ) ?9ly veil$ contempt8 ,= ^! reasons1 we f9d x impossible to discov] 9 ,mk4 vi4 #c a ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir? by ,/4 ,m>k2 ! ,evangeli/'s sil5ce is unbrok54 ,01 !n1 ! tradition unkn[n to ,/4 ,m>k8 ,sev]al passages h be5 cit$ 9 support ( ! cont5tion t ,/4 ,m>k _h no k ( ! doctr9e4 ,among ^! is ,mk4 iii4 #ba1 #cae 7cf4 ,mt4 xii4 #dfej2 ,lk4 viii4 #aiba74 ,! /ory ( ,mk4 iii4 #cae is t ( ! com+ ( ,m>y & ( ! bro!rs ( ,jesus1 :ile our ,"l is surr\nd$ by a cr[d1 app>5tly 9 a h\se4 ,:5 ,jesus is in=m$ t !y are )\t seek+ ,him1 ,he says1 8,:o is my "m & my bre?r5801 & look+ r\nd ^u ! assembl$ company1 ,he cont9ues1 8,behold1 my "m & my bre?r56 ,= :osoev] %all d ! w ( ,god1 ! same is my bro!r1 & si/]1 & "m04 ,! acc\nt 9 ,mt4 is almo/ id5tical1 & ,/4 ,luke's /ory1 :ile mu* brief]1 is sub/antially ! same4 ,b ,/4 ,m>k's n>rative mu/ be read 9 ! light ( ,mk4 iii4 #ba 7cf4 ,g\ld1 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,mk41 pp4 #fa1 #fg7--;a passage :i* is omitt$ 9 ,mt4 & 9 ,lk4 ,!re1 we are told t ! fri5ds ( ,jesus 7 1 probably 8,8 k9sm507 w5t out to lay hold on ,him1 9 ! belief t ,he 0 mad4 ,?is fact mu/ unque/ionably be held to expla9 ! action ( ! family ( ,jesus 9 ! incid5t ( ,mk4 iii4 #cae1 & ! "q arises1 ,did ,m>y %>e 9 ! fe>s & int5tions ( ! re/87#ac7 ,a second passage is ,mk4 vi4 #d1 :]e ,jesus decl>es t a prophet is n )\t hon\r1 save 9 8 own c\ntry1 & among 8 own k91 & 9 8 own h\se4 ,! phrase 8among 8 own k901 :i* bo? ,mt4 7xiii4 #eg7 & ,lk4 7iv4 #bd7 omit1 is said to po9t 9 ! same direction z ,mk4 iii4 #ba1 #cae47ad7 ,a ?ird incid5t adduc$ is t record$ 9 ,mk4 xii4 #ceg 7,mt4 xxii4 #daf2 ,lk4 xx4 #dad71 :]e ,jesus raises ! "q1 h[ ! ,messiah c be at once ,david's ,son & ,david's ,"l4 8,"h aga901 writes ,mr4 ,?ompson1 8,jesus assumes ! reality ( t human p>5tage on :i* ,8 ,davidic desc5t relies4444 ,?us x appe>s t on ?ree sep>ate occasions 7& !re are no o!rs7 :5 ,jesus1 accord+ to ! e>lie/ ,gospel1 spoke ab\t ,8 bir?1 ,he us$ language naturally compatible ) human p>5tage1 & n naturally compatible ) any?+ else0 7op4 cit41 p4 #ach74 ,x w be se5 t ^! passages raise m ?an ! "q :e!r ,/4 ,m>k knew ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,!y raise ! "q ( ! k ( ,jesus1 & inde$ ! :ole "q ( ! hi/orical "* ( ! ,miracul\s ,conception4 ,cle>ly1 ! "q ( ! k ( ,jesus is a det]m9ative consid]ation4 ,few inde$ w c>e to argue = ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 if x c be prov$ t ,jesus knew no?+ ( x1 b believ$ ,himself to be ! son ( ,joseph4 ,j = ?is v reason we ought to be scrupul\sly c>eful 9 treat+ ! "q4 ,a sci5tific inquiry w hesitate to draw an inf]5ce :i* makes fur!r rese>* sup]flu\s4 ,& 9 ! pres5t case hesitation is amply ju/ifi$4 ,we _c %>e ,mr4 ,?ompson's conviction t ! words ( ,jesus ackn[l$ge a natural p>5tage4 7#a7 ,su* exegesis mu/ suff] an obvi\s disc\nt if we f9d t ! ,evangeli/ knew no?+ ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 7#b7 ,we _c be c]ta9 t ,m>y %>$ ! fe>s & int5tions ( h] *ildr54 7#c7 ,we d n "k ! tone 9 :i* ,jesus spoke1 nor c we be sure t ,he int5d$ to repudiate ,8 family4 ,x may be s2 b our op9ion on ^! matt]s mu/ re/ ^u :at we believe ab\t ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 ! evid5ce is too unc]ta9 to rev]se ! process4 ,z reg>ds ! ,evangeli/1 we may say at once t we c\ld acc\nt mu* m easily = ! passages cit$1 if ,/4 ,m>k did n "k ( ! doctr9e4 ,b x is d\btful if we c say m1 s long z we conf9e ourselves to :at ,/4 ,m>k has actually writt54 ,!re is little difficulty 9 ! ?ird passage 7,mk4 xii4 #ceg71 s9ce bo? ,mt4 & ,lk4 repeat x )\t mat]ial v>iation4 ,nor is !re ! =ce claim$ 9 ! phrase 8among 8 own k90 7,mk4 vi4 #d74 ,9 any case ,mt4 has ! words 89 8 own h\se01 & probably ! omission ( ! =m] phrase is suffici5tly expla9$ by ! writ]'s t5d5cy to remove r$undant expressions 9 ,mk47#ae7 ,:ile 9 ! case ( ,/4 ,luke1 we h to rememb] t abbreviation is a common feature 9 8 use ( ,m>kan mat]ial4 ,! real difficulty lies 9 ,mk4 iii4 #ba1 #cae4 ,some?+ m ?an a desire = brevity mu/ acc\nt = ! lat] ,evangeli/s' treatm5t ( ?is /ory4 ,m>y's position & attitude are c]ta9ly left v ambigu\s 9 ! light ( ,mk4 iii4 #ba4 ,9 ! subsequ5t /ory ,/4 ,m>k does n di/+ui% h] f ! re/ 7iii4 #cae74 ,9 %ort1 he leaves h] op5 to ! *>ge ( hav+ ?\ght h] ,son di/raught & 9 ne$ ( re/ra9t4 ,ought we to f9d 9 ?is pro( t ,/4 ,m>k _h no k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?8 ,our hesitation 9 draw+ ?is conclusion arises out ( ! 8objectivity0 ( ,/4 ,m>k's writ+4 ,frequ5tly1 he does n hesitate to introduce details1 to :i*1 = v>i\s reasons1 ,/4 8,mat!w0 & ,/4 ,luke took exception4 ,he does n appe> to feel ! difficulties :i* ! lat] writ]s felt4 ,we c\ld n1 !re=e1 atta* ! same significance to an 8inconsi/5cy0 9 ,mk41 z 9 ,lk41 or 9 ,mt4 ,= ?is reason1 we ?9k t1 :ile ,mk4 iii4 #ba1 #cae raises v great difficulties1 ! passage is n suffici5t 9 itself to prove t ,/4 ,m>k knew no?+ ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,we may say t ! passage po9ts 9 ?is direction1 b t ! inf]5ce requires fur!r confirmation4 ,c ?is be f\nd8 ,we believe t x c be f\nd 9 ! broad fact ( ,/4 ,m>k's sil5ce4 ,!re is mu* great] significance 9 ,/4 ,m>k's sil5ce ?an is sometimes all[$4 ,:y %\ld he1 z an ,evangeli/1 rema9 sil5t ab\t ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 if he knew ( x1 & believ$ 9 x8 ,! deep int]e/ :i* he takes 9 ! desc5t ( ! ,_s at ! ,baptism1 & 8 evid5t int5tion to describe ?is ev5t z a crucial mom5t 9 ! life ( ,jesus1 set up a /rong presumption t1 _h he kn[n ( ! ,miracul\s ,conception1 he w\ld h introduc$ x into 8 n>rative4 ,!re is no suffici5t analogy 9 8 sil5ce ab\t o!r ev5ts 9 ! life ( ,jesus :i* lat] writ]s record2 no omission c be comp>$ ) ?is4 ,nor w reasons ( prud5ce acc\nt = 8 sil5ce2 ! ,second ,gospel is probably too late = ?is argum5t to h weight4 ,!re is /ill less =ce 9 ! sugge/ion t ,/4 ,m>k's int5tion 0 to describe only ! public m9i/ry ( ,jesus4 ,?is solution evades ! difficulty1 & comes p]il\sly ne> to say+ t ,/4 ,m>k does n record ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition because he does n record x6 ,! ,second ,gospel describes n only ! dea? & burial ( ,jesus1 b also ! visit ( ! wom5 to ! tomb1 & probably1 9 its orig9al end+1 "s ( ! ,po/,resurrection ,appe>ances ( ,jesus4 ,^! facts are en\gh to %[ h[ inadequate x w\ld be to describe ! ,gospel z an acc\nt ( ! public m9i/ry ( ,jesus4 ,hav+ reg>d to all ! facts ( ! case1 ! probability is t ,/4 ,m>k's sil5ce mu/ be expla9$ on ! gr\nd t ! ,evangeli/ _h no k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition4 ,! fur!r implication is t x =m$ no "p ( ,apo/olic prea*+1 & 0 unkn[n 9 ! circles 9 :i* ,/4 ,m>k mov$4 ,^! conclusions _c1 ( c\rse1 be h>d5$ into c]ta9ties2 !y move 9 ! realms ( :at is probable4 ,in/ead ( be+ capable ( refut+ o!r consid]ations :i* might arise1 !y !mselves require fur!r confirmation4 ,,iv4 ,acts ,!re is no ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 ei!r direct ( indirect1 9 ,,! ,,acts4 ,! presumption is t ! doctr9e _h no place 9 ,apo/olic prea*+47#af7 ,?is view is sugge/$1 n only by ! sil5ce ( ,acts1 b also by ! "* ( its ,*ri/ology4 ,*ri/ is spok5 ( z ,jesus ( ,naz>e?1 a man approv$ ( ,god by mighty works & wond]s & signs 7ii4 #bb71 & z "o :o 0 ano9t$ by ,god ) ! ,holy ,_s1 & ) p[]1 :o w5t ab\t do+ good 7x4 #ch74 ,he is ! ,holy & ,righte\s ,"o 7iii4 #ad71 ! ,pr9ce ( ,life 7iii4 #ae71 :om ,god made bo? ,"l & ,*ri/ 7ii4 #cf74 ,he is exalt$ to ! "r h& ( ,god1 to be a ,pr9ce & a ,savi\r1 = to give rep5tance to ,israel & remission ( s9s 7v4 #ca74 ,9 all ?is1 ! ma9 gr\nd ( appeal is to ! ,resurrection 7ii4 #bd1 #cb1 iii4 #ae1 iv4 #aj747ag7 ,! ref]5ce to ! miracles ( ,jesus 7ii4 #bb1 x4 #ch7 is 8! only direct & concrete allusion to ! ev5ts ( ,8 e>?ly life047#ah7 ,ev5 :]e ! ,davidic desc5t is m5tion$ 7ii4 #be f41 xiii4 #bc1 #cc71 !re is no sugge/ion o!r ?an t ( direct physical l9eage 78,( ?is man's se$ ha? ,god accord+ to promise br\ght unto ,israel a ,savi\r1 ,jesus01 xiii4 #bc74 ,does ! sil5ce ( ,acts p]mit u to draw any inf]5ces conc]n+ ,/4 ,luke's k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition8 ,! "q ought to be consid]$ ap>t altoge!r f ,lk4 i1 ii4 ,hav+ reg>d to ! "* ( ! "w we d n ?9k t any "o conclusion c safely be drawn4 ,! ,acts obvi\sly diff]s f ! ,gospels1 & we _c1 z 9 ! case ( ! ,paul9e ,epi/les1 look to x = any suffici5t acc\nt ( ! writ]'s ,*ri/ology4 ,x w\ld !re=e be unsafe to say t ! sil5ce ( ,acts implies t its au?or _h no k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?47#ai7 ,if ! doctr9e 0 n a subject ( ,apo/olic prea*+1 ,/4 ,luke mu/ h kn[n ?is3 8 sil5ce may !re=e be due to a s\nd hi/orical s5se4 ,if1 at ! "t :5 he wrote ! ,acts1 8 k ( ! tradition _h n long be5 ga9$1 he w\ld be /ill less likely to p]petrate :at w\ld h be5 an hi/orical ana*ronism4 ,on ! o!r h&1 we _c1 on ! evid5ce ( ! ,acts alone1 %[ t he did "k ( ! doctr9e1 & t ! possibilities j /at$ repres5t ! facts4 ,! case is "o 9 :i* ! argum5tum ex sil5tio w\ld be untru/wor?y 9 ei!r direction4 ,x %\ld be emphasiz$ t ?is view spr+s entirely out ( ! "* ( ! book1 & 9 no way affects ! use ( ! argum5t we h made 9 ! case ( ,mk4 & ! ,epi/les ( ,/4 ,paul4 ,v4 ,! ,epi/le to ! ,hebrews ,,! ,,epi/le ,,to ,,! ,,hebrews claims att5tion because ( ! develop$ "* ( its doctr9e ( ! ,p]son ( ,*ri/1 & because its writ]1 :ile n an eyewitness 7ii4 #c71 has a vivid k ( _m ev5ts 9 ! e>?ly life ( ,jesus4 ,z reg>ds ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 ! ,epi/le is completely sil5t4 ,9 ! comp>ison ) ,mel*iz$ek 7vii4 #ac71 no /ress c be laid on ! fact t ! latt] is describ$ z 8)\t fa!r02 he is also 8)\t "m0 & 8)\t g5ealogy04 ,! ref]5ce to ! desc5t ( ,jesus f ! tribe ( ,judah 7vii4 #ad7 is left q b>e4 ,ev5 ! /atem5ts conc]n+ ! s9lessness ( ,*ri/ 7iv4 #ae1 vii4 #bf71 & ! l(ty *>act]ization ( ! ,son z 8! effulg5ce0 ( ,god's glory & 8! v impress ( 8 sub/ance0 7i4 #c71 are made )\t a ^w z to ! me?od ( ! ,inc>nation4 ,x is difficult to read ! ,epi/le )\t feel+ t ! writ]'s ?\ght is n[h]e influ5c$ by ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,especially is ?is ! case 9 su* passages z ii4 #ad 78,s9ce !n ! *ildr5 are %>]s 77 9 fle% & blood1 he also himself 9 l mann] p>took ( 77 ! same0717#bj7 & ii4 #ag 78,x behov$ him 9 all ?+s to be made l unto 8 bre?r5074 ,two consid]ations =bid1 h[ev]1 ! draw+ ( ?is conclusion4 ,we h no c]ta9 k ( ! writ]'s id5tity1 & we h no o!r "w f 8 p5 ) :i* to comp>e ! ,epi/le4 ,its significance is !re=e ma9ly !ological2 x is an in/ance ( an elaborate doctr9al writ+17#ba7 com+ possibly f ! sev5? decade ( ! fir/ c5tury1 or1 m probably1 f ab\t ! ye> #hj ,a4,d41 9 :i* no ref]5ce ( any k9d is made to ! ,miracul\s ,conception4 ,?is fact1 h[ev] x is expla9$1 _c be ignor$1 & ! lat] we date ! ,epi/le ! m important x becomes4 ,,vi4 ,! ,f\r? ,gospel ,! sil5ce ( ,,! ,,f\r? ,,gospel reg>d+ ! ,virg9 ,bir? is n[ g5]ally admitt$27#bb7 ! only "q be+ :e!r !re is n a pass+ ref]5ce to ! doctr9e 9 ,jn4 i4 #ac47bc7 ,:at ! writ]'s sil5ce means is "o ( ! mo/ difficult problems 9 ! "q ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,! case is diff]5t f any we h yet consid]$4 ,= ! doctr9e ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? mu/ h be5 p]fectly well kn[n to ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/4 ,he 0 well acqua9t$ ) ! ,synoptic ,gospels17#bd7 & !re c be little d\bt b t he read ,lk4 i1 ii1 & ,mt4 i1 ii1 9 ! =m 9 :i* we h !m today4 ,t he knew ( ! tradition is fur!r confirm$ by ! fact t1 s e>ly probably z c4 #aaj ,a4,d41 ! ,epi/les ( ,ignatius conta9 sev]al ref]5ces to ! doctr9e 7,eph4 xviii4 #b2 xix4 #a2 ,magn4 #aa2 ,tr4 ix74 ,! difficulty is fur!r increas$ by ! fre$om ) :i* ! ,evangeli/ treats ! ,synoptics4 8,on ! "o h& _! cont5ts are v l>gely assum$2 & on ! o!r h& ! au?or does n hesitate1 :]e he ?9ks x necess>y1 to correct !m4444 ,! au?or evid5tly felt himself at lib]ty to select j ^? incid5ts :i* suit$ 8 purpose0 7,s&ay1 ,! ,criticism ( ! ,f\r? ,gospel1 p4 #ga74 ,z ! problem is usually treat$1 ! sil5ce ( ! ,f\r? ,gospel is said to mean ei!r 8tacit rejection0 or 8tacit acceptance0 ( ! tradition4 ,x may be que/ion$1 h[ev]1 if ^! alt]natives suffici5tly cov] ! possibilities ( ! case4 8,tacit rejection0 "u any circum/ances means repudiation ( ! doctr9e4 ,b 8tacit acceptance0 may mean any?+ f comp>ative indiff]5ce to :ole he>t$ ass5t4 ,z conta9+ ! %>p] issue1 ! case = 8tacit rejection0 may be consid]$ fir/4 ,among ! argum5ts 9 fav\r ( ?is view1 we may note ! foll[+3-- 7#a7 ,c]ta9 passages seem to require ?is position4 ,9 i4 #de ,jesus is describ$ by ,philip z 8! son ( ,joseph01 & 9 vi4 #db ! ,jews at ,cap]naum ask ! "q3 8,is n ?is ,jesus1 ! son ( ,joseph1 ^: fa!r & "m we "k80 ,?ree times1 moreov]1 controv]sy turns on ! "q ( ! bir?place ( ,jesus4 ,! ,jews look = ! bir?place ( ! ,messiah at ,be?lehem 78,ha? n ! scripture said t ! ,*ri/ come? ( ! se$ ( ,david1 & f ,be?lehem801 vii4 #db71 or !y reg>d x z unkn[n 78,:5 ! ,*ri/ come?1 no "o kn[e? :5ce he is01 vii4 #bg71 & ! objection is rais$ t ,jesus is ( ,galilee 7i4 #de1 vii4 #da f41 #eb74 ,n[h]e does ! ,evangeli/ expose ! futility ( ! controv]sy by a ref]5ce to ,be?lehem z ! bir?place ( ,jesus4 ,on ! contr>y 7x is said71 he himself believ$ ,naz>e? to be ! bir?place1 & mu/ ?us h reject$ ! tradition ( ,mt4 i1 ii4 7#b7 ,in/ead ( directly repudiat+ a p>ticul> ,synoptic n>rative1 ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/'s me?od is sil5tly to set x aside by pref]r+ ano!r tradition or view4 ,is n 8 pref]5ce = 8 own ,inc>nation !ory a tacit repudiation ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition8 ,( ^! argum5ts ! second c be all[$ only if we c %[ t ! ,evangeli/ look$ ^u ! two doctr9es1 t ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? & t ( ! ,inc>nation ( ! ,div9e ,logos1 z contradictory & mutually exclusive4 ,x is n possible1 h[ev]1 to prove ?is1 & to assume x is to beg ! "q4 ,! /rong] argum5t is ! fir/4 ,x is c]ta9ly difficult to %[ t ! language ( i4 #de & vi4 #db is t ( ,philip & ! ,jews respectively1 & t x does n reflect ! ,evangeli/'s po9t ( view4 ,9 ! ,f\r? ,gospel we are (t5 unable to assume t ! writ] int5ds to give ! ipsissima v]ba ( ^? :o speak4 ,are i4 #de & vi4 #db cases 9 po9t1 or are !y exceptions8 ,! "q is n an easy "o to decide1 unless1 ( c\rse1 we h satisfi$ ourselves t ! ,f\r? ,gospel is an entirely unhi/orical "w4 ,9 ?is case1 i4 #de & vi4 #db w repres5t ! ,evangeli/'s op9ions4 ,b1 on ?is view1 we h l>gely =feit$ our "r to appeal to ! ,f\r? ,gospel 9 treat+ ! "q ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? on its hi/orical side4 ,we _c h x bo? ways4 ,if ! ,f\r? ,gospel %[s a pron\nc$ disreg>d ( hi/ory1 x is n p]missible to draw hi/orical argum5ts f x4 ,x w h 7on ?is view7 an important be>+ on ! hi/orical "q f ! !ological side2 b1 z a prim>y hi/orical au?ority1 x mu/ disappe>4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 we admit--z we h good reason to admit--! pres5ce ( a consid]able elem5t ( valuable hi/orical tradition 9 ! ,f\r? ,gospel1 x is by no means c]ta9 t i4 #de & vi4 #db repres5t ! ,evangeli/'s views4 ,z 9 ! case ( ,mt4 xiii4 #ee & ,lk4 iv4 #bb1 ^! passages may indicate contempor>y op9ions & no m4 ,?is view is less easy to hold 9 ! case ( i4 #de & vi4 #db ?an x is 9 respect ( ! ,synoptic passages2 b x is a possibility n lightly to be set aside4 ,& if ?is is s1 we _c ) confid5ce urge t 9 i4 #de & vi4 #db ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ repudiates ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,z reg>ds ! passages :i* connect ,jesus ) ,naz>e? & ,galilee1 x is n necess>y to inf] t ! writ] look$ ^u ! t[n z ! bir?place ( our ,"l4 ,8 sil5ce reg>d+ ,be?lehem is /range1 b x does n compel u to conclude t he is reject+ ! tradition b\nd up ) ,mt4 i1 ii1 z ,mr4 ,?ompson ?9ks 7op4 cit41 p4 #aeh747be7 ,! m important fact is t ! ,evangeli/ does n "n any t[n1 n ev5 ,naz>e?1 z ! bir?place ( ! ,et]nal ,^w4 ,! view t ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ tacitly rejects ! ,virg9 ,bir? fails to ju/ify itself on int]nal gr\nds4 ,x is also oppos$ by consid]ations ( an ext]nal "*4 ,x is f ! locality 9 :i* probably ! ,f\r? ,gospel arose1 t we h ! e>lie/ ref]5ces to ! ,virg9 ,bir? outside ! ,new ,te/am5t4 ,ignatius1 accord+ to ,dr4 ,m(fatt 7,,int41 p4 #baa71 seems 8to fuse ! ,johann9e idea ( ! inc>nation ) ! synoptic bir?/ories04 ,if ?is is s1 ! fact does n compel u to suppose t ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ w\ld h done ! same2 b x raises a /rong presumption aga9/ ! view t he explicitly reject$ ! tradition4 ,mu/ we !n suppose t ! ,evangeli/'s sil5ce means 8tacit acceptance0 ( ! doctr9e8 ,obvi\sly1 ! failure to prove 8tacit rejection0 tells s f> 9 ! opposite direction4 ,b1 z we h se51 8tacit acceptance0 is a v ela/ic t]m2 x calls1 !re=e1 = clos] consid]ation4 ,x c sc>cely be %[n t ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ accepts ! ,virg9 ,bir? 9 ! same way 9 :i* x is held 9 ,mt4 i1 ii4 ,!re is no suffici5t answ] to ?is ass]tion 9 ! plea t ! /ory _h be5 already told1 & t ! ,evangeli/'s purpose 0 to supplem5t ! ,synoptic n>ratives4 ,?is is a view ( ! ,f\r? ,gospel :i* _c be c>ri$ ?r\gh4 ,x is bett] to suppose t ! ,evangeli/'s omission ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition has a m def9ite mean+1 ev5 ?\gh we reject ! view t its significance is sil5t repudiation ( ! doctr9e4 ,we h also to f9d a place 9 our solution ( ! problem = ! difficulties left ov] 9 i4 #de & vi4 #db1 & 9 ! ,evangeli/'s failure to "n ! bir?place ( ,jesus4 ,9 o!r words1 argum5ts insuffici5t to prove 8tacit rejection0 _c on t acc\nt be ignor$4 ,!y mu/ r be held to condition ! s5se 9 :i* we speak ( 8tacit acceptance04 ,! ,evangeli/'s sil5ce reg>d+ ! ,virg9 ,bir? c only be und]/ood :5 x is consid]$ along ) 8 o!r notable 8omissions04 ,x is "o ( 8a :ole s]ies ( episodes1 c>d9al to ! ,synoptic /ory0 7,scott1 ,f\r? ,gospel1 p4 #db74 ,?is s]ies includes ! ,g5ealogy1 ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 ! ,baptism1 ! ,temptation1 ! ,transfiguration1 ! ,supp]1 ! ,agony1 ! ,asc5sion4 ,! true explanation is probably t giv5 by ,dr4 ,e4 ,f4 ,scott3 8,^! rem>kable omissions 444 _c be due to ov]sight or to ! leav+ out ( :at 0 noness5tial4 ,)\t d\bt !y h be5 made delib]ately1 9 view ( c]ta9 !ories & presuppositions ) :i* ! writ] approa*$ 8 subject0 7ib41 p4 #db f474 ,^! words set u on ! "r track4 ,! ,evangeli/'s sil5ce does n mean t he reject$ ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition4 ,! ,synoptic bir?/ories 7 m probably accept$ by him 8z a "p ( ! or?odox tradition1 9 :i*1 z a memb] ( ! ,*ur*1 he acquiesc$0 7ib41 p4 #ahh74 ,8 doctr9al sympa?ies1 h[ev]1 lay 9 ano!r direction4 ,x may be t at ! "t :5 he fir/ he>d ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 8 doctr9e ( ! ,inc>nate ,^w _h already %ap$ itself 9 8 m9d4 ,jesus ,*ri/ 0 ! ,et]nal ,son ( ,god1 ! ,^w made fle%1 :o became inc>nate by ,8 own volunt>y act4 ,! fact t 8 own !ological s*eme 0 already develop$1 toge!r ) its specific "*17#bf7 may well acc\nt = 8 neglect ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,he does n d5y ! /ory1 b 8 own ,*ri/ology has sup]ior spiritual attractions4 ,x w be se5 t ?is !ory leaves little room = difficulties aris+ f su* passages z i4 #de & vi4 #db1 & expla9s at once ! ,evangeli/'s attitude to ! "q ( ! bir?place ( ,jesus4 ,on ! "o h&1 ! doctr9al presuppositions ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? 7 n op]ative 9 8 m9d2 on ! o!r h&1 9 ! light ( 8 doctr9e ( ! ,logos1 ! difficulties m5tion$ w\ld sc>cely be felt4 ,! ,jewi% controv]sies mu/ h seem$ to him s mu* play+ ) words4 ,:at did x matt] :]e ! ,^w became fle%8 ,:at did x matt] if m5 call$ ,him ,joseph's son8 ,our conclusion1 !n1 is t ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ tacitly accepts ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 b gives x no place 9 8 doctr9al sy/em4 ,) ! !ological significance ( ?is result we are n n[ conc]n$4 ,our pres5t int]e/ is r 9 its hi/orical implications4 ,on ! positive side1 x yields little2 on ! negative side1 its importance is great]4 ,x is n p]missible to argue aga9/ ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition on ! gr\nd t ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ reject$ x4 ,we may g fur!r & say t1 hav+ reg>d to 8 evid5t preoccupation ) ! ,logosdoctr9e1 x may n ev5 be safe to make too mu* ( ! fact t he ignor$ ! tradition4 ,,vii4 ,! ,pa/oral & ! ,ca?olic ,epi/les & ! ,apocalypse ,( ! ,new ,te/am5t ,writ+s1 o!r ?an ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels1 !re rema9 ,,! ,,pa/oral ,,& ,,! ,,ca?olic ,,epi/les ,,& ,,! ,,apocalypse4 ,:e!r ! ,pa/oral ,epi/les are ! "w ( ,/4 ,paul or n1 _! sil5ce reg>d+ ! ,virg9 ,bir? _c be press$4 #a ,tim4 iii4 #af 7probably a fragm5t f an e>ly ,*ri/ian hymn7 may or may n be significant 9 its sil5ce2 b1 9 ei!r direction1 ! inf]5ce w\ld be unsafe4 ,^! writ+s are mu* too brief & re/rict$ 9 subject matt] to leave room = ! argum5t f sil5ce4 ,! same view is also true ( ! ,ca?olic ,epi/les4 ,! ,apocalypse conta9s "o passage 7xii7 :i* has be5 ?\ght to indicate ! writ]'s k ( ! doctr9e17#bg7 b ! inf]5ce is f> f be+ c]ta91 &1 9 any case1 9 view ( ! date ( ! ,book1 x w\ld add no?+ to our k :i* _c be le>nt m cle>ly else:]e4 ,,viii4 ,summ>y ,we may summ>ize ! hi/orical results rea*$ 9 ! pres5t *apt] z foll[s3-- #a4 ,!re is no c]ta9 in/ance ( a ,new ,te/am5t writ] :o knew ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 & yet repudiat$ x4 ,x is m ?an d\btful if an exception c be f\nd ev5 9 ! case ( ! ,f\r? ,gospel1 ?\gh ! ,evangeli/ makes no doctr9al use ( ! tradition4 ,if ! au?or ( ! ,epi/le to ! ,hebrews knew ( ! doctr9e1 ! same is probably true ( t writ] also4 #b4 ,! doctr9e _h no place 9 ! subjectmatt] ( ,apo/olic prea*+4 ,?is view is support$ by all ! available evid5ce4 ,! sil5ce ( ! ,paul9e ,epi/les1 ( ! ,acts1 & ( ! ,second ,gospel c be expla9$ 9 no o!r way4 #c4 ,! tradition 0 n a matt] ( public k dur+ ! p]iod cov]$ 9 common by ! ,paul9e ,epi/les1 ! ,second ,gospel1 & ,q4 #d4 ,x is also probable t ! same conclusion %\ld be ext5d$ to ! p]iod cov]$ by ! ,second ,gospel alone1 if ?is ,book is dat$ lat] ?an ,/4 ,paul's lifetime1 z x usually is4 ,until we h exam9$ ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition reflect$ 9 ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels1 x w\ld n be "r to discuss ^! results fur!r1 except to say t an hi/orical argum5t aga9/ ! ,virg9 ,bir? bas$ on ^! conclusions alone w\ld be prec>i\s4 ,! *ief importance ( ! results rea*$ is ! help !y furni% 9 decid+ :5 belief 9 ! ,virg9 ,bir? fir/ became curr5t4 ,,*apt] ,,ii4 ,,! ,,virg9 ,,bir? ,,& ,,! ,,?ird ,,gospel ,! "q to be discuss$ 9 ?is *apt] ne$s c>eful def9ition4 ,:at we wi% to discov]1 if possible1 is :e!r ! ,virg9 ,bir? is an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel4 ,?is "q is n )\t a c]ta9 ambiguity4 ,x is sometimes tak5 z if x 7 equival5t to ! fur!r "q1 ,did ,/4 ,luke tea* ! ,virg9 ,bir?8 ,x is cle> t ^! que/ions are closely connect$2 nev]!less1 !y are di/9ct1 & %\ld be kept di/9ct4 ,! diff]5ce is at once app>5t if1 = purposes ( argum5t1 we assume t ! doctr9e really does belong to a lat] /ratum 9 ! ,gospel4 ,9 ?is case1 all ! ref]5ces to ! tradition mu/ h be5 ins]t$1 ei!r 7i7 by an unkn[n read]1 editor1 or scribe1 or 7ii7 by ,/4 ,luke himself4 ,9 ei!r case1 ! ,virg9 ,bir? w\ld be a lat] elem5t 9 ! ,gospel2 b ! two s5ses 9 :i* ?is c\ld be true are cle>ly v diff]5t4 ,be=e "o c\ld say t ,/4 ,luke did n tea* ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 x w\ld be necess>y to %[ t he did n write ! passage ,lk4 i4 #cd f417#bh7 & ?is is a po9t :i* _c be det]m9$ by argum5ts d]iv$ f ! context & subjectmatt] alone4 ,su* argum5ts may1 or may n1 be able to prove t ! doctr9e is a lat] elem5t1 b !y _c %[ t x is a non,lukan elem5t4 ,?is is a second & di/9ct /ep1 :i* is n ju/ifi$ until ! textual & ! l+ui/ic facts h be5 exam9$4 ,!n1 & !n only1 c we say if ,/4 ,luke taught ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,9 ! pres5t *apt] all que/ions ( a l+ui/ic "* w be left aside4 ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is p]fectly susceptible ( ! l+ui/ic te/1 & ?is w be appli$ 9 its prop] place4 ,! only argum5ts we %all consid] at pres5t w be ^? :i* arise out ( matt]s ( context & subjectmatt]4 ,9 ! light1 !n1 ( ! pr9ciple laid d[n above1 ! "q :e!r ,/4 ,luke taught ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 does n yet prop]ly arise4 ,! only "q we h to consid] at ?is /age is :e!r ! ,virg9 ,bir? is an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel1 int]pret+ t "q 9 its /ricte/ & b>e/ s5se4 ,! di/9ction we h drawn is p]fectly obvi\s :5 x is po9t$ out4 ,at ! same "t1 "o _c read ! lit]ature :i* treats ( ! ,?ird ,gospel 9 relation to ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 )\t feel+ h[ frequ5tly ! po9t has be5 neglect$4 ,! assumption1 t1 if ! ,virg9 ,bir? is f\nd to be a lat] elem5t 9 ! ,gospel1 we mu/ /raightway h rec\rse to ! hypo!sis ( non,lukan int]polation1 runs ?r\gh ! writ+s ( critics ( all s*ools l a refra94 ,its pres5ce 9 ! argum5ts ( ^? :o d5y ! ,virg9 ,bir? is (t5 suffici5tly cle>4 ,b ! same assumption is also tacitly made by _m critics on ! o!r side4 ,x w\ld be ung5]\s1 & p]haps unw>rant$1 to sugge/ t ?is assumption has prev5t$ _m or?odox writ]s f do+ ju/ice to ! objections :i* h be5 rais$ aga9/ ! view t ! doctr9e 0 pres5t 9 ! ,gospel f ! v fir/4 ,t its effects h be5 h>mful 9 ! int]e/s ( dispassionate inve/igation1 is1 h[ev]1 h>dly op5 to "q4 ,9 ! treatm5t :i* foll[s1 an attempt w be made to avoid ?is fallacy1 & to keep ! discussion )9 ! limits :i* are prop] to itself4 ,! mat]ial to be exam9$ is f\nd = ! mo/ "p 9 ! fir/ two *apt]s ( ! ,gospel1 & consi/s 7#a7 ( c]ta9 n>ratives & passages1 :i* app>5tly are inconsi/5t ) ! view t ! au?or wrote ) a k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 & 7#b7 ( ! passage i4 #cd f41 :i* implies ! doctr9e1 b is believ$ by _m s*ol>s to be a lat] ins]tion4 ,outside *aps4 i & ii1 ! only passages :i* call = notice are iii4 #bb1 iii4 #bc1 & iv4 #bb4 ,we may say at once t we h few new argum5ts to br+ =w>d4 ,! cont5tions we h to exam9e are famili> to e "o :o /udies ! "q ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,!y h be5 brilliantly /at$ 9 two wellkn[n articles 9 ! ,encyclopa$ia ,biblica1 "o by ,p4 ,w4 ,s*mi$el 7on 8,m>y071 & ! o!r by ,us5] 78,nativity074 ,9 a review 7,,hj41 vol4 i1 no4 #a1 p4 #afd71 ,dr4 ,m(fatt ju/ly describes ^! articles z 8compet5t & fir/rate essays1 :i* des]ve al]t recognition04 ,b bo? ^! articles n only d5y t ! ,virg9 ,bir? 0 an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel1 b also t ,/4 ,luke1 ! companion ( ,/4 ,paul1 ev] taught t doctr9e--& ?is )\t any l+ui/ic exam9ation ( ! passage i4 #cd f4 ,!y provide1 9 fact1 a cle> illu/ration ( ! po9t we h already discuss$4 ,inasmu*1 !n1 z our purpose is to consid] ! "q1 ,0 ! ,virg9 ,bir? an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel81 int]pret$ 9 its /ricte/ t]ms1 we %all ne$ to /ate & weigh ! argum5ts afre%4 ,?is is ! m desirable1 because1 9 ! =m 9 :i* ^! s*ol>s pres5t _! case1 ea* argum5t is put =w>d ) an assurance & a f9ality :i* individually x does n m]it4 ,x is ! cumulative =ce ( a numb] ( argum5ts1 ea* ( :i* has /rong presumptive value1 :i* ultimately c>ries conviction2 n a s]ies ( argum5ts ea* ( :i* is conclusive 9 itself4 ,we d n suppose1 ( c\rse1 t a writ] l ,s*mi$el w\ld d5y any?+ s obvi\s z ?is4 ,nev]!less1 v _m ,engli% read]s feel t 8 sev]al argum5ts are /at$ too mu* 9 ! light ( ! result4 ,moreov]1 !y appe> to be %ap$ by presuppositions :i* are !mselves fatal to ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,9 ! pres5t treatm5t ( ! "q1 an attempt w be made to assign to ea* argum5t its prop] =ce1 to obs]ve its limitations z well z its cog5cy4 ,! result s\ght is n a conclusion to :i* we c app5d a triumphant ,q4 ,e4 ,d41 b t hypo!sis1 :atev] x be1 :i* be/ expla9s ! obs]v$ facts tak5 z a :ole4 ,i4 ,n>ratives & ,passages ,said to be ,inconsi/5t ,) ! ,view ,our fir/ task mu/ be to exam9e ^? n>ratives & passages 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel :i* are said to be irreconcilable ) ! view t ,/4 ,luke wrote 9 ! belief t ,jesus 0 miracul\sly conceiv$ ( ! ,virg9 ,m>y by ! ,holy ,gho/4 ,:at we h to ask is :e!r or n !y are consi/5t ) t supposition4 ,we beg9 ) ,lk4 iii4 #bb4 7a7 ,lk4 iii4 #bb1 accord+ to ! 8,we/]n ,text0 ,9 ! great majority ( exi/+ ,,mss4 ?is passage reads z 9 ! ,,rv41 8,?\ art my belov$ ,son2 9 !e ,i am well pleas$04 ,b 9 ,codex ,bezae1 support$ by ,old ,lat9 ,,mss4 & by quotations 9 ,ju/9 & ,clem5t1 ! passage reads1 8,?\ art my ,son3 today h ,i begott5 ,!e04 ,blass 7,philology ( ! ,gospels1 p4 #afh f47 believes ?is to be ! g5u9e ,lukan read+1 & expla9s ! common text z 8a product ( assimilation to ! o!r ,gospels04 ,us5] 7,,eb41 col4 #ccdh7 also accepts ! 8,we/]n0 read+1 & says1 8,?us ! passage 9 ,lk4 0 read1 9 ! ,greek ,*ur* d[n to ab\t #cjj ,a4,d4 & 9 ! ,lat9 ,we/ d[n to & beyond #cfj ,a4,d40 ,dr4 ,m(fatt 7,,int41 #crd ed41 p4 #bfi7 goes s f> z to say t ! ,lukan read+ 8und\bt$ly 0 04 ,he foll[s ?is read+ 9 8 ,translation ( ! ,new ,te/am5t1 & says 7p4 #gd71 8,9 ! o!r ,,mss4 x has be5 alt]$1 = h>moni/ic reasons04 ,^! op9ions1 & ! argum5ts ^u :i* !y re/1 h great weight4 ,if ! 8,we/]n0 read+ is accept$1 a /rong presumption is set up aga9/ ! view t ! ,?ird ,gospel orig9ally conta9$ ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 = x is v difficult to believe t ! h& :i* wrote1 8,to day h ,i begott5 ,!e01 _h already describ$ ! miracul\s bir?4 7,cf4 also ,h>nack1 ,say+s1 pp4 #caj ff47 ,at fir/ sight ,blass's argum5t w\ld seem to %[ a way ( escape f ?is conclusion4 ,he def5ds ! 8,we/]n0 read+ by %[+ ! close connexion :i* x has ) ! foll[+ v]se4 8,! #8today h ,i begott5 ,!e' /&s 9 opposition to ! #8?irty ye>s'1 & ! #8,?\ art my ,son' likewise to #8be+ z 0 suppos$ ! son ( ,joseph' 0 7op4 cit41 p4 #afi74 ,! phrase 8z 0 suppos$0 7v]se #bc7 w fall to be discuss$ next4 ,mean:ile we may obs]ve t ! connexion :i* ,blass notes is actually /r5g!n$ if :at ,/4 ,luke orig9ally wrote 0 8be+ ! son ( ,joseph04 ,?is is ! real po9t 9 ! p>allelism1 z ,blass himself indicates by pr9t+ ! "n ,joseph 9 italics4 ,if ! 8,we/]n0 read+ is to be accept$1 a v int]e/+ "q arises z reg>ds ,/4 ,luke's conception ( ! ,baptism ( ,jesus4 ,!re is no ne$ to suppose t he look$ ^u x z ! occasion ( ! imp>t+ ( ! ,div9e ,son%ip4 ,if ! connexion :i* ,blass notes be all[$1 x is probably purely lit]>y1 & ! =m 9 :i* ,/4 ,luke reports ! logion is det]m9$ by 8 recollection ( ,ps4 ii4 #g47bi7 ,!re is no int5tion1 t is to say1 on 8 "p1 ( describ+ an act ( deification or ev5 adoption4 ,b if ! connexion is lit]>y1 we return aga9 to ! "q1 ,c we ?9k t ,/4 ,luke w\ld h writt5 ! passage 9 ?is =m1 if he _h already describ$ ! miracul\s bir?8 ,c we expla9 8 delib]ate pref]5ce = ! language ( ,ps4 ii4 #g8 ,! answ] is1 we feel b\nd to say1 ,x is difficult1 if x is n impossible4 ,! =ce ( ?is argum5t re/s1 nev]!less1 ^u ! confid5ce ) :i* we c accept ! 8,we/]n0 read+2 & :ile ! pres5t writ] w\ld fav\r t read+ himself1 he recognizes t its atte/ation is n su* z to compel acceptance4 ,m(fatt's claim t x 8und\bt$ly 00 ! ,lukan read+ is too /rong4 ,! mo/ we c say is t x has great1 if n v great1 probability 9 its fav\r4 7b7 ,! ,lukan ,g5ealogy & ,lk4 iii4 #bc ,x w be be/ at ?is po9t to consid] ! "q ( ! ,lukan ,g5ealogy1 & also ! passage to :i* att5tion has j be5 call$3 8be+ ! son 7z 0 suppos$7 ( ,joseph0 7,,rv474 ,an exam9ation ( ! ,g5ealogy reveals ! fact t x is artificially con/ruct$1 x is an arrangem5t ( names 9 multiples ( sev5 7cf4 ,s&ay1 ,outl9es1 p4 #bjb74 ,! :ole li/ conta9s sev5tysev5 names4 ,f ,adam to ,abraham !re are tw5ty"o names 7#g x #c72 f ,isaac to ,david f\rte5 names 7#g x #b71 if we include1 z we probably %\ld1 ! "n ,adm91 z 9 ! ,,rv4 m>g92 f ,na?an to ,%ealtiel tw5ty"o names2 & f ,z]ubbabel to ,*ri/ tw5ty"o names4 ,n only is ?is s1 b 9 ord] to pres]ve ! symbolic arrangem5t1 names are repeat$ & omitt$4 ,?us 9 v]se #cf1 ! compil] has pref]r$ ! ,,lxx to ! ,hebrew4 ,?is p]mits ! "n ,ca9an to be introduc$ into ! ,g5ealogy twice1 z ! son ( ,arphaxad 9 v]se #cf1 & aga9 z ! son ( ,enos 9 v]se #cg4 ,no ,hebrew ,,ms4 m5tions ,ca9an z ! son ( ,arphaxad4 ,aga91 9 ! li/ f ,isaac to ,david1 ! "n ,ram 7cf4 #a ,*ron4 ii4 #aj & ,ru? iv4 #ai7 is omitt$1 & 9 its place ! two names ,adm9 & ,arni appe>4 ,:atev] be ! explanation ( ^! facts1 x is significant t 9 ?is way ! symmetrical arrangem5t is pres]v$4 ,x is n probable t a ,g5ealogy ( su* an artificial "* 0 con/ruct$ by ,/4 ,luke himself4 ,he %[s no pr$ilection = symbolic numb]s 9 8 writ+s1 & does n inde$ appe> to obs]ve ?is feature 9 ! li/4 7,cf4 ,s&ay1 op4 cit41 p4 #bjb1 & contra/ ,mt4 i4 #ag47 ,probably he f\nd ! ,g5ealogy ready to h&4 ,! fact t x traces ! desc5t to ,adam may h appeal$ to him1 9 view ( 8 own b5t ( m9d1 & x may h be5 ?is feature 9 ! li/ :i* l$ him to incorporate x 9 8 ,gospel4 ,! words 8! son ( ,god0 ) :i* ! li/ ends1 may be due to ,/4 ,luke himself1 8add$ = ! sake ( ,g5tile read]s1 to rem9d !m ( ! ,div9e orig9 ( ! human race0 7,plumm]1 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,luke1 p4 #aje7 ,x does n seem likely t ! ,g5ealogy 9 its orig9al =m1 9 ! =m1 t is to say1 9 :i* ,/4 ,luke f\nd x1 conta9$ ! words :i* n[ /& 9 iii4 #bc1 8z 0 suppos$04 ,x is g5]ally all[$ at ! pres5t day t ! ,g5ealogies1 bo? 9 ! ,fir/ ,gospel & 9 ! ,?ird1 trace ! ance/ry ( ,jesus ?r\gh ,joseph4 ,b unlike ! ,mat?aean ,g5ealogy1 t 9 ,lk4 gives u no reason to suppose t legal desc5t only is trac$ 9 x4 ,x is !re=e difficult to believe t its au?or int5d$ to con/ruct a *a9 ( desc5t 9 :i* ! vital l9k %\ld conta9 ! words1 8z 0 suppos$04 ,^! words m naturally give ! impression ( be+ a lat] ins]tion int5d$ to adapt ! ,g5ealogy to a new situation4 ,= our pres5t purpose ! important "q is1 ,are ^! words ! words ( ,/4 ,luke81 & :at is /ill m vital1 ,at :at po9t1 if ,lukan1 7 !y ins]t$ 9 ! ,g5ealogy1--:5 x 0 fir/ incorporat$ 9 ! ,gospel1 or at "s subsequ5t "t8 ,if f ! fir/ !y /ood :]e !y n[ /&1 x is obvi\s t ! ,?ird ,gospel taught ! ,virg9 ,bir? f ! beg9n+4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 !y 7 add$ aft] ! ,gospel 0 writt5 7or its e>li] *apt]s71 ?is supports ! view t ! doctr9e is a lat] elem5t4 ,! data at pres5t at our disposal d n enable u to decide betwe5 ^! alt]natives4 ,we may argue a priori t x is unlikely t ,/4 ,luke w\ld h ?\ght x wor? :ile to introduce ! ,g5ealogy at all1 if at ! "t :5 he wove x into 8 ,gospel he _h realiz$ ! necessity ( int]polat+ ! words 8z 0 suppos$04 ,9 o!r words1 we may say t _h he kn[n ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? f ! fir/ he w\ld nev] h made use ( ! ,g5ealogy4 ,& fur!r1 we may argue t we be/ cons]ve ,/4 ,luke's reputation z a skilful writ] by suppos+ ! phrase 8z 0 suppos$0 to be a correction1 introduc$ to make ! be/ ( a ,g5ealogy1 us$ 9 ! fir/ place "u presuppositions :i* new in=mation _h n[ l$ him to disc>d4 ,%ort ( excis+ ! ,g5ealogy altoge!r--we may say--he did ! be/ he c\ld4 ,b su* speculations1 h[ev] attractive1 d n lead to a conclusion :i* we c reg>d ) confid5ce4 ,x is bett] to leave iii4 #bc to dep5d ^u ! conclusion to :i* we come ) reg>d to i4 #cd f4 ,?is is ! crucial passage1 & if ?is %\ld prove to be a lat] ins]tion1 !n iii4 #bc mu/ also be reg>d$ z su*1 introduc$ by ! same h& at ! same "t & = ! same reasons4 7c7 ,! ,n>ratives ( ,lk4 ii ,we h n[ to exam9e ! n>ratives ( ,lk4 ii1 & to ask1 ,"u :at presuppositions 7 !y %ap$8 ,! incid5ts :i* call = special notice are ! ,purify+1 ! meet+ ) ,simeon 9 ! ,temple1 & ! visit ( ,jesus to ,j]usalem at ! age ( twelve4 ,! five passages :i* speak ( 8! p>5ts0 ( ,jesus w be consid]$ sep>ately4 ,!re is no ne$ to dwell on ! /ory ( ! visit ( ! %eph]ds4 ,x goes )\t say+ t x n[h]e presupposes ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,on ! o!r h&1 !re is no?+ 9 ! pres5tation ( ! /ory :i* is ali5 to ! doctr9e4 ,turn+ to ! /ory ( ! ,purify+ 9 ,lk4 ii4 #bbd1 we are met by ! "q1 ,:at are we to und]/& by ! phrase 8_! purification0 7ii4 #bb78 ,attempts h be5 made to take ! pron\n z ref]r+ to ! "m & ! *ild1 b1 9 view ( ! con/ruction ( ! passage1 ?is exegesis is impossible4 ,joseph & ,m>y are cle>ly ! unexpress$ subject ( ! v]b 9 ! s5t5ce 9 :i* ! pron\n 8_!0 occurs 78,& :5 ! days ( _! purification 444 7 fulfill$1 !y br\ght him up to ,j]usalem074 ,s*mi$el holds t ! ^w 8_!0 ref]s to ,joseph & ,m>y17#cj7 & )\t d\bt ?is op9ion is correct4 ,b if ?is is s1 is x probable t ,/4 ,luke _h ! ?\ght ( a virg9 bir? 9 ! backgr\nd ( 8 m9d :5 he fir/ p5n$ ! phrase8 ,is n ! pron\n "o :i* we may ?9k he w\ld h be5 anxi\s to avoid8 ,nor 0 !re any ne$ = him to introduce x1 s9ce1 accord+ to ! ,levitical law1 x 0 only ! "m :o 0 made unclean by a bir? 7cf4 ,lev4 xii74 ,s*mi$el1 :o calls att5tion to ?is fact1 ?9ks t ! writ] has made 8an ar*aeological error04 8,?is error s]ves to %[ t ! writ] reg>d$ ,joseph z ! actual fa!r ( ,jesus2 o!rwise he c\ld n h ?\ght ( him at all z unclean0 7,,eb41 col4 #biee74 ,ev5 if we ?9k t ,s*mi$el's remorseless logic is too confid5tly appli$1 ! fact rema9s t ,/4 ,luke's pron\n is z unnecess>y z x is ambigu\s4 ,! difficulty ( ! expression is n felt by ! mod]n m9d alone4 ,x is reflect$ 9 two subsequ5t textual alt]ations4 ,in/ead ( 8_! purification01 ! ,codex ,bezae reads 88 purification01 & ! ,s94 ,syr4 ,,ms41 toge!r ) ! cursive #gf1 has ! pron\n 8h]04 ,! textual evid5ce =bids u to accept ! read+ 8h] purification01 b ?is is assur$ly ! phrase we %\ld expect a writ] to use :o has j told ! /ory ( a virg9 bir?4 ,9 ! two rema9+ /ories1 t ( ! meet+ ) ,simeon1 & t ( ! visit ( ,jesus to ,j]usalem1 !re is a common elem5t :i* provokes reflection 9 ! surprise ( ,joseph & ,m>y4 ,9 ref]5ce to ! prophecy ( ,simeon conc]n+ ,jesus1 we are told t !y 87 m>vell+ at0 ! ?+s t 7 said 7ii4 #cc74 ,we c readily acc\nt = ?is rem>k1 if ,/4 ,luke _h no k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? at ! "t ( writ+1 = ! prophecy ( ,simeon transc5ds t ( ! angelic ann\ncem5t ( i4 #cac4 ,:]eas ! latt] does n leave ! soil ( ,israel1 ! =m] speaks ( a revelation to ! ,g5tiles4 ,we c\ld say1 !n1 t ! wid] scope ( ! prophecy ( ,simeon provides room = wond]4 ,b c we say ?is if ,/4 ,luke believ$ ,m>y to h receiv$ ! ann\ncem5t ( a virg9 bir?1 :i*1 moreov]1 _h be5 fulfill$8 ,w\ld he h ?\ght any prophecy call$ = wond] aft] su* facts z ^!8 ,! same difficulty arises 9 ! /ory ( ! visit to ! ,temple4 ,aft] ,/4 ,luke has record$ ! pregnant words ( ,jesus1 8,wi/ ye n t ,i mu/ be 9 my ,fa!r's h\se801 he writes3 8,& !y und]/ood n ! say+ :i* he spake unto !m0 7ii4 #ej74 ,if1 9 ?is case1 z di/+ui%$ f ii4 #cc1 ! ,evangeli/ _h said t !y m>vell$1 ! difficulty w\ld be less great4 ,x might !n h be5 argu$ t1 inasmu* z ! facts ( ,8 bir? _h n be5 made kn[n to ! boy ,jesus1 !re 0 room = wond] t already ,he %\ld h atta9$ to su* a consci\sness ( filial relation%ip to ,god4 ,b to say t !y did n und]/& ,8 words is an a/oni%+ /atem5t on ! "p ( a writ] :o believes ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,on ! o!r h&1 x is a p]fectly natural rem>k1 if we c presume ! ,evangeli/ to h writt5 9 ! abs5ce ( su* a belief47#ca7 ,speak+ ( ! n>ratives ( ,lk4 ii1 z a :ole1 we may say t1 ap>t f ! ref]5ces to 8! p>5ts01 :i* rema9 to be consid]$1 di/9ct difficulties are rais$ if we mu/ believe t ,/4 ,luke knew ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? at ! "t :5 he fir/ wrote ! *apt]1 & t great] ju/ice c be done to ! n>ratives if we c presume him to h writt5 !m )\t t k4 ,h[ f> ?is view is support$ by ! five passages :i* speak ( ,joseph & ,m>y1 we h n[ to consid]4 7d7 ,! ,ref]5ces to ,joseph & ,m>y 9 ,lk4 ii ,^! passages are z foll[s3 ii4 #bg1 8! p>5ts02 ii4 #da & #dc1 88 p>5ts02 ii4 #cc1 88 fa!r & 8 "m02 & ii4 #dh1 8?y fa!r & ,i04 ,! po9t to be consid]$ is :e!r we c suppose ,/4 ,luke to h kn[n ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? at ! "t :5 he us$ ^! expressions4 ,! la/ passage 7ii4 #dh7 diff]s f ! re/1 & %\ld n be press$4 ,x is reasonable to urge t1 9 address+ ! boy ,jesus1 ,m>y w\ld naturally speak 9 ?is way1 ev5 if ! ,virg9 ,bir? is hi/orically true2 & t x is conceivable t ,/4 ,luke1 :ile himself hold+ ! doctr9e1 %\ld h be5 s f> fai?ful to 8 s\rces z to pres]ve ,m>y's words 9 ?is =m4 ,9 ?is respect ! f\r passages :i* rema9 are q diff]5t1 9 t !y are expressions :i* ,/4 ,luke himself employs4 ,?is gives !m a di/9ctive "* :i* has (t5 be5 ov]look$4 ,x has be5 too frequ5tly assum$ t ^! passages are ( l "* to ^? :i* belong to ! /ory ( ,jesus at ! synagogue at ,naz>e?4 ,9 ?is incid5t ! ,jews speak ( ,jesus z 8! c>p5t]'s son0 7,mt4 xiii4 #ee4 ,cf4 ,mk4 vi4 #c1 8! c>p5t]1 ! son ( ,m>y074 ,/4 ,luke1 :o records ! same incid5t1 b p]haps foll[s a special s\rce ( 8 own 7,lk4 iv4 #af ff471 gives ! "q 9 ! =m1 8,is n ?is ,joseph's son80 ,) reg>d to ^! passages1 x is op5 to any "o to urge t 9 !m we h in/ances ( ! accuracy ) :i* ! ,gospels record contempor>y beliefs1 :i* 7 natural b errone\s4 ,! language ( ! ,jews1 x may be said1 is ju/ifi$ by ignorance ( ! true facts1 & its ret5tion by ,evangeli/s :o tea* ! ,virg9 ,bir? is evid5ce ( _! fidelity to detail4 ,?is is a reasonable argum5t1 & x _c be ga9said1 until ! :ole "q has be5 fac$ 7aga91 z 9 ! case ( ii4 #dh74 ,b ! f\r passages 9 ,lk4 ii /& ^u an entirely diff]5t foot+4 ,9 ^! passages x is n a "q ( :at is ju/ifi$ by ignorance1 b ( :at is possible 9 ! light ( k4 ,assum+ t we h to d ) a writ] :o believes ,jesus to be ! son ( ,m>y by ! direct op]ation ( ! ,holy ,gho/1 we h to ask :e!r1 believ+ ?is1 & hav+ 7on ?is assumption7 j /at$ ?is v ?+1 t writ] w\ld be at all likely to speak ( 8! p>5ts01 88 p>5ts01 &1 inde$1 to use an expression s def9ite z 88 fa!r & 8 "m04 ,9 %ort1 grant+ t ,/4 ,luke has record$ ! language ( ! ,naz>5es1 c we suppose t he w\ld h us$ ! same language himself 9 ! light ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?8 ,x is n z if ^! modes ( spee* 7 indisp5sable4 ,! words 8,joseph & ,m>y0 c\ld easily h be5 employ$1 & 9 ?is way all dang] ( ambiguity remov$4 ,9 ! face ( a fact s unique z a virg9 bir?1 "o w\ld expect an ef=t to avoid ambiguity2 all ! m1 9 ! case ( a writ]1 ) ^: apt *oice ( words & delicacy ( expression s*ol>s l ,ramsay & ,h>nack h made u famili>4 ,9 say+ ?is we are n guilty ( impos+ mod]n canons ( accuracy ^u an anci5t writ]4 ,! difficulties we ourselves feel h long be5 felt4 8,x is v notewor?y t six old ,lat9 codices 9 ii4 #da h ,ioseph et ,m>ia = #88 p>5ts' 7 72 mo/ uncials 9 ii4 #cc sub/itute #8,joseph' 7 7 = #88 fa!r' 7 70 7,s*mi$el1 ,,eb41 col4 #biee74 ,none ( ^! read+s c claim1 ( c\rse1 to be orig9al1 s9ce admitt$ly !y repres5t attempts to remove difficulties4 ,_! significance lies 9 ! fact t !y indicate t ^? difficulties h long be5 felt4 ,!y %[ t we are n ask+ an anci5t writ] to con=m to mod]n /&>ds1 :5 we ass]t t ,/4 ,luke has express$ himself ) an ambiguity :i* x is difficult1 if n impossible1 to und]/&1 if he wrote f ! fir/ 9 ! k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,! impression made by ! n>ratives ( ,lk4 ii is ?us deep5$ & confirm$ by ! sev]al ref]5ces to ,joseph & ,m>y4 7e7 ,lk4 ii4 #e ,! be>+ ( ! facts exam9$ ?us f> is 9 ! direction ( %[+ ! ,virg9 ,bir? to belong to a lat] /ratum 9 ! ,gospel4 ,"o passage 9 ,lk4 ii might seem to invalidate ?is view4 ,9 ! ,revis$ ,v]sion1 v]se #e reads3 8to enrol himself ) ,m>y1 :o 0 betro!d to him1 be+ great ) *ild04 ,^! words1 if !y mu/ /&1 imply t ! ,virg9 ,bir? is kn[n to ! writ]4 ,b1 ap>t altoge!r f ! hi/orical "* ( ! miracle1 x is highly probable t we ought to read3 8) ,m>y 8 wife047#cb7 ,?is is ! read+ ( ! ,s9aitic ,syriac & ( ! ,old ,lat9 ,,mss4 a1 b1 c2 & ! ^w 8wife0 toge!r ) 8betro!d01 also appe>s 9 ,,ac#b1 l1 q991 ,syrp1 vulg41 go?41 ae?4 7,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bfi74 ,!re is mu* to be said = ! view t ?is is "o ( ! cases 9 :i* 8,we/]n0 read+s1 :]e ,old ,syriac & ,old ,lat9 ,,mss4 agree1 probably pres]ve an orig9al text47#cc7 ,:5 we add ! argum5t ( transcriptional probability1 x is difficult to resi/ ?is conclusion4 ,"o c easily und]/& h[ ! read+ 8) ,m>y 8 wife0 c\ld come to be alt]$ to 8) ,m>y1 :o 0 betro!d to him0 by ^? :o imag9$ t ! =m] 0 inconsi/5t ) ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,b1 if ! words 8) ,m>y1 :o 0 betro!d to him0 /ood 9 ! primitive text1 c we give any satisfactory explanation ( ! *ange8 ,:5 we consid] t f ,new ,te/am5t times ! ,virg9 ,bir? 0 "p ( ! fai? ( ! ,*ur*1 que/ion$ by few save ! ,ebionites & "s ( ! ,gno/ic sects1 ! supposition t 8) ,m>y 8 wife0 is a lat] corruption1 becomes improbable 9 ! extreme4 ,x is h>dly suffici5t to adopt ,plumm]'s sugge/ion1 t 8! ( ,a4 ,vulg4 ,syr4 & ,ae?4 is a gloss1 b a correct "o0 7op4 cit41 p4 #ec74 ,mu/ we n f9d m ?an a gloss8 ,moreov]1 is ?is a satisfactory explanation ( ! ,s94 ,syr4 & ( ^? ,old ,lat9 ,,mss4 :i* h 8wife0 )\t 8betro!d08 ,we %\ld probably conclude t 9 ?is in/ance ! 8,we/]n0 read+1 support$ by transcriptional probability1 mu/ outweigh ! evid5ce ( ev5 ! great uncials1 & t :at ,/4 ,luke wrote 0 8) ,m>y 8 wife04 ,if ?is view is s\nd1 ! v]se 9 itself is n necess>ily inconsi/5t ) ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 s9ce x may reasonably be urg$ t x c>ries u no fur!r ?an ,mt4 i4 #bd1 :]e ! m>riage is impli$47#cd7 ,if ?is fact is put =w>d 9 a n>rative :i* expressly tea*es ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 x c\ld be s "h4 ,! phrase 8) ,m>y 8 wife0 is c]ta9ly congru\s ) ! view t ! doctr9e is a lat] elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel1 b x w\ld be improp] to employ x 9 support ( t view4 7,! case is l ^? ( ii4 #dh1 iv4 #bb47 ,b ev5 if we mu/ leave ! "q op51 at any rate we h no long] to reckon ) ! words1 8) ,m>y1 :o 0 betro!d to him04 ,!re is no?+1 !re=e1 9 ! v]se :i* is 9 conflict ) ! view t ,/4 ,luke _h no k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? :5 he fir/ wrote 8 ,gospel4 ,be=e leav+ ?is "p ( ! subject x may be well to recall ! nature ( ! argum5t4 ,! sev]al po9ts treat$ are n reg>d$ z cont5tions :i* inexorably dem& a c]ta9 conclusion1 b z di/9ct difficulties1 great] or less1 :i* arise1 on ! view t ,/4 ,luke knew ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? f ! fir/4 ,we may fairly say t ! facts exam9$ ?us f> w\ld be be/ satisfi$ by consid]+ ! ,virg9 ,bir? z a lat] elem5t 9 ! ,gospel2 b1 until we h inve/igat$ ! important passage ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 x w\ld be prec>i\s to say m4 ,,ii4 ,! ,passage ,lk4 i4 #cd f ,9 ! ,revis$ ,v]sion ,lk4 i4 #cd;f4 reads z foll[s3 8,& ,m>y said unto ! angel1 ,h[ %all ?is be1 see+ ,i "k n a man8 7#ce7 ,& ! angel answ]$ & said unto h]1 ,! ,holy ,gho/ %all come ^u !e1 & ! p[] ( ! ,mo/ ,high %all ov]%ad[ !e3 :]e=e also t :i* is to be born %all be call$ holy1 ! ,son ( ,god40 ,z reg>ds ! la/ clause1 ! m>g9 gives ! alt]native r5d]+3 8! holy ?+ :i* is to be born %all be call$ ! ,son ( ,god04 ,! diff]5ce re/s ^u a "q ( punctuation 9 ! ,greek1 & does n affect our imm$iate problem4 ,our purpose 9 ?is section is to inquire h[ f> ! view1 :i* is widely held1 t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is a lat] ins]tion is ju/ifi$4 ,b two important que/ions mu/ deta9 u fir/4 7a7 ,is ! assumption we h made ?us f>1 t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 implies ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 t5able8 ,:at is ! true int]pretation ( ! passage8 7b7 ,:at is ! purport ( ! angelic ann\ncem5t 9 ,lk4 i4 #cjc8 ,is ,dr4 ,plumm]'s language ju/ifi$1 :51 9 ref]5ce to ?is message1 he speaks ( 8! /range decl>ation t %e ,m>y is to h a son be=e %e is m>ri$0 7op4 cit41 p4 #bd78 ,is !re any sugge/ion ( a virg9 bir?8 7a7 ,! ,int]pretation ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f ,9 ! text z x /&s1 9 answ] to ! angel's words 9 ,lk4 i4 #cjc1 ,m>y says3 8,h[ %all ?is be1 see+ ,i "k n 7 7 a man80 ,! int]pretation ( ?is v]se dep5ds ^u ! =ce we give to ! ^w 4 ,s*mi$el 7,,eb41 col4 #bief7 ?9ks t 9 ?is v]se 8_c mean ! act ( concubitus = :i* ! ^w is (t5 employ$01 because x is "h us$ 9 ! pres5t t5se4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! q g5]al s5se ( k 9 ! way ( acqua9tance%ip1 is also1 9 8 view1 8equally preclud$01 s9ce x w\ld be 8q mean+less 9 ! pres5t context04 ,accord+ly1 he f9ds ! true int]pretation to be 8! int]m$iate "o2 ,i h no su* acqua9tance%ip ) any man z might lead to ! fulfilm5t ( ?is prophecy04 ,9 o!r words1 ,m>y's objection or difficulty is t %e is n ev5 betro!d4 ,s*mi$el is n daunt$ by ! fact t ?is int]pretation is 9 conflict ) ,lk4 i4 #bg 78a virg9 betro!d to a man ^: "n 0 ,joseph074 ,inde$1 ! contradiction is giv5 z "o reason = reg>d+ ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 z a lat] ins]tion4 ,9 ?is respect ,s*mi$el's view w probably n comm& mu* support4 ,he gives no example ( us$ 9 ! special s5se 9 :i* he int]prets x1 & fails to ju/ify 8 rejection ( ! common use ( ! v]b4 7,see ,?,gr41 p4 #aag2 ,,vgt41 p4 #abg47 ,x is altoge!r pref]able to foll[ ,dr4 ,plumm] 7op4 cit41 p4 #bd71 ^: view is indicat$ 9 ! ref]5ces :i* he gives to ! ,,ot4 passages1 ,g54 xix4 #h2 ,judg4 xi4 #ci2 ,num4 xxxi4 #ag4 8,! words01 says ,dr4 ,plumm]1 8are ! av[al ( a maid5 consci\s ( h] own purity04 ,accord+ to ?is view ! phrase 8see+ ,i "k n a man0 mu/ be int]pret$ ( ! m>ital relation%ip4 ,m>y's p]plexity is t %e1 an unm>ri$ woman1 is promis$ an imm$iate conception4 ,x is impossible to accept ,s*mi$el's view1 :5 he says3 8,m>y takes ! words ( ! angel z ref]r+ to a fulfilm5t 9 ! way ( nature04 ,?is explanation is1 ( c\rse1 consi/5t on ! int]pretation :i* ,s*mi$el gives to ,m>y's "q1 b n on t :i* we h f\nd reason to pref]4 ,_h ,m>y und]/ood ! angelic message to mean a natural human bir? aft] m>riage1 !re w\ld h be5 no cause = p]plexity4 ,h] words1 8,h[ %all ?is be1 see+ ,i "k n a man801 are cle>ly a reply to :at is und]/ood z ! ann\ncem5t ( an imm$iate conception1 & n ( a bir? )9 ! m>riage tie4 ,if ?is view is tak5 ( ,m>y's words1 x foll[s t v]se #ce mu/ be expla9$ z ! yet cle>] ann\ncem5t ( a virg9 bir?1 sup]naturally caus$4 ,if ! v]se is treat$ 9 itself1 x is possible to int]pret x ( an ord9>y human bir?1 & !re is mu* t is attractive 9 ! int]pretation4 ,! words may be said to speak ( ! ,holy ,gho/ :o %\ld come ^u ,m>y to inspire & pres]ve ! purity ( h] s\l 9 ! act ( conception4 ,!y may speak1 t is to say1 ( ,god's use ( ,8 own appo9t$ ag5cies4 ,b1 to accept ?is view1 x w\ld be necess>y to reg>d ! words 8see+ ,i "k n a man0 z a lat] ins]tion1 &1 ?\gh ?is op9ion has be5 held by "s 7includ+ ,katt5bus*1 ,we9el1 ,j4 ,m4 ,?ompson71 x does n on ! :ole comm5d itself z a satisfactory solution ( ! problem 7see fur!r pp4 #fi ff474 ,we are compell$ !re=e to accept ! ord9>y int]pretation ( v]se #ce1 z imply+ ! ,miracul\s ,conception4 7b7 ,! ,purport ( ! ,angelic ,ann\ncem5t 9 ,lk4 i4 #cjc ,9 treat+ ,m>y's "q 9 ,lk4 i4 #cd4 we h conclud$ t x reflects ! po9t ( view ( "o :o has receiv$ ! ann\ncem5t ( a miracul\s bir?4 ,b ?is conclusion does n compel u to int]pret ! words ( ,lk4 i4 #cjc z conta9+ su* an ann\ncem5t4 ,we h to exam9e ! passage s z to det]m9e :e!r z a matt] ( fact x is susceptible ( t int]pretation4 ,t its pres5t context requires ?is view ( ,lk4 i4 #cjc is a fact n lightly to be reg>d$2 nev]!less1 x mu/ f9d ju/ification )9 ! passage itself be=e x c be accept$4 ,9 ! ,revis$ ,v]sion1 ! angelic message reads z foll[s3 8,fe> n1 ,m>y3 = ?\ ha/ f\nd fav\r ) ,god4 7#ca7 ,& behold1 ?\ %alt conceive 9 ?y womb1 & br+ =? a son1 & %alt call 8 "n ,jesus4 7#cb7 ,he %all be great1 & %all be call$ ! ,son ( ! ,mo/ ,high3 & ! ,"l ,god %all give unto him ! ?rone ( 8 fa!r ,david3 7#cc7 & he %all reign ov] ! h\se ( ,jacob = ev]2 & ( 8 k+dom !re %all be no end40 ,we h already express$ ! view t ?is prophecy moves /rictly )9 ,jewi% limits 7p4 #bi74 ,detail$ /udy ( ! passage only s]ves to confirm ?is op9ion4 ,! ,son%ip m5tion$ 9 v]se #cb be>s a purely ,messianic "*4 ,dr4 ,plumm] ju/ly rem>ks3 8,! title expresses "s v close relation betwe5 ,jesus & ,jehovah1 b n ! ,div9e ,son%ip 9 ! ,tr9ity0 7op4 cit41 p4 #bc74 ,no?+ is ei!r said or impli$ 9 ?is ann\ncem5t ( a miracul\s bir?4 ,! t]ms ( ! promise to ,m>y w\ld be p]fectly fulfill$ by an ord9>y bir? )9 ! m>riage tie1 s f>1 t is to say1 z ! mode ( bir? is conc]n$4 ,we mu/ !re=e reject ! view :i* speaks ( 8! /range decl>ation t %e is to be> a son be=e %e is m>ri$0 7,plumm]74 ,we look 9 va9 = ?is decl>ation4 ,we agree t ,m>y's "q 9 v]se #cd dem&s su* a decl>ation 9 ord] to make x rational4 ,9 fact1 we ourselves h argu$ t v]se #cd is 8a reply to :at is und]/ood z ! ann\ncem5t ( an imm$iate conception04 ,nev]!less1 ev5 on ! mo/ g5]\s int]pretation ( ,lk4 i4 #cjc1 x is impossible to f9d 9 ! passage any su* ann\ncem5t47#ce7 ,!re is ?us a radical diff]5ce ( po9t ( view betwe5 ! angelic ann\ncem5t ( ,lk4 i4 #cjc & ,m>y's "q 9 ,lk4 i4 #cd4 ,?is diff]5ce ( /&po9t w be urg$ z "o1 ?\gh n ! only reason = reg>d+ ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 z a lat] ins]tion4 ,b be=e we exam9e ^! reasons1 we ne$ to consid] :e!r aft] all ! angelic ann\ncem5t may n conta9 "s implication 7:i* does n lie ^u ! surface ( ! passage7 t a ,miracul\s ,conception is promis$4 ,we f9d x impossible to re/ satisfi$ 9 ! sugge/ion ( ,w4 ,c4 ,all51 t !re may h be5 "s unrecord$ indication ( some?+ unique 9 ! conception 7,int]pret]1 #aije1 p4 #aba f474 ,a sugge/ion ( ?is k9d c nei!r be ju/ifi$ nor ga9said1 & is valuable only z a confirmation ( ! view t !re is no?+ 8record$0 9 ,lk4 i4 #cjc ( a unique conception4 ,to laun* ^u ! wat]s ( :at is unrecord$ w\ld seem to be a policy ( despair4 ,!re is mu* m to be said = an extremely int]e/+ sugge/ion ( ,canon ,box 9 8 article on ! ,virg9 ,bir? 9 ,ha/+s's ,diction>y ( ,*ri/ & ! ,gospels 7see vol4 ii1 p4 #hjf a74 ,box argues t 9 ! angelic ann\ncem5t ( ,lk4 i4 #cjc 8an imm$iate conception is meant04 ,accept+ ! view t a ,hebrew orig9al und]lies ! nativityn>ratives ( ,lk4 i1 ii1 he ?9ks t ?is orig9al has be5 incorrectly translat$ 9 ,lk4 i4 #ca1 :]e1 9 ! ,greek1 we h ! future t5se 1 8?\ %alt conceive04 8,! ,hebrew orig9al ( w\ld be a p>ticiple01 he says1 8& ! exact r5d]+ w\ld be1 #8,behold1 ?\ art conceiv+ n[' 04 ,!re c be no d\bt t1 if ?is view c be all[$1 ! angelic ann\ncem5t really does speak ( a miracul\s bir?1 & ?us an adequate explanation is giv5 ( ,m>y's surprise 9 ,lk4 i4 #cd4 ,!re are1 h[ev]1 c]ta9 objections :i*1 9 ! judgem5t ( ! pres5t writ]1 appe> to be fatal to ?is !ory4 ,we ne$ n press ! objection t x re/s ^u an initial assumption1 ! exi/5ce ( ! suppos$ ,hebrew orig9al1 s9ce ?is !ory ( a ,hebrew 7or ,aramaic7 docum5t>y s\rce is accept$ by mo/ ,briti% s*ol>s4 ,nor is x m ?an a =mal objection if we "q if ! ^w w\ld necess>ily be repres5t$ 9 ! suppos$ ,hebrew orig9al by a p>ticiple4 ,9 ! ,hebrew ,,nt4 publi%$ by ! ,briti% & ,=eign ,bible ,society1 ! adjective is us$1 & ?is is ! case 9 simil> passages 9 ! ,hebrew ,,ot41 viz4 ,g54 xvi4 #aa1 xxxviii4 #bd2 ,judg4 xiii4 #g 7v]se #c1 p]f472 #a ,sam4 iv4 #ai2 #b ,sam4 xi4 #e2 ,isa4 vii4 #ad4 ,a m s]i\s objection arises f ,lk4 ii4 #ba1 :]e x is said t ! "n ,jesus 0 s call$ by ! angel 8be=e he 0 conceiv$ 9 ! womb0 7 74 ,on ! !ory we are consid]+1 ?is mu/ be held to be ei!r a second mi/ranslation ( ! ,hebrew orig9al1 or a dep>ture f x4 ,9 ei!r case we mu/ conclude t a promis$ conception1 & n an imm$iate "o1 0 ! consid]$ view ( ! translator ( ! ,hebrew docum5t4 ,a second & conclusive objection to ! !ory ( ,canon ,box re/s ^u que/ions ( grammatical syntax4 ,is x correct to say t 8! exact r5d]+0 ( ! p>ticiple 7or adj47 w\ld be1 8,behold1 ?\ art conceiv+ n[08 ,x is true t ! active p>ticiple is 8ma9ly descriptive ( some?+ pres5t0 7,davidson1 ,hebrew ,syntax1 p4 #acd71 b x is also true1 to quote ! same au?ority1 t 8! p>ticiple does n indicate "t1 its col\r 9 ?is respect be+ tak5 f ! connexion 9 :i* x /&s04 ,! same consid]ation also applies to 9 all ! ,,ot4 in/ances ref]r$ to above4 ,:]e x is made cle> 9 ! context t conception has already tak5 place1 is translat$ 9 ! ,,rv4 by ! pres5t 7cf4 ,g54 xvi4 #aa1 xxxviii4 #bd2 #b ,sam4 xi4 #e74 ,:]e1 h[ev]1 !re is no su* indication1 x is r5d]$ by ! future1 & ! ann\ncem5t is treat$ z a promise 7cf4 ,judg4 xiii4 #g74 ,to convict ! translator ( ! ,hebrew docum5t ( an error 9 translation1 x is cle>ly necess>y to %[ f ! context ( ,lk4 i4 #ca t conception has already tak5 place4 ,9 o!r words1 ! translation pref]r$ by ,canon ,box1 if x is to be accept$1 mu/ be ju/ifi$ by "s /atem5t1 ei!r previ\sly made1 or made )9 ! angelic ann\ncem5t itself2 x mu/ be requir$1 t is to say1 by some?+ 9 ! n>rative previ\s to ,m>y's "q 9 ,lk4 i4 #cd47cf7 ,b ^! conditions1 :i* are by no means arbitr>y1 _c be met4 ,we mu/1 !re=e1 conclude t ! translator 0 q ju/ifi$1 :5 he us$ ! future 771 & s repres5t$ ! ann\ncem5t z a prophecy2 & we mu/ draw ?is conclusion1 irrespective altoge!r ( ! diff]5ce ( po9t ( view :i* ?us /&s reveal$ betwe5 ?is ann\ncem5t & v]se #cd 9 ! connexion 9 :i* x n[ appe>s4 ,inde$1 ! argum5t ( ,canon ,box seems capable ( be+ employ$ 9 a direction ! v rev]se ( t int5d$4 ,x c\ld be argu$ t s9ce1 9 po9t ( fact1 ! translator has us$ ! future 9 v]se #ca1 !re 0 no?+ 9 ! ,hebrew orig9al to sugge/ to 8 m9d ! idea ( an imm$iate conception2 n ev5 ! /atem5t ( v]se #cd1 :i* might h sugge/$1 ?\gh x does n ju/ify1 ! r5d]+1 8,behold1 ?\ art conceiv+ n[04 ,?us we might enli/ ! consid]$ view ( ! translator1 t a promis$ conception is meant1 9 support ( ! cont5tion t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is a lat] ins]tion4 ,)\t press+ ?is view1 we may fairly say t !re is mu* m to be said = x ?an = ! !ory we h discuss$4 ,! latt] !ory1 9 spite ( all t c be urg$ 9 its fav\r1 fails to ju/ify itself4 ,9 t case its failure seems to illu/rate ! some:at desp]ate exp$i5ts to :i* we mu/ h rec\rse1 9 ord] to f9d 9 ! angelic ann\ncem5t ! ?\ght ( an imm$iate conception4 ,on ! "q z a :ole1 we c only conclude t su* a view is nei!r /at$ nor impli$ 9 ! ann\ncem5t1 b t1 on ! contr>y1 its ref]5ce is to ! future4 7c7 ,reasons = reg>d+ ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 z a ,lat] ,ins]tion ,hav+ s\ght to give _! full =ce & prop] mean+ to ! two passages1 ,lk4 i4 #cjc & ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 we may n[ consid] ! argum5ts :i* c be advanc$ 9 fav\r ( reg>d+ ! latt] passage z an int]polation4 ,9 respect ( ^! argum5ts1 !re is f> f g5]al agreem5t among ^? :o are at "o 9 ! conclusion rea*$4 ,b ! significant fact is n ! div]sity ( op9ion z reg>ds ! mode ( pro(1 b ! agreem5t ( s _m s*ol>s 9 hold+ ! passage to be a lat] ins]tion47#cg7 ,! argum5ts we %all exam9e are n equally cog5t1 &1 z 9 ! fir/ "p ( ! pres5t *apt]1 we %all call att5tion to _! limitations z well z to ! po9ts 9 :i* !y are /rong4 ,we %all also treat ! case entirely ap>t f ! results sugge/$ 9 ! fir/ half ( our inquiry4 ,^? results1 if valid1 set up a presupposition aga9/ ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,b x seems mu* ! be/ n to avail ourselves ( su* an argum5t1 b r to consid] ! passage 9 itself & 9 relation to its context4 ,if 9 ?is way we f9d reasonable gr\nds = consid]+ ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 to be a lat] ins]tion1 we h !n a d\ble s]ies ( argum5ts conv]g+ on "o conclusion4 7#a7 ,! fir/ po9t to be consid]$ is t v]se #cf foll[s naturally aft] v]se #cc4 ,z we h se51 9 v]ses #cjc we h an angelic ann\ncem5t to ,m>y to ! effect t %e is to give bir? to a son :o is de/9$ to become ! ,messiah4 ,he w be call$ 8! ,son ( ! ,mo/ ,high01 & to him ! ,"l ,god w give 8! ?rone ( 8 fa!r ,david04 ,to ?is message1 x may be said1 v]ses #cf & #cg =m a fitt+ sequel4 ,!y add ! assurance t 8no ^w f ,god %all be void ( p[]01 9 pro( ( :i* x is decl>$ t ,m>y's k9swoman1 ,elisabe?1 is %ortly to be> a son 9 h] old age4 ,! :ole spee* 7,lk4 i4 #cjc1 #cf1 #cg7 is a consi/5t passage1 & 9 relation to x ! words ( ,m>y 9 v]se #ch--8;,behold1 ! h&maid ( ! ,"l2 be x unto me accord+ to ?y ^w0--are a natural & fitt+ reply4 ,canon ,box1 9 ! article already cit$1 que/ions ?is view4 8,!re w\ld be no?+ extraord9>y01 he says 89 ,m>y's conceiv+ a son z ,joseph's wife0--no?+1 t is to say1 to require ! sign (f]$4 ,b surely x is n a "q ( 8conceiv+ a son01 b ( conceiv+ su* a son1 ! longpromis$ ,messiah2 &1 moreov]1 ! ratification ( s great a promise by means ( a miracle is a commonplace ( ,,ot4 ?\ght4 ,x is n sugge/$1 ( c\rse1 t ?is argum5t proves ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 to be an int]polation4 ,t a section runs smoo?ly :5 a p>ticul> passage )9 x is excis$1 is no pro( t t passage is n orig9al4 ,?is la/ conclusion mu/ be e/abli%$ on ! gr\nd ( o!r argum5ts4 ,if1 h[ev]1 9 ! pres5t in/ance1 o!r argum5ts c>ry weight1 !n ! fact t v]se #cf c be connect$ easily & naturally ) v]se #cc becomes ( v great importance1 & x is = t reason t we introduce x "h4 7#b7 ,we take a really decisive /ep :5 we in/ance :at already has be5 f\nd1 namely t v]se #cd foll[s q unnaturally ^u ,lk4 i4 #cjc4 ,we h se5 t ,m>y's "q implies ! ann\ncem5t ( an imm$iate conception1 & we h fail$ to f9d any su* ann\ncem5t 9 ! angel's words4 ,!re is ?us a complete diff]5ce ( po9t ( view 9 ! two passages4 ,no possible gr\nd is provid$ 9 ! angelic ann\ncem5t = ! objection rais$ 9 v]se #cd4 ,x is difficult1 !re=e1 to d5y ! sugge/ion t ,m>y's "q already implies a k ( :at is told = ! fir/ "t 9 v]se #ce4 ,b ?is view1 if we accept x1 is to say t ,m>y's "q c\ld n possibly h be5 pres5t to ! m9d ( ,m>y 9 ! connexion 9 :i* x /&s2 x 0 ! la/ "q %e w\ld h ?\ght ( ask+4 ,! "q c only h be5 put into h] m\? by "o :o already knew ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 & wi%$ to introduce t doctr9e into a context 9 :i* orig9ally x did n appe>4 ,on ! int]pretation :i* we h giv5 to ,lk4 i4 #cjc & ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 ?is conclusion is inevitable1 unless we pref] to f9d 9 ,/4 ,luke an utt] inconsecutiv5ess ( ?\ght :i* does him no cr$it z writ]1 & :i* nei!r ( 8 works ju/ify u 9 attribut+ to him4 7#c7 ,we are unable to atta* ! same =ce to ! cont5tion t v]se #ce is foll[$ unnaturally by v]ses #cf & #cg 7s ,s*mi$el71 ?\gh ?is view has some?+ to be said = x4 ,v]se #ce ann\nces ! virg9 bir? ( ! promis$ ,messiah1 a doctr9e :i* is n f\nd 9 ,jewi% lit]ature & tradition1 & = :i*1 !re=e1 ! m9d ( ,m>y mu/ h be5 utt]ly unprep>$47#ch7 ,z ! section n[ /&s1 ! /atem5t ( v]ses #cf & #cg is add$ z a sign t :at has j be5 promis$ w surely come to pass4 ,?is sign1 we h already argu$1 w\ld be q natural1 accord+ to ,,ot4 modes ( ?\ght1 z au!nticat+ su* a message z t giv5 9 ,lk4 i4 #cjc4 ,b c we say ?is 9 ref]5ce to ! promise ( a virg9 bir?8 ,to ! mod]n m9d at lea/ ! argum5t seems faulty & unconv9c+4 ,m>y is bidd5 to accept z ! div9e promise :at is s rem>kable z to be o!rwise unkn[n to h]1 on ! gr\nd ( :at is c]ta9ly rem>kable b famili> to h] m9d & outlook4 ,9 tru?1 ?is seems a rem>kable argum5t ) :i* to cr$it an angel6 ,at ! same "t1 x has to be admitt$ t su* an objection may be too /r+5t1 & t x may n all[ suffici5tly = anci5t modes ( ?\ght1 accord+ to :i* ! argum5t f ! less to ! great] is by no means uncommon4 ,= ?is reason ! pres5t writ] w\ld n feel confid5t 9 press+ ! argum5t sket*$ above47#ci7 7#d7 ,a mu* /rong] argum5t calls att5tion to ! simil>ity betwe5 ,m>y's "q & t ( ,za*>ias 7,lk4 i4 #ah71 & ! diff]5ce ) :i* !y are treat$ by ! angel4 8,m>y's spee* expresses d\bt ( ! tru? ( ! angel's message1 & yet %e is n s mu* z blam$1 :il/ ,za*>ias is actually puni%$ = a l d\bt 7i4 #bj7047dj7 ,! presumption is t ! two cases d n emanate f ! same cycle ( tradition4 ,! =ce ( ?is argum5t dep5ds1 ( c\rse1 ^u ! way 9 :i* we int]pret ,lk4 i4 #cd4 ,x is true t we h no indication ( ! tone 9 :i* ! "q is ask$1 beyond ! words !mselves & ! s5t5ces :i* foll[2 b q suffici5t is giv5 to indicate ! pres5ce ( d\bt4 ,! po9t is n m]ely "o ( subjective valuation4 ,?is w appe> if we consid] ,plumm]'s view1 :i* is q diff]5t f ,s*mi$el's4 8,%e does n ask = pro(1 z ,za*>ias did 7v]4 #ah72 & only 9 ! =m ( ! words does %e ask z to ! mode ( accompli%m5t4 ,h] utt]ance is little m ?an an involunt>y expression ( amazem5t4444 ,x is cle> t %e does n d\bt ! fact promis$1 nor = a mom5t suppose t h] *ild is to be ! *ild ( ,joseph0 7op4 cit41 p4 #bd74 ,9 weigh+ ?is op9ion1 x %\ld be notic$ t x ref]s only to ! words1 8 ,we may readily agree t if all t ,m>y _h said 71 8,h[ %all ?is be801 we %\ld be unable to conte/ ?is view4 ,b to divide ,m>y's "q 9 ?is way is n p]missible4 ,! second "p1 8see+ ,i "k n a man01 cle>ly det]m9es ! fir/1 & deb>s u f view+ x z m]ely 8an involunt>y expression ( amazem5t04 ,! pres5ce ( d\bt1 we ?9k1 mu/ be conc$$1 ?\gh x is less m>k$ ?an 9 ! case ( ,za*>ias4 ,?is view1 moreov]1 is support$ by ! fact t1 9 ! n>rative z x /&s1 an explanation foll[s1 :i* is also confirm$ by a sign4 ,s9ce1 z ,plumm] says1 ,m>y1 unlike ,za*>ias1 does n ask = pro(1 we ne$ n object t %e is n 8puni%$40 ,& x is j possible t we make ! p>allelism too rigid if we lay /ress on ! fact t 8%e is n s mu* z blam$04 ,x is r ! 8eulogium0 ( ,lk4 i4 #de 78,bless$ is %e t believ$07 :i* pres5ts ! difficulty4 ,x is true t1 9 ! n>rative z we h x n[1 ,m>y believes ultimately 7v]se #ch71 b ,lk4 i4 #de seems r to belong to a n>rative 9 :i* ,m>y believes f ! fir/4 ,we conclude t ! pres5t argum5t gives real support to ! view t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 belongs to a s\rce di/9ct f its context4 7#e7 ,a fif? argum5t dwells on ! diff]5t s5ses 9 :i* ,div9e ,son%ip is pr$icat$ ( ! promis$ *ild 9 v]se #cb z comp>$ ) v]se #ce4 ,z we h se51 ! t]m 9 v]se #cb is purely ,messianic4 ,b 9 v]se #ce ! expression mu/ be giv5 a v diff]5t mean+4 ,x is 9 consequ5ce ( 7 7 ! div9e ov]%ad[+ t ! *ild is to be call$ 8,son ( ,god04 ,"h1 to quote ,dr4 ,j4 ,e/l9 ,c>p5t]1 ! t]m d5otes 8n (ficial adoption1 b actual orig901 &1 ) ! same writ]1 we mu/ conclude t v]se #ce 8is ?us a d\blet ( v]ses #ca1 #cb on ano!r plane0 7op4 cit41 p4 #dhg747da7 ,x is m difficult to decide :e!r ! diff]5ce supports ! !ory ( int]polation4 ,we _c %ut out ! possibility t two div]se types ( ,son%ip might h be5 attribut$ by ,/4 ,luke to ! same speak] at ! same "t ( writ+4 ,b1 hav+ said ?is1 we may obs]ve t x is c]ta9ly mu* easi] to suppose1 & is mu* m probable1 t !y belong to diff]5t p]iods ( reflection1 & are ! product 7or deposit7 ( diff]5t traditions4 ,?is argum5t1 !n1 may be said to lean 9 ! direction ( ! !ory ( int]polation1 b1 = ! reason giv5 above1 we %\ld hesitate to urge x1 if x /ood alone4 7#f7 ,we h la/ly to look at ! vex$ "q ( ! ,davidic desc5t4 ,x is safe to say t1 if we _h n ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 9 ! ,gospel z x /&s today1 we %\ld h no gr\nd = reg>d+ ,m>y z ( ,davidic desc5t4 ,x is ! pres5ce ( ^! v]ses t makes possible t inf]5ce 9 v]se #cb1 :]e1 9 address+ ,m>y1 ! angel speaks ( ,david z ! =efa!r ( ! promis$ *ild4 ,x is surely a rem>kable fact t a po9t s vital to ,/4 ,luke's n>rative z ! ,davidic desc5t ( ,m>y %\ld be introduc$ 9 s incid5tal a mann]4 ,our wond] is increas$ :5 we obs]ve t ,/4 ,luke is at great pa9s to assure ,!ophilus ( ! ,davidic desc5t ( ,joseph4 ,9 ii4 #d x is said t ,joseph 0 8( ! h\se & family ( ,david02 n a ^w is said ( ,m>y's desc5t4 ,x is true t ! ,s94 ,syr4 reads1 8because !y 7 bo? ( ! h\se ( ,david02 b ?is does n naturally fit into ! /ructure ( ! s5t5ce1 is unsupport$ else:]e1 & is accept$ by no "o2 x cle>ly repres5ts an attempt to remove a difficulty4 ,94 i4 #bg x is also said t ,joseph 0 8( ! h\se ( ,david04 ,! phrase _c be con/ru$ ) ! ^w 8virg901 :i* occurs e>li] 9 ! s5t5ce1 9 view ( ! fact t aft] ,/4 ,luke resumes ! ?read ( ! /ory by say+ 8& ! virg9's "n 0 ,m>y02 o!rwise1 he w\ld h cont9u$ 7s ,s*mi$el1 op4 cit41 col4 #bieg71 8& h] "n 0 ,m>y04 ,x is n easy inde$ to resi/ ,s*mi$el's fur!r cont5tion t ! phras+ ( ! s5t5ce expressly =bids our ascrib+ ! ,davidic desc5t to ,m>y1 ?\gh ! op9ion is put =w>d ) great] confid5ce ?an seems ju/ifi$4 ,! "o passage 9 :i* ,/4 ,luke directly ref]s to ! family ( ,m>y is dubi\s4 ,9 i4 #cf ,elisabe? is said to be 8! k9swoman0 ( ,m>y1 & we "k f i4 #e t ,elisabe? 0 8( ! daught]s ( ,a>on01 :i* seems to imply t ,m>y too 0 ( ,levitical desc5t4 ,b z ! precise nature ( ! relation%ip is n /at$1 we _c say1 ) ,s*mi$el1 ,us5]1 & o!rs1 t ?is is s4 ,nev]!less1 ! broad fact rema9s t ap>t f an inf]5ce1 :i* itself dep5ds on ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 we h no gr\nds = believ+ ,m>y to be a desc5dant ( ,david4 ,/4 ,luke und\bt$ly believes ,jesus to be ( ,davidic desc5t2 he c>efully %[s ,joseph to be ( t desc5t2 he gives u no reason to suppose1 t1 l ! au?or ( ! ,fir/ ,gospel1 he trac$ ! desc5t ( ,jesus ?r\gh ,joseph z ,8 legal fa!r2 & yet1 9 spite ( all ?is1 he has left ! vital "q ( ! ,davidic desc5t ( ,m>y at ! m]cy ( an inf]5ce6 ,if he kn[s ,m>y to be a desc5dant ( ,david1 :y does he n say s explicitly8 ,we h a "r to ask ! "q1 :i* is nei!r capti\s nor unfair4 ,no "o has yet answ]$ x satisfactorily1 except 9 ! answ] t ,/4 ,luke _h no tradition ( ! ,davidic desc5t ( ,m>y at 8 disposal1 t he trac$ ! desc5t ( ,jesus ?r\gh ,joseph z ,8 real fa!r1 t ?is is ! true int]pretation ( v]se #cb1 & t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is a lat] ins]tion1 :i* has impos$ on v]se #cb a s5se :i* orig9ally x did n be>4 ,reg>d ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 z a lat] ins]tion1 & all ! facts alleg$ by ,/4 ,luke ab\t ! ,davidic desc5t fall into intelligible ord]2 refuse to d ?is1 & !y rema9 9 inexplicable confusion4 ,:5 we consid] ! cumulative =ce ( ! prec$+ argum5ts1 x becomes impossible = u to ?9k t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 0 writt5 at ! same "t1 & f ! same po9t ( view1 z ! context 9 :i* x n[ /&s2 x is cle>ly a lat] ins]tion4 ,) "s reason we may hesitate to say t v]se #cf does n foll[ naturally ^u v]se #ce1 & we may speculate :e!r two div]se conceptions ( ,son%ip may n be held 9 ! same m9d at ! same "t ( writ+4 ,b :5 we pond] ! "q ( ! ,davidic desc5t2 :5 we comp>e v]se #cd ) ,lk4 i4 #ah ff42 :5 we obs]ve ! natural coh]5ce ( ,lk4 i4 #cjc & ,lk4 i4 #cfh1 & ! radical diff]5ce 9 po9t ( view betwe5 v]ses #cd1 #ce & ! angelic ann\ncem5t2 :51 9 %ort1 we h a n>rative1 :i*1 if ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 0 pres5t f ! fir/1 ought to be dom9at$ by ^? v]ses1 b on ! contr>y does n seem to be influ5c$ by !m2 we are compell$ to conclude t ! suspect$ v]ses repres5t a lat] ins]tion 9 ! ,gospel4 ,,iii4 ,summ>y & ,conclusion ,we are 9 a position n[ to conclude f ! =ego+ inve/igation t ! ,virg9 ,bir? is n an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel4 ,?is conclusion has be5 rea*$ by two l9es ( argum5t :i* confirm & /r5g!n ea* o!r4 ,we h se5 t ! "o passage :i* unmi/akably ass]ts ! doctr9e is a lat] ins]tion4 ,indep5d5tly ( ?is1 /atem5ts h be5 not$ 9 *apt]s i & ii1 :i* receive no natural & satisfactory explanation on ! assumption t ,/4 ,luke wrote 8 n>rative ) a k ( ! miracle presuppos$4 ,9 ! fir/ "p ( ?is *apt] we expressly refra9$ f press+ ! view t ^! po9ts 9 !mselves absolutely =bid ?is assumption4 ,b1 obvi\sly1 n[ t we h f\nd ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 to be a lat] ins]tion1 ! =ce ( ^! difficulties is greatly increas$4 ,we are n[ entitl$ to say t ! op9ion :i* does lea/ hon\r to ,/4 ,luke is ! view t he has writt5 cc4 i1 ii1 :ile kn[+ ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,we h to rememb] t n only is ! ,virg9 ,bir? itself a /up5d\s ?\ght1 b t1 if kn[n to ,/4 ,luke1 x _c h be5 kn[n long1 & mu/ !re=e h pres]v$ ! fre%ness ( its wond]4 ,c we1 !n1 suppose t1 :ile "u ! sway ( a presupposition s despotic z ?is1 he w\ld /raightway proce$ to use su* expressions z 8! p>5ts01 88 p>5ts01 88 fa!r & 8 "m02 t1 )\t qualification1 he w\ld speak ( 8_! purification02 t he w\ld repres5t !m a/oni%$ at ! words ( ,simeon1 & my/ifi$ by ! be>+ & spee* ( ,jesus at ,j]usalem8 ,is x cr$ible1 9 %ort1 t he %\ld h fall5 into ! v ambiguities & inconsi/5cies1 :i* presumably he w\ld be anxi\s to avoid1 & :i* )\t ! slighte/ difficulty he c\ld h avoid$8 ,ev5 if we %\ld /ill hesitate to answ] ^! que/ions 9 ! negative1 our conclusion1 t orig9ally ! ,gospel lack$ ! ref]5ces to ! ,virg9 ,bir? :i* we n[ f9d 9 x1 leaves u no o!r option4 ,x %\ld be obs]v$ t ! argum5ts we h employ$ 9 ! pres5t *apt] d n compel u to take ! view t ,/4 ,luke nev] at any "t taught ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,!y are satisfi$ if we c suppose t he _h no k ( ! doctr9e :5 ,lk4 i1 ii 0 fir/ writt54 ,to say t i4 #cd f4 is a correction1 ins]t$ by a r$actor or read]1 ^: "n we d n "k1 b :o is n ,/4 ,luke1 is to take two /eps :]e we h gr\nd = "o only4 ,all t our /udy entitles u to claim is t ! ,virg9 ,bir? belongs to a lat] /ratum 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel4 ,m ?an ?is we _c say1 until we h made a ?or\gh l+ui/ic & textual exam9ation ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 & ?is mu/ be our next task4 ,,*apt] ,,iii4 ,,/4 ,,luke ,,& ,,! ,,virg9 ,,bir? ,:ile1 9 ! prec$+ *apt]1 we conclud$ t ! ,virg9 ,bir? is a lat] /ratum 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel1 we 7 unable to say to ^: h& its pres5ce is due4 ,!re 0 no?+ to %[ t ,/4 ,luke c\ld nev] at any "t h kn[n ( ! doctr9e1 b only t he c\ld n h kn[n ( x at ! "t :5 he fir/ draft$ & wrote 8 ,gospel4 ,we are free1 !n1 to make a new beg9n+1 & to ask3 ,did ,/4 ,luke tea* ! ,virg9 ,bir?8 ,! "q is mo/ conv5i5tly treat$ by discuss+ ! au?or%ip ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,z we h se51 ?is is ! crucial passage4 ,if we c believe ,/4 ,luke himself to h writt5 ^! v]ses1 we mu/ also attribute to 8 p5 ! words1 8z 0 suppos$0 9 iii4 #bc2 9 a ^w1 we mu/ conclude t he taught ! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,jesus1 & we mu/ leave ! "q1 h[ ?is result is to be coord9at$ ) ^? rea*$ 9 ! previ\s *apt]1 to be consid]$ lat]4 ,t ,/4 ,luke & no o!r did write ^! v]ses1 is ! consid]$ view ( ! pres5t writ]4 ,!re are two l9es ( argum5t :i* conv]ge 9 ?is direction4 ,! fir/ argum5t is textual1 b x is m ?an a matt] ( weigh+ docum5ts2 ! second is l+ui/ic & /yli/ic4 ,nei!r is completely conclusive 9 itself1 &1 :5 tak5 toge!r1 !y d n admit ( a result s /r+5t z rigid demon/ration4 ,!y are complem5t>y ea* to ! o!r4 ,ei!r w\ld be weak5$ 9 =ce 9 ! abs5ce ( ! o!r1 b _! agreem5t is suffici5t to e/abli% a result = :i* a v high degree ( probability c ju/ly be claim$4 ,i4 ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 & ! ,textual ,"q ,x is well kn[n t no exception to ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 c be tak5 on /rictly textual gr\nds4 ,! ext]nal evid5ce = ! passage is practically complete4 ,! sole exception1 :i* only s]ves to ?r[ into relief ! ov]:elm+ mass ( positive evid5ce1 is f\nd 9 ! ,old ,lat9 ,,ms4 kn[n z b1 :i* sub/itutes i4 #ch = i4 #cd & omits v]se #ch aft] v]se #cg47db7 ,9 ,great ,brita91 a g5]ation ago & less1 ?is weight ( ext]nal evid5ce w\ld h be5 ?\ght suffici5t to settle ! "q1 & !re are probably v _m s*ol>s :o w\ld /ill take ?is view4 ,b )9 rec5t ye>s a *ange has come to be disc]nible among lead+ !ological writ]s on ! g5]al "q ( atte/ation4 ,mu* m ?an 9 =m] times x is n[ recogniz$ t dur+ ! fir/ half ( ! second c5tury ! text ( ! ,new ,te/am5t1 & especially t ( ! ,gospels1 0 subject to r free h&l+1 & ! possibility has to be fac$ t int]polations may h crept into ! text 9 places :]e =m]ly ! ext]nal atte/ation w\ld h be5 ?\ght suffici5tly /rong4 ,dr4 ,george ,milligan7#dc7 traces ! dang] ( textual corruption to :i* ! ,new ,te/am5t writ+s 7 expos$ to a ?reefold cause1 7i7 ! mat]ial ^u :i* ! autographs 7 writt51 7ii7 ! employm5t ( nonpr(essional scribes1 7iii7 ! fact t ! ?\ght ( ! ne$ ( absolute v]bal reproduction 0 /range to e>ly scribes4 ,! la/ nam$ fact l$1 n only to attempts to improve ! gramm> & to add 8explanatory words01 b also to ! ins]tion 8ev5 ( delib]ate *anges 9 ! suppos$ int]e/s ( hi/oric or dogmatic tru?04 ,milligan in/ances ! case ( ,dionysius ( ,cor9? :o1 89 view ( ! circulation ( 8 epi/les 9 a falsifi$ =m01 is f\nd 8navely com=t+ himself ) ! ?\ght t ! same fate _h befall5 ! ,scriptures0 7p4 #agi n474 8,! g5]al result01 ,dr4 ,milligan concludes1 8is1 t in/ead ( assign+ textual corruption to a comp>atively late date 444 ev]y?+ r po9ts to ! conclusion t1 ! ne>] we get to ! orig9al manuscripts1 ! great] 7 ! dang]s to :i* _! text 0 expos$0 7p4 #ahj74 ,9 view ( ?is position1 x is important to ask :e!r int]polations may n exi/ :i* h left no trace :atev] ( _! orig9 9 ! abundant docum5t>y evid5ce we possess4 ,a repres5tative /atem5t ( ?is view may be f\nd 9 ! words ( ,dr4 ,james ,m(fatt 7,,int41 p4 #cf f473 8,ev5 :]e ! extant text does n sugge/ any break1 ! possibility ( int]polations _c be d5i$ outright2 ! di/ance betwe5 ! olde/ ,,mss41 or ev5 ! olde/ v]sions1 & ! date ( composition leaves ample room = *anges to h tak5 place 9 ! int]val betwe5 ! autograph & ! e>lie/ kn[n text0 7p4 #ch74 8,! ext5t ( int]polations v>i$ f a ^w or two to a p>agraph1 & ! motives = x v>i$ equally f s9i/] to nave0 7p4 #ch747dd7 ,"o argum5t 9 fav\r ( ?is view may be drawn f ! /ate ( ! exi/+ ,,mss4 & v]sions4 ,! multitud9\s v>iations :i* occur 9 ^! docum5ts _c be expla9$ )\t admitt+ ! free treatm5t :i* has be5 m5tion$1 & :i* 0 natural at a "t :5 ! ,gospels 7 n yet look$ ^u z 8sacr$ books04 ,9 l>ge measure su* additions z we f9d 7 drawn f float+ ,*ri/ian tradition1 & 9 _m cases1 e4g4 ! p]icope adult]iae1 !y probably reflect hi/oric fact47#de7 ,nev]!less1 !y are n g5u9e p>ts ( ! ,new ,te/am5t4 ,! fur!r argum5t is an inf]5ce3 if su* v>iations f su* causes occur 9 ! ,,mss4 & v]sions we possess1 may !re n be int]polations ( :i* we h no ext]nal indication 9 ! exi/+ texts8 ,/at$ 9 ?is way ! "q invites an affirmative answ]1 b !re are o!r factors :i* h yet to be consid]$4 ,z a matt] ( fact1 !re is little pr(it 9 a broad & g5]al discussion4 ,we t\* ! he>t ( ! problem only :5 we consid] ! types or classes into :i* su* ins]tions might conceivably fall4 ,on ! :ole x is be/1 ev5 if only = purposes ( argum5t1 to admit ! possibility t ins]tions unm>k$ by signs ( textual v>iation exi/1 & to ask3 ,( :at "* may we suppose ^! ins]tions to be1 & c we def9e any limits )9 :i* !y are m probable ?an o!rs8 ,9 p>ticul>1 is ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 a likely or probable in/ance8 ,x is obvi\s t h>d & fa/ l9es _c be drawn 9 individual cases4 ,nev]!less1 x ought to be possible to say :e!r or n a passage l ! "o we are consid]+ is1 or is n1 ! "w ( a r$actor4 ,^? in/ances ( ins]tions1 :]e textual v>iations c be cit$1 supply u ) ! safe/ crit]ion = o!r suspect$ cases4 ,( ^! in/ances _m1 z we h se51 7 drawn f ! float+ tradition ( ! ,*ri/ian communities4 ,an int]e/+ case is sugge/$ by ,dr4 ,j4 ,h4 ,m\lton 7,f ,egyptian ,rubbi% ,heaps1 p4 #aja f474 ,he traces ! say+1 8,fa!r1 =give !m2 = !y "k n :at !y d01 to ! rem9isc5ces ( ! c5turion :o 0 pres5t at ! dea? ( ,jesus4 8,! words are n 9 ,luke's orig9al ,gospel1 b z ! great ,pr(essor ,hort said 9 reg>d to ! fact t ^! words _c be textually def5d$1 #8,few if any words 9 all ! ,gospels be> m intr9sic witness to ! tru? ( :at !y relate ?an ^!' 0 7p4 #ajc74 ,on g5]al gr\nds1 x may v well be1 t simil> items ( tradition h f\nd _! way into ! exi/+ texts1 leav+ ! surface ( ! textual /ream unruffl$4 ,b x is cle> t1 9 any suspect$ case1 ! ins]tion c\ld be ! act ( ! au?or himself & n ! read]4 ,if ! latt] really is ! case1 ! ins]tion mu/ h be5 made v e>ly1 & mu/ h be5 ( su* a k9d z n to awak5 comm5t or diss5t4 ,a second k9d ( ins]tions may possibly be f\nd 9 explanatory words or phrases1 introduc$ ) ! int5tion ( br++ out ! orig9al writ]'s mean+4 ,we may take z an in/ance ,rom4 iv4 #a 78,:at !n %all we say t ,abraham1 our =efa!r accord+ to ! fle%1 ha? f\nd80 71 :]e ,s&ay & ,headlam say t !y 8reg>d ! omission ( z probable ) ,,:4 text ,tr4 ,,rv4 m>g40 7,,icc41 ,rom41 p4 #ii747df7 ,9 ?is case1 h[ev]1 z 9 s _m o!rs1 ! gloss1 if gloss x is1 is reflect$ 9 ! textual evid5ce4 ,nev]!less1 ! possibility may be all[$1 t su* glosses exi/ ev5 :]e v>iants _c be cit$4 ,9 ^! cases1 h[ev]1 x is cle> t ! ins]tions mu/ h be5 v e>ly & v happy1 & t 9 specific cases _! pres5ce c r>ely be conc$$ ) complete confid5ce4 ,yet ano!r class ( int]polations may possibly be f\nd 9 c]ta9 passages 9 ! ,gospels :i* lat] conditions obta9+ )9 ! ,*ri/ian ,*ur* h %ap$4 ,t lat] exp]i5ce did int]pret ! words ( ,jesus & give ! s5se ( !m 9 its own t]ms1 ne$ n be que/ion$4 ,b x %\ld always be rememb]$ t 9 any suspect$ case1 ! process may well h be5 complete by ! "t t ! ,evangeli/s wrote1 & t ! passage is n an int]polation at all4 ,!re are v good gr\nds = ?is op9ion ev5 9 cases 9 :i* v>iations 9 r5d]+ c be cit$ f patri/ic & o!r s\rces1 z1 = example1 9 ! case ( ! ,great ,commission 9 ,mt4 xxviii4 #ai4 ,?is fact makes x all ! m difficult to conc$e an int]polation :]e ! textual record is unbrok51 ?\gh aga9 ! possibility t su* cases d exi/ may well be left op54 ,! cases j consid]$ help u :5 we come to ?9k ( doctr9al modifications4 ,z reg>ds ^!1 x is important to draw aga9 a di/9ction :i* has be5 already made4 ,we mu/ di/+ui%1 on ! "o h&1 betwe5 ^? in/ances ( doctr9al modification t are due to ! ,evangeli/s !mselves1 & :i* are 9 no s5se int]polations1 &1 on ! o!r h&1 ^? :i* may subsequ5tly h be5 made by lat] scribes or read]s4 ,cases ( ! =m] k9d unque/ionably occur 9 ! ,gospels4 ,we h only to exam9e ! way 9 :i* ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,evangeli/s h treat$ ! ,second ,gospel1 :i* lay be=e !m1 to be assur$ ( ?is4 ,alt]ations1 e4g41 are made out ( a s5se ( rev]5ce = ! p]son ( ,jesus 7cf4 ,all51 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 xxxi f474 ,mt4 xix4 #ag 78,:y aske/ ?\ me conc]n+ t :i* is good8071 & ! *anges :i* ,mk4 vi4 #e f4 has be5 subject$ to1 bo? 9 ,mt4 & ,lk41 w s]ve z illu/rations4 ,modifications ( ?is k9d are n1 h[ev]1 ! sort we h specially 9 m9d4 ,x is ! second type1 ^? :i* are int]polations prop]1 t we h p>ticul>ly to consid]4 ,! exi/5ce ( ^! has frankly to be admitt$4 ,x is beyond "q t doctr9al ins]tions 7 introduc$ into ! text ( ! ,gospels by lat] scribes & read]s4 ,! "o case ( ,mt4 i4 #af is pro( positive ( ?is 7see pp4 #aje ff474 ,if ! op9ion1 t ! orig9al end+ ( our ,second ,gospel 0 delib]ately suppress$1 is correct1 ,mk4 xvi4 #ibj may be cit$ z ano!r in/ance47#dg7 ,an important qualification1 h[ev]1 requires to be made4 ,9 ! two cases m5tion$ !re is a conflict ( textual evid5ce1 &1 z reg>ds ! latt]1 ! objections are re9=c$ by ! int]nal evid5ce1 aris+ f ! vocabul>y1 ! /yle1 & ! subjectmatt]4 ,! pres5t writ] mu/ ne$s conclude t ! pres5ce ( textual v>iation is an almo/ necess>y condition 9 ! case ( a doctr9al ins]tion4 ,x is m difficult to say h[ f> ?is requirem5t %\ld be press$ 9 ! o!r types ( int]polation :i* h be5 m5tion$1 b z reg>ds doctr9al modifications ! te/ is ?or\ghly legitimate4 ,)\t go+ s f> z to pron\nce x absolutely impossible1 we may say t ! !ory1 t doctr9al ins]tions may exi/ :]e ! extant texts %[ no break1 is improbable 9 ! extreme4 ,9 tak+ ?is view1 we are n conf9$ to ! plea ( ! e>ly & abundant nature ( textual evid5ce1 or to ! effect ( controv]sy 9 pres]v+ ! purity ( ! text1 ?\gh ^! are argum5ts ( v great weight4 ,a suffici5tly decisive factor is ! "* ( ! exi/+ textual v>iants47#dh7 ,if au!ntic items ( ,jesustradition & 8explanatory words & phrases0 h n be5 able to ent] ! textual /ream unnotic$1 c we suppose t doctr9al modifications h brea/$ ! wat]s )\t leav+ s mu* z a ripple8 ,if ev5 an ins]tion l 8,fa!r1 =give !m2 = !y "k n :at !y d0 has n be5 able successfully to conceal itself1 c we believe ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 to h succe$$ 9 do+ ?is8 ,c we ?9k t1 l ,mel*iz$ek1 ! passage is )\t fa!r1 "m1 g5ealogy & beg9n+ ( life8 ,9 ask+ ^! que/ions we ne$ to recall ! "* ( ! section4 ,x is su* z radically to trans=m ! /&po9t ( ! *apt]s 9 :i* x occurs4 ,x speaks ( matt]s :i*1 = a consid]able "t at lea/1 7 n kn[n among ! mass ( ,*ri/ian believ]s1 & 7 nev] accept$ by "s4 ,to suppose1 !n1 t x is a non,lukan doctr9al int]polation1 is a flight ( fai?1 = :i* ^? :o c make x %\ld receive ! cr$it t is due1 b ( :i* ! pres5t writ] mu/ confess t he is n capable4 ,:ile1 h[ev]1 we conclude t ! !ory we are discuss+ is manife/ly improbable1 we h admitt$ our inability to pron\nce x impossible 9 any %ape & =m4 ,provid$ we agree t ! ,?ird ,gospel nev] circulat$ )\t ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 !re is "o po9t :]e ! passage might h ent]$ z an ins]tion1 & t is 9 ! int]val be=e circulation4 ,b ev5 "h x is difficult to suppose t ! passage 0 add$ by "s "o o!r ?an ,/4 ,luke himself4 ,9 our entire ignorance ( ! circum/ances "u :i* ! ,gospel came to h a wid] circulation1 we _c say t ?is supposition is inadmissible4 ,x has a b>e possibility 9 its fav\r1 b n m4 ,if a l+ui/ic exam9ation ( ! passage gave a result unfav\rable to ,lukan au?or%ip1 ! possibility w\ld become m significant4 ,b if ! contr>y proves to be ! case1 !n x becomes s remote z to be unwor?y ( s]i\s consid]ation4 ,x is because ( ?is position t we h describ$ ! pres5t argum5t z be+ n completely conclusive 9 itself1 & ! "o l9e ( reason+ z complem5t>y to ! o!r4 ,q ap>t1 h[ev]1 f ! l+ui/ic argum5t1 ! difficulties :i* ! !ory ( non ,lukan int]polation has to face on textual gr\nds are =midable4 ,,ii4 ,l+ui/ic & ,/yli/ic ,exam9ation ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f ,our second task is to make a l+ui/ic & /yli/ic exam9ation ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,at ! beg9n+ ( ! la/ *apt] we drew att5tion to ! importance ( ! te/4 ,x _c be too /rongly affirm$ t any hypo!sis ( int]polation1 :i* does n take acc\nt ( ! l+ui/ic *>act]i/ics ( ! passage1 is premature2 inde$1 x may easily turn out to be a r gl>+ case ( non sequitur4 ,x is precisely ! l+ui/ic te/ :i* we miss 9 ! argum5ts ( ^? :o claim t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 0 n writt5 by ,/4 ,luke4 ,usually x is ?\ght en\gh to argue an incompatibility betwe5 ?is passage & its context1 & /raightway to assign ! =m] to ! p5 ( an unkn[n r$actor4 ,we may illu/rate ?is me?od f ! two articles 9 ! ,encyclopa$ia ,biblica to :i* ref]5ce has be5 made4 ,9 ! article on 8,m>y01 ,s*mi$el says 7col4 #bief73 8,x has to be po9t$ out t ev5 9 ,lk4 i only two v]ses--vv4 #cd f4--conta9 ! idea ( ! virg9 bir? cle>ly & effectively2 & ^! di/urb ! connexion s manife/ly t we are compell$ to reg>d !m z a lat] ins]tion04 ,! only argum5t ( a l+ui/ic "* is ! rem>k3 8,note1 fur!r1 t ap>t f i4 #cd 7#8s9ce'7 is n met ) ei!r 9 ! ?ird gospel or 9 ,acts04 ,us5] writes 7col4 #ccdi73 8,to ,joh4 ,hillmann 7,,jpt4 #ag1 #bba ff47 belongs ! m]it ( hav+ conclusively %[n t ! two v]ses 9 ,lk4 7i4 #cd f471 ! only v]ses 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel 9 :i* ! sup]natural bir? ( ,jesus ( ! ,virg9 ,m>y is /at$1 are incompatible ) ! entire repres5tation ( ! re/ ( *aps1 i & ii1 & ?us mu/ h be5 int]polat$ by a r$actor047#di7 ,x is !ories ( ?is k9d t we h 9 view :5 we say 7p4 #dg7 t to /ate su* a conclusion is to take two /eps :]e !re is gr\nd = "o only4 ,! importance ( ! l+ui/ic argum5t is manife/ 9 su* works z ,sir ,john ,c4 ,hawk9s's ,horae ,synopticae 7#bnd ed41 #aiji7 & ,dr4 ,w4 ,k4 ,hob>t's ,m$ical ,language ( ,/4 ,luke 7#ahhb74 ,x has also receiv$ great emphasis 9 ! books 9 :i* ,h>nack has s\ght to prove ! ,lukan au?or%ip & e>ly date ( ! ,acts1 viz4 ,luke ! ,physician1 ,! ,acts ( ! ,apo/les1 & ,! ,date ( ! ,acts & ( ! ,synoptic ,gospels4 ,x may n be )\t value to ask h[ f> ! l+ui/ic argum5t c take u4 ,we may c]ta9ly lay d[n ! broad proposition t argum5ts 9 fav\r ( an int]polation ought to be support$ by ! l+ui/ic facts2 provid$1 ( c\rse1 t ! suspect$ passage is susceptible ( ! l+ui/ic te/4 ,we d n =get t a passage may be ( su* a neutral "* z n to admit ( t te/4 ,9 t case we h to be cont5t ) o!r available argum5ts4 ,:]e1 h[ev]1 ! l+ui/ic te/ c be appli$1 & :]e ! result is /rongly fav\rable to ! g5u95ess ( ! passage1 t1 assur$ly1 is a v s]i\s objection = ! !ory ( int]polation to face4 ,x becomes especially =midable1 if we c br+ =w>d no evid5ce to prove an ana*ronism1 or if we c allege no real textual objections4 ,"u su* circum/ances1 inde$1 we may well adopt ! rule t1 9 cases ( ?is k9d1 we h n to d ) ! ins]tion ( a r$actor2 unless1 ( c\rse1 we h good reason = say+ t ! int]polator has ent]$ deeply into ! orig9al writ]'s /yle4 ,! view "h tak5 does n mean t all objections to a passage are suffici5tly met if we c /ate a /rong l+ui/ic case on ! o!r side4 ,we %all h reason to take up ?is po9t aga9 7p4 #fi74 ,= ! pres5t x is suffici5t to say t ea* k9d ( argum5t mu/ be giv5 its own p>ticul> =ce4 ,9 ! case ( a passage :]e objections aris+ f context & subjectmatt] _c be ga9said1 we mu/ conclude t ! passage is ( lat] date ?an its context1 b n m4 ,9 a case :]e ! facts ( vocabul>y1 /yle1 & subjectmatt] are suffici5tly fav\rable1 & no textual difficulties =bid1 we mu/ ascribe ! passage to ! orig9al writ]4 ,9 a case1 f9ally1 :]e bo? k9ds ( conditions occur1 we mu/ suppose t ! passage 0 aft]w>ds ins]t$ by ! writ] himself into ! body ( 8 own "w4 ,cle>ly1 !n1 ! l+ui/ic exam9ation ( a suspect$ passage is a matt] ( great importance4 ,9 ! case ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 x is n too mu* to say t x is a task z necess>y z x is neglect$4 ,x may be object$ t ! passage is "o ( two v]ses only1 & t1 9 consequ5ce1 x is mu* too brief to all[ ( satisfactory results4 ,on ! o!r h&1 x %\ld be rememb]$ t ! ?irtysev5 words ( ! section include sev]al int]e/+ phrases & po9ts ( con/ruction1 :i* are s important 9 matt]s ( ?is k9d4 ,moreov]1 9 ! case ( ,/4 ,luke1 we are deal+ ) a writ] :o has a v di/9ctive /yle47#ej7 ,h>nack has recogniz$ ! =ce ( ! l+ui/ic argum5t 9 ! case ( two v]ses 7?irty"o words74 ,^! are ! la/ two v]ses ( ! ,acts4 ,aft] rem>k+ t1 s f> z he kn[s1 x has nev] be5 que/ion$ t ^! words come f ! au?or ( ! complete "w1 ?\gh !y h ! appe>ance ( be+ a po/script1 he cont9ues3 8,moreov]1 9 cont5t & 9 =m !y agree s closely ) ! ,lukan /yle t f ?is po9t ( view /rong argum5ts c be produc$ 9 fav\r ( _! g5u95ess0 7,date ( ,acts1 c41 p4 #id74 ,9 a footnote he adds ! l+ui/ic argum5t4 ,?is is q en\gh = our purpose4 ,x is true t ! g5u95ess ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is que/ion$ by _m 7on o!r ?an l+ui/ic & textual gr\nds74 ,nev]!less1 ! field is op5 = inquiry z to :e!r 89 cont5t & =m !y agree s closely ) ! ,lukan /yle t f ?is po9t ( view /rong argum5ts c be produc$ 9 fav\r ( _! g5u95ess04 ,aft] all1 ! l5g? ( ! passage is n ! vital consid]ation1 b its "* 7:i* may1 or may n1 be m /rik+ ?an t ( a mu* long] section72 & ?is is some?+ :i* c come out only aft] actual exam9ation4 ,we turn1 !n1 to ! l+ui/ic exam9ation ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,accord+ to ! ,we/cott & ,hort text1 ! passage is z foll[s3 #cd4 1 2 #ce4 1 1 4 ,9 treat+ ^! words1 we %all n foll[ ! ord] 9 :i* !y occur1 b ! ord] ( _! importance = our inve/igation47#ea7 ,x is cle> t ! words fall into diff]5t classes3 7a7 accord+ z !y are neutral 9 "*1 t is to say1 ( insuffici5t importance ei!r way 9 decid+ ! "q2 7b7 9 s f> z !y create difficulty on ! assumption ( ,lukan au?or%ip1 &1 to t ext5t1 support ! !ory ( int]polation2 7c7 9 s f> z !y give cle> support 9 fav\r ( ,lukan orig94 a4 ,9 ! fir/ class we may include ! words3 1 1 1 1 1 1 ) dat41 1 & p]haps ev5 4 ,e "o ( ^! words & phrases is well repres5t$ 9 ! ,lukan writ+s1 & 9 ! case ( "s ( !m we get1 on inve/igation1 rem>kable results47#eb7 ,take ! case ( 4 ,9 ! ,,nt4 x occurs #bab times1 & ( ^! no less ?an #abe appe> 9 ,/4 ,luke's works 7#bf 9 ,g4 & #ii 9 ,acts71 i4e4 #eh p] c5t4 ,/ill m rem>kable is ! result :5 we comp>e & 4 ,:]eas ! o!r ,evangeli/s use v frequ5tly inde$ 7#bah times71 !y employ only #bj times4 ,/4 ,luke also 7especially 9 ! ,gospel7 uses frequ5tly 7#ic times71 b he has #bf times 7cf4 ,mt4 #h times1 ,mk4 #d times1 ,jn4 #h times74 ,if we take bo? ,lukan writ+s1 ! usage ( & is r\ghly equal1 :]eas 9 ! re/ ( ! ,,nt4 x is z #i is to #b4 ,we c say1 !re=e1 t ,/4 ,luke %[s a lik+ = 1 :]eas ,mt4 ,mk4 & ,jn4 m>k$ly pref] 4 ,h[ev]1 ! ^w is s common t we c lay no /ress on ! fact t x occurs 9 i4 #cd1 :]e ! connexion dem&s x4 ,we c only note its congruity ) a ,lukan lik+4 is also int]e/+1 ?\gh n1 ( c\rse1 9 any way decisive4 ,9 ,lk4 ! phrase occurs #ad times2 9 ,mt4 x is f\nd #f times2 9 ,mk4 #h2 nev] 9 ! ,f\r? ,gospel1 & nev] 9 ! ,acts4 ,x occurs1 t is to say1 9 ^? p>ts ( ! ,new ,te/am5t 9 :i* s\rces1 probably ,aramaic17#ec7 are employ$4 ,?is is 9 l9e ) ! view express$ by ,m\lton & ,milligan ) reg>d to ! aori/ passive =ms ( ! v]b47#ed7 ,!y say t !y incl9e to ! op9ion t 8belongs only to e>ly ,hell5i/ic1 :5ce x 0 tak5 by ! ,,lxx translators to r5d] a common ,hebrew phrase1 pass+ !nce into ! n>rative p>ts ( ,,nt4 z a def9ite #8,septuag9talism' 04 ,x is 9 keep+ ) ?is view t 444 %\ld appe> 9 t "p ( ,/4 ,luke's ,gospel :]e mo/ ( all we h reason to posit ,semitic s\rces1 :e!r oral or docum5t>y4 ,z we h se51 half ! record ( ?is expression 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t1 ap>t f ,lk4 i4 #ce1 is 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel4 ,! pres5ce1 !n1 ( 9 ,lk4 i4 #ce is congru\s ) ^! facts2 m1 p]haps1 we _c say4 ,a ^w l has no be>+ on our pres5t inve/igation1 & ! same is true ( 1 7o!rwise1 h[ev]1 ( 4 9 comb9ation ) n\ns1 c41 9 ! g5471 7v frequ5tly 9 ,lk471 7) dat4717#ee7 & 4 7( ! "m ( ,jesus7 occurs m (t5 9 ,lk4 ?an 9 o!r ,,nt4 writ]s 7#i times & probably #aj 9 ! ,g41 once 9 ,acts72 ! =m appe>s b once 7ii4 #ai is d\btful74 ,9 ,mk4 occurs once1 nev]2 9 ,mt4 we f9d #c times & probably twice4 ,! use ( ! =m 9 i4 #cd is !re=e 9 agreem5t ) ,/4 ,luke's usage1 b ( c\rse ?is does n preclude ! h& ( an int]polator1 s9ce e in/ance ( 7( ! "m ( ,jesus7 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel occurs 9 ! fir/ two *apt]s4 ,z is well kn[n1 ! phrase is v frequ5tly f\nd 9 ! ,lukan writ+s4 ,! p]c5tage is z mu* z #fj1 & out ( ! in/ances 9 ! ,,nt41 :]e ! phrase is an>?r\s1 m ?an #ej p] c5t1 are 9 ,/4 ,luke 7,g4 & ,acts74 ,! phrase is !re=e v /rongly ,lukan4 ,b p]haps we ought n to include ! phrase among ^? :i* tell /rongly aga9/ ! !ory ( int]polation1 s9ce a r$actor w\ld easily & naturally introduce x 9 ! connexion 9 :i* x appe>s 9 i4 #ce4 8,! new view 0 n an intrud] f ! sph]e ( hea!n my?ology1 b a logical conclusion f ! belief t our ,"l 0 ,god's ,son by ! op]ation ( ! ,holy ,_s0 7,h>nack's ,date ( ,acts17#ef7 p4 #add74 ,we c say !re=e t is admirably 9 keep+ ) ,lukan usage b h>dly m4 ,! case is q o!rwise ) ! :ole phrase1 4 1 z we %all see4 is also a ^w :i* might be consid]$ "h1 = x is1 ( c\rse1 a v common ^w4 ,hav+ reg>d1 h[ev]1 to ! way 9 :i* x is us$1 x w be bett] to take x lat]4 ,summ+ up our results ?us f>1 we may say t we h f\nd no?+ t is out ( accord ) ,lukan usage4 ,on ! o!r h&1 inde$1 e ^w & phrase we h exam9$ is well repres5t$ 9 ,/4 ,luke's writ+s4 ,nev]!less1 ! words are common else:]e1 & 9 no case d !y tell decisively ei!r way4 b4 ,we n[ come to words :i* pres5t difficulties1 less or great]1 on ! assumption ( ,lukan au?or%ip1 & s f> tell 9 fav\r ( ! !ory ( int]polation4 ,^! are--1 1 & p]haps 4 #a4 ,we introduce "h1 because ! expression1 z di/9ct f ! con/ruction1 occurs n[h]e else 9 ,lk4 ,z a matt] ( fact x occurs n[h]e else 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t 9 ?is =m4 ,! p]fect passive p>ticiple1 h[ev]1 appe>s twice 9 ! ,johann9e writ+s3 4 7,jn4 iii4 #f71 & 4 4 7#a ,jn4 v4 #d74 ,:at is m important is t !re is a close p>allel to 9 ,mt4 i4 #cj1 :i* reads1 4 ,! complete clause 9 ,lk4 runs1 1 4 ,x is c]ta9ly op5 to any "o to argue t ! passage 9 ,lk4 is introduc$ by an int]polator :o is "u ! influ5ce ( ,mt4 i4 #bj4 ,:y1 h[ev]1 :ile "u t influ5ce1 he %\ld s f> ent] into ,lukan usage z to introduce ! ,lukan 1 & 1 to say no?+ ( putt+ into a diff]5t connexion 9 a *>act]i/ically ,lukan phrase 74 4 4 ,cf4 ,acts i4 #h & see lat]71 are que/ions :i* x is n easy to answ]4 ,assur$ly !re is n mu* "h to support ! hypo!sis ( int]polation1 & :5 we consid] ! con/ructional use ( ! article ) ! p>ticiple1 !re is /ill less1 if inde$ any?+ at all4 ,to consid] is r a concession to c>efulness ?an ! ackn[l$gem5t ( a real difficulty4 #b4 mu/ be exam9$1 because 9 i4 #cd x is us$ ( k 9 ! way ( m>ital relation%ip4 ,! only p>allel 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t is ,mt4 i4 #be1 :]e1 h[ev]1 x is us$ ( a man3 4 ,on ! o!r h&1 9 o!r s5ses1 occurs fairly frequ5tly 9 ,lk4 ,x is1 h[ev]1 9 no s5se ,lukan1 be+ di/ribut$ ev5ly ?r\gh\t ! ,new ,te/am5t1 except 9 ! ,johann9e writ+s1 :]e x is v common4 ,we _c1 !re=e1 produce evid5ce to %[ t else:]e ,/4 ,luke uses 4 9 ! special s5se ( i4 #cd4 ,nev]!less1 !re is no reason :y he %\ld n h writt5 4 9 t passage1 & !re are consid]ations :i* g to %[ h[ he c\ld easily h us$ ! ^w4 ,9 i4 #cd & also 9 ,mt4 i4 #be is by no means a 8,hebrai/ic euphemism017#eg7 yet x is probable t ! influ5ce ( ! ,septuag9t is to be f\nd 9 bo? passages4 ,9 ! ,,lxx !re are sev]al in/ances ( 4 us$1 z 9 i4 #cd1 ( a woman4 ,x is s us$ 9 ,g54 xix4 #h 7( ,lot's daught]s71 9 ,judg4 xi4 #ci 7( ,jeph?ah's daught]71 & 9 ,num4 xxxi4 #ag 7( ! wom5 ( ,midian74 ,if1 !n1 we are "r 9 trac+ ! influ5ce ( ! ,,lxx1 9 i4 #cd1 we h gr\nd = f9d+ ! h& ( ,/4 ,luke 9 t passage1 ev5 ?\gh he nev] aga9 uses 4 9 t s5se4 ,= x is j 9 ,lk4 i1 ii t ! influ5ce ( ! ,,lxx is mo/ m>k$47#eh7 ,ev5 if we d n press ,,lxx influ5ce 7= 4 9 ?is special s5se is f\nd 89 ,greek writ]s f ! ,alex&rian age d[n0717#ei7 x is n at all app>5t :y ,/4 ,luke himself %\ld n h us$ ! ^w4 ,& if ! argum5t 9 fav\r ( ! !ory ( int]polation is to be su/a9$1 x is sc>cely en\gh to urge ! b>e fact t ,/4 ,luke does n use 4 z 9 i4 #cd else:]e4 ,an idiom :i* occurs 9 ,greek writ]s f ! "t ( ,m5&]7#fj7 7,b4,c4 #cbe7 may well h be5 kn[n to a writ] l ,/4 ,luke1 ap>t f its pres5ce 9 ! ,septuag9t4 ,if v]ses #cd1 #ce are inde$ ,lukan1 x is q probable t 9 4 we %\ld f9d ! influ5ce ( ! ,septuag9t1 b we are n at all %ut up to ,septuag9t usage4 ,9 ! connexion 9 :i* x occurs 0 a suitable ^w to employ1 & its pres5ce !re is 9 no way incongru\s ) ,lukan au?or%ip4 #c4 ,9 ^! v]ses ! ^w :i* is ( greate/ difficulty is )\t d\bt 4 ,9 ! re/ ( ! ,new ,te/am5t x occurs #be times4 ,( ^! #aj are f\nd 9 ! ,paul9e ,epi/les & #i 9 ! ,epi/le to ! ,hebrews4 ,! rema9+ #f appe> 9 ! ,gospels2 #c 9 ,mt41 #a 9 ,mk41 & #b 9 ,jn4 ,ap>t !n f i4 #cd occurs n[h]e 9 ,/4 ,luke's works4 ,!re are1 x is true1 two ,lukan passages1 "o 9 ! ,gospel 7vii4 #a7 & ! o!r 9 ! ,acts 7xiii4 #df71 :]e occurs 9 "s ,,mss4 ,! true read+1 h[ev]1 9 bo? cases is probably 47#fa7 ,we h1 !re=e1 to face ! fact1 t n only is f\nd n[h]e else 9 ,/4 ,luke's works1 b t else:]e he seems to pref] & 7! latt] 9 ! ,prologue to ! ,gospel1 & ! =m] five times out ( ! t5 cases 9 :i* x occurs 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t74 ,"h is ! /ronge/ argum5t1 :i* on l+ui/ic gr\nds c be urg$ aga9/ ! g5u95ess ( i4 #cd f4 ,! ri*ness ( ,/4 ,luke's vocabul>y increases ! difficulty47#fb7 ,:y1 if he has us$ 9 i4 #cd1 he %\ld nev] employ x aga91 is a "q :i* x is n easy to answ]4 ,if1 9 view ( ! evid5ce z a :ole1 ! case = an int]polation fails1 we %all h to cont5t ourselves ) ! fact1 h[ev] /range1 t "h & "h only occurs 9 ,lk4 ,a writ] inde$ may use a ^w once & nev] aga94 occurs b once 9 ,mk4 7xv4 #db71 & x may be s "h4 ,assur$ly1 9 a l+ui/ic argum5t room mu/ always be left = ! occurr5ce ( 9 an individual writ]4 ,! =ce ( ?is cont5tion is1 h[ev]1 some:at weak5$ by ! pref]5ce :i* ,/4 ,luke seems to %[ = 1 & x mu/ be all[$ t ! case = an int]polation does receive support f 4 c4 ,we h n[ to consid] ! ?ird division ( ! l+ui/ic evid5ce4 ,x includes ! foll[+ words & phrases3 7! con/ruction71 1 1 1 1 1 444 444 #a4 ,we beg9 ) 7! con/ruction47 ,z is well kn[n1 ! article ) ! p>ticiple is q a *>act]i/ic ( ! ,lukan writ+s4 8,p>ticiples ) ! article (t5 take ! place ( sub/antives01 writes ,plumm] 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,lk41 p4 lxii74 ,! in/ances giv5 by ,plumm] are z foll[s3 ii4 #bg4 4 7,"h only 9 ,,nt47 iv4 #af4 4 7,"h & ,acts xvii1 #b only47 viii4 #cd4 4 7,"h & ,mk4 v4 #ad2 ,lk4 xxiv4 #ab4 ,cf4 also ,acts iv4 #ba47 xxii4 #bb4 4 7,"h only 9 ,,nt4 ,cf4 ! p>allel passages1 ,mt4 xxvi4 #bd & ,mk4 xiv4 #ba1 :]e we f9d 47 xxiv4 #ad4 4 7,cf4 ,acts iii4 #aj47 ,to ^! may be add$ xxi4 #cf1 xxiii4 #dg1 #dh4 ,! con/ruction is cle>ly ,lukan1 )\t1 ( c\rse1 be+ exclusively ,lukan1 & ?\gh does n occur else:]e 9 ,/4 ,luke's works1 ! v]b is n uncommon 7#aj times out ( #ic 9 ! ,,nt41 ( :i* #dj occur 9 ! ,g5ealogy 9 ,mt474 #b4 4 ,9 8 ,date ( ,acts ,h>nack und]l9es ?is v]b1 z a ,lukan trait1 :]ev] x occurs 9 ! 8,we0 ,sections1 :i* he pr9ts on pp4 #dab4 ,out ( ! total numb] ( cases 9 :i* x occurs 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t1 no less ?an #dd p] c5t4 are f\nd 9 ! ,lukan writ+s4 ,9 ! ,gospel x is pres5t #da times4 ,x %\ld also be not$ t :5 we comp>e 4 ) ! analog\s phrase 9 ,mt4 #a4 #bj1 1 9 ! latt] ! ,lukan is abs5t4 ,( c\rse is a common ^w1 b ,/4 ,luke's use ( x is di/9ctive1 & ) ?is usage 9 v]se #ce agrees4 #c4 ,we h ref]r$ to already17#fc7 & h said t :ile frequ5t 9 ,lk41 x is too common a ^w to be important = our pres5t purpose4 ,! case is o!rwise ) ! phrase 4 ,/4 ,luke is fond ( us+ 4 9 composition ) o!r words 9 ! g5itive4 ,9 8 ,gospel1 he employs x ) 1 1 1 1 & 4 ,9 ! ,acts 7viii4 #aj7 we h 4 4 ,9 ,mt4 we f9d ?is usage twice2 9 ,mk4 once2 9 ! ma9 epi/les ( ,/4 ,paul x occurs #ac times2 else:]e 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t #g times4 ,t is to say1 out ( #bi in/ances 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t 7o!r ?an i4 #ce717fd7 ,/4 ,luke has #f 7or #bj p] c5t474 ,we may !re=e say t ?is aga9 is a m>k$ *>act]i/ic ( ,/4 ,luke's usage1 & ?\gh ! phrase 4 4 does n occur aga9 9 ,lk4 7x occurs n[h]e else 9 ! ,,nt471 x is ?or\ghly congru\s ) ! ,lukan /yle4 ,we h also to note ! ^w 4 ,out ( #ab in/ances 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t ,/4 ,luke actually has #h1 or #ge p] c5t4 ,z1 h[ev]1 ?ree ( ^! occur 9 *aps4 i & ii1 x might be argu$ t ! int]polator has introduc$ 4 9 v]se #ce "u ! influ5ce ( ^! v *apt]s4 ,t1 h[ev]1 he %\ld comb9e x ) 4 is int]e/+4 ,inde$1 on ! !ory ( int]polation1 our int]polator has comb9$ a di/9ctively ,lukan ^w 77 ) ano!r ^w 77 :i* ,/4 ,luke (t5 uses 7#bd times71 to produce a *>act]i/ic ,lukan phrase 74 9 composition ) a n\n 9 ! g5itive76 #d4 4 ,else:]e ,/4 ,luke uses #i times 7once 9 ! ,gospel & #h times 9 ! ,acts74 ,9 ?is respect he may be comp>$ ) ,/4 ,paul1 :o uses ! ^w #be times1 & ! au?or ( ! ,epi/le to ! ,hebrews1 :o employs x #h times4 ,9 ! ,ca?olic ,epi/les x appe>s #f times4 ,!re is b "o in/ance 9 ,mt4 & a d\btful case 9 ,mk4 ,! results are also int]e/+ :5 we take 4 ,out ( #aj in/ances 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t1 ,/4 ,luke has #b 7,ac4 x4 #bi & xxiv4 #bf71 ,/4 ,paul has #f1 & ,hebrews #b4 ,!re is n an in/ance 9 ,mt4 or ,mk41 or any:]e else 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t4 ,we are f> f sugge/+ t no "o else c\ld use 47#fe7 ,! po9t is t ! suppos$ int]polator has introduc$ ! phrase into ! "w ( a writ] :o1 ) ,/4 ,paul & ! au?or ( ,hebrews1 alone among ,new ,te/am5t writ]s employs x6 #e4 4 appe>s 9 f\r o!r places 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t4 ,( ^!1 ?ree are connect$ ) ! /ory ( ! ,transfiguration 7,mt4 xvii4 #e1 ,mk4 ix4 #g1 ,lk4 ix4 #cd74 ,t ! rema9+ in/ance %\ld be ,acts v4 #ae is1 9 connexion ) our pres5t problem1 an int]e/+ fact4 ,?ay],grimm rem>ks t ! v]b occurs 9 8pr(ane0 au?ors1 8g5]ally ) an accusative ( ! object1 & 9 ! s5se ( obscur+04 ,9 ! ,septuag9t1 h[ev]1 x is us$ ( ! div9e cov]+ or ov]%ad[+ 7cf4 ,ps4 xc4 7xci47 #d2 ,ps4 cxxxix4 7cxl47 #h2 ,ex4 xl4 #bi 7#ce774 ,we h to ask :e!r ^! passages1 especially ! la/1 h influ5c$ ! writ] ( i4 #ce4 ,we _c assume ! po9t1 ( c\rse1 b !re is mu* to be said = x4 ,! ?\ght ( ! cl\d ( ,yahweh ov]%ad[+ ! t5t ( meet+ may v well h %ap$ ! ?\ght & ! phras+ ( 4 4 ,if !re is any weight 9 ?is sugge/ion 7cf4 ,plumm]1 op4 cit41 p4 #bd71 aga9 x tells = ,lukan au?or%ip--s f>1 t is to say1 z ! und\bt$ fact t *aps4 i & ii h a di/9ctly ,old ,te/am5t atmosph]e w take u4 ,ap>t1 h[ev]1 f su* consid]ations x is a rem>kable fact1 on ! !ory ( int]polation1 t a ^w s r>e 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t1 & "o :i* ,/4 ,luke uses m ?an any "o else1 %\ld appe> 9 ! suspect$ v]ses4 ,acts v4 #ae 7 7 is en\gh 9 itself to raise ! grave/ d\bt t we h "h to d ) an int]polator4 #f4 4 ,"h we h fir/ to call att5tion to ! v]b 4 ,ap>t f ,eph4 ii4 #g & ,james v4 #a1 ?is v]b is limit$ to ! ,lukan writ+s1 :]e x occurs six times 7i4e4 besides i4 #ce74 ,we h already spok5 ( & rem>k$ t1 :ile x is *>act]i/ic ( ,/4 ,luke1 we c\ld n lay /ress ^u t fact1 s9ce ev5 an int]polator w\ld naturally introduce a ref]5ce to ! ,holy ,_s 9 su* a connexion z i4 #ce4 ,if1 h[ev]1 z n[ we take ! :ole phrase1 we come to a v diff]5t conclusion4 ,= 9 ,acts i4 #h we h ! significantly close p>allel1 4 4 ,! p>allel speaks = itself6 #g4 ,we consid] la/ly1 444 4 ,a comp>ison ( passages 9 ! f\r ,gospels & ! ,acts gives ! foll[+ results3 3 ,jn4 #a 7 #b872 ,lk4 7,g47 #fj2 ,acts #ae2 ,lk4 7,g4 ,ac47 #ge 444 3 ,mt4 #a82 ,mk4 #b2 ,jn4 #i2 ,lk4 7,g47 #gi2 ,acts #bf2 ,lk4 7,g4 ,ac47 #aje 444 3 ,lk4 7,g47 #be2 ,acts #b2 ,lk4 7,g4 ,ac47 #bg ,to ! facts not$ 9 ! =ego+ table we may add t occurs n[h]e else 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t4 ,/4 ,luke1 !re=e1 has x #aje times out ( #aaf4 ,/ill m is 444 limit$ to ,/4 ,luke4 ,no o!r ,new ,te/am5t writ] uses ! phrase1 & ,/4 ,luke has x #bg times47#ff7 ,9 8 ?ree books on ! ,acts1 ,h>nack is fond ( und]l9+ ,lukan *>act]i/ics 9 ! 8,we0 ,sections1 9 ord] to %[ ! l+ui/ic id5tity :i* exi/s betwe5 ^! ,sections & ! re/ ( ! "w4 ,let u see h[ ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 appe>s1 :5 treat$ 9 ?is way2 n =gett+1 ( c\rse1 t we are deal+ ) two v]ses only4 ,x is obvi\sly impossible to indicate by ?is me?od ! special significance ( ea* ^w or phrase2 ?is1 h[ev]1 has already be5 %[n4 ,our results may be repres5t$ z foll[s3 1 2 1 1 4 ,a possible reply to ! l+ui/ic argum5t pres5t$ above is t we may h to d ) an int]polator :o has ?or\ghly ent]$ into ! ,lukan /yle4 ,if our exam9ation has %[n any?+ at all1 x has %[n t ,lk4 i4 #cd4 f4 is v f> f pres5t+ neutral features3 x is %ot ?r\gh & ?r\gh ) 8,lukanisms047#fg7 ,b1 x may be ask$1 c\ld n an int]polator1 /rongly influ5c$ by ! ,lukan /yle1 h p5n$ ^! v]ses8 ,let u see :at1 on t hypo!sis1 ! int]polator has done4 ,he has produc$ a passage ( ?irtysev5 words1 9 :i* !re is n a con/ruction1 & only "o ^w 771 :i* is n well repres5t$ 9 ! ,lukan writ+s4 ,he has us$ a ^w 77 9 a s5se n else:]e illu/rat$ 9 ^? works1 b a ^w :i* ,/4 ,luke w\ld naturally employ 9 ! connexion 9 :i* x occurs4 ,he has employ$ words1 phrases1 & con/ructions = :i* ,/4 ,luke has a fondness1 su* z 1 1 1 ! article ) ! p>ticiple 9 place ( a n\n 7 4747#fh7 ,he has us$ two v]bs 7 & 7 :i* are r>e 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t1 b :i* ,/4 ,luke uses m ?an once2 ! phrase 4 4 1 :i* is closely p>allel$ 9 ,acts i4 #h2 &1 above all1 ! m>k$ly ,lukan 444 4 ,?is feat1 x mu/ be confess$1 is a /rik+ p]=mance4 ,if1 inde$1 x has be5 a*iev$1 we mu/ conclude t x has be5 c>ri$ out delib]ately4 ,we make e all[ance = ! possibility t a r$actor may well ent] into ! /yle ( an au?or4 ,b to suppose t 9 s %ort a passage s _m ,lukan features h come toge!r )\t prem$itation or design is all b impossible4 ,we make bold to say t1 if we mu/ admit su* an undesign$ collocation ( 8,lukanisms01 we c h little confid5ce 9 ! l+ui/ic argum5t any:]e4 ,b c we believe t ! l+ui/ic features ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 h be5 purposely introduc$8 ,su* a "q is its own answ]4 ,no "o1 assur$ly1 w\ld resort to ! desp]ate exp$i5t ( suppos+ a r$actor1 :o labori\sly amasses ,lukan *>act]i/ics1 ) ! int5tion ( pass+ (f ! v phraseology ( 8 ins]tion z g5u9e4 ,a mod]n int]polator might "w along ^! l9es1 b n an anci5t r$actor4 ,int]polations are n =g]ies4 ,! ?\ght ( consci\sly reproduc+ /yli/ic features 9 an ins]tion w\ld probably nev] h occurr$ to a r$actor ( ! ,gospels47#fi7 ,s f> !n z l+ui/ic consid]ations g1 we mu/ conclude t our unkn[n int]polator is a my?ical p]sonage4 ,we d n =get ! difficulty ( 1 b if ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is a non,lukan int]polation1 we mu/ h m support ?an ?is4 ,w>p & wo( are ,lukan2 only a s+le ?read gives cause = hesitation4 ,mu/ n ?is hesitation give way :5 we look at ! facts z a :ole8 ,c we /ra9 out ! gnat1 & swall[ ! camel8 ,assur$ly on l+ui/ic gr\nds ! mo/ reasonable conclusion we c frame is t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 comes f ! h& ( ,/4 ,luke himself4 ,,iii4 ,summ>y & ,conclusion ,we h n[ to coord9ate our results4 ,h[ev] /rong a l+ui/ic argum5t may be1 !re is p]haps always room = ! view t x is confirmatory r ?an demon/rative4 ,9 ! pres5t case also1 ! %ortness ( ! passage c be plead$4 ,9 notic+ ?is objection we urg$ t ! "* ( ! passage is ! relevant consid]ation1 & we ?9k ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 meets ?is dem&4 ,b we h no ne$ to press ! l+ui/ic argum5t to ! ext5t we ourselves believe to be legitimate1 :5 we f9d t bo? ?is argum5t & ! textual argum5t po9t /eadily 9 ! same direction4 ,x is ?is fact1 t bo? argum5ts conv]ge on ! same po9t1 :i* is ! ultimate gr\nd = our conclusion4 ,%ort ( supply+ a rigid demon/ration1 :i* %\ld n be s\ght1 x is suffici5t to e/abli% = u ! ,lukan au?or%ip ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,?is view c>ries ) x at once ! fur!r conclusion t at "s "t or o!r ,/4 ,luke taught & believ$ 9 ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,b be=e we c re/ satisfi$ ) ?is result1 we ne$ to look m closely at an alt]native =m ( ! int]polationhypo!sis1 to :i* ref]5ce has already be5 made 7p4 #cf74 ,?is is ! view ( ,katt5bus*1 ,m]x1 ,we9el1 & ,j4 ,m4 ,?ompson 7,miracles 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t1 p4 #adi74 ,accord+ to ?is !ory ! int]polation consi/s 9 ! phrase 1 an ins]tion :i*1 x is cont5d$1 has trans=m$ ! promise ( a natural conception into ! prophecy ( a virg9 bir?4 ,mr4 ,?ompson notices ! two =ms :i* ! !ory may assume4 ,! ins]tion may be ei!r 8a modification ( ,/4 ,luke's s\rce1 introduc$ by ! ,evangeli/ himself1 z editor01 or x may be 8a lat] addition to ! text ( ,lk4 by "s p]son or congregation :o wi%$ to make ! miracle q cle>0 7p4 #adi74 ,x is obvi\s t1 9 its =m] %ape1 ?is hypo!sis w\ld n s]i\sly affect our results rea*$ ?us f>1 provid$ we c\ld agree t 8v]se #ce is n inconsi/5t ) human p>5tage0 7,?ompson1 p4 #adh71 & is be/ int]pret$ 9 ?is way4 ,z reg>ds ! second =m ( ! !ory1 ! case is diff]5t4 ,if is ! addition ( a lat] read] or congregation1 x is mu* m difficult to ?9k t ,/4 ,luke taught ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,x w\ld n be impossible2 b x w\ld leave ! :ole problem to re/ ^u ! int]pretation ( v]se #ce4 ,we are unable to accept ! !ory t is an ins]tion ( unkn[n orig91 = ! foll[+ reasons3 #a4 ,on ! :ole1 ! m natural int]pretation ( v]se #ce is t 9 itself x implies ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,x is easi]1 on ?is view1 to expla9 & foll[$ by 4 7,cf4 ,s*mi$el1 col4 #bieg n42 ,plumm]1 ,/4 ,lk41 p4 #bd;f42 ,lob/e91 op4 cit41 p4 #fg47 #b4 ,no textual evid5ce c be cit$ 9 support ( ! !ory4 ,?is is frankly admitt$ by ,mr4 ,?ompson1 & ! ins]tion is expla9$ z an editorial modification4 ,we c\ld reg>d ?is explanation z suffici5t1 if ! 8ins]tion0 c\ld be look$ ^u z an 8explanatory phrase01 int5d$ to %>p5 a ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 :i* _h already be5 f\nd 9 ! context4 ,on ?is read+ ( ! problem1 abs5ce ( textual v>iation might n be an insup]able difficulty4 ,b if we mu/ reg>d z a doctr9al modification--an attempt on ! "p ( an unkn[n editor to impose ^u ! n>rative a s5se q diff]5t f t :i* previ\sly x _h be5 und]/ood to be>--!n ! argum5t sket*$ 9 ! fir/ "p ( ! pres5t *apt] is :olly aga9/ ! !ory4 ,we _c und]/& :y no e*oes ( ! e>li] view h l+]$4 #c4 ,x is difficult to suppose t a lat] read] :o s\ght to "w up ! orig9al n>rative 9 ! int]e/s ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? w\ld h ex]cis$ su* re/ra9t4 ,to exp& a n>rative 9 ! direction ( ! s5se :i* x already be>s is a conceivable sugge/ion4 ,to trans=m x totally by m]ely add+ f\r words is a !ory :i* does n c>ry conviction4 ,0 ev] an int]polator s +5i\s z ?is8 ,on ! o!r side may be plead$ 7#a7 ! difficulty ( 1 7#b7 _m ( ! argum5ts we h sket*$ 9 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,! difficulty ( we h to admit4 ,z reg>ds ! second po9t1 we believe t ! !ory we h yet to outl9e 9 ! next *apt] meets ! case mu* bett]1 )\t suff]+ f ! special objections :i* c be br\ght aga9/ ! view we h j discuss$4 ,= ! reasons giv5 we are unable to accept t view4 ,we pref] to reg>d ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 z a unity1 & to int]pret bo? v]ses z imply+ ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,& z we h f\nd suffici5t reasons1 bo? on textual & l+ui/ic gr\nds1 = ascrib+ ! passage to ,/4 ,luke1 we believe t he taught ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,,*apt] ,,iv4 ,,! ,,place ,,( ,,! ,,virg9 ,,bir? ,,9 ,,! ,,?ird ,,gospel ,9 ! pres5t *apt] we mu/ =mulate a !ory :i* %all d ju/ice to ! results obta9$ 9 ! la/ two *apt]s4 ,we h argu$ t ! ,virg9 ,bir? is n an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel1 t sev]al passages 9 x are inconsi/5t ) ! doctr9e1 & t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is a lat] ins]tion4 ,on ! o!r h& we h giv5 reasons = our belief t ,/4 ,luke really did write ! passage j m5tion$1 & t 9 consequ5ce he taught ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,x is useless1 we ?9k1 to set ^! results aga9/ "o ano!r2 !y are n contradictory4 ,! argum5t f ! l+ui/ic & textual facts w n make "o iota ( diff]5ce to ^? d]iv$ f ! treatm5t & subjectmatt] ( ,lk4 i1 ii1 & ! latt] w n 9 any way impair ! =m]4 ,writ]s :o hold fa/ to ! view t ,/4 ,luke wrote i4 #cd f4 h n1 9 t "o cont5tion1 answ]$ _! oppon5ts1 & critics :o plead = ! hypo!sis ( non,lukan int]polation travel mu* too fa/4 ,! f9al !ory mu/ take all ! facts into acc\nt4 ,i4 ,a ,sugge/$ ,!ory ,s f> z we ourselves are conc]n$1 !re is only "o hypo!sis op5 to u1 & x is n f> to seek4 ,x w be be/ if we fir/ /ate x some:at baldly1 leav+ obvi\s difficulties to be consid]$ lat]4 ,! !ory is z foll[s3 ,9 ! fir/ in/ance ,/4 ,luke wrote 8 ,gospel1 ei!r 9 :ole or 9 "p1 )\t any k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,to him1 z to ! compil] ( ! ,lukan ,g5ealogy1 ,jesus 0 ! son ( ,joseph & ( ,m>y4 ,/4 ,luke's e/imate ( ,jesus 0 n less high ?an t ( ,/4 ,paul & ,/4 ,m>k1 b1 z 0 probably true 9 ! case ( ea* ( ^! writ]s1 no tradition ( ! ,miracul\s ,bir? _h rea*$ him4 ,he look$ ^u ,jesus z ! ,*ild ( ,wondr\s ,promise1 & = 8 analogies he turn$ to ! ,old ,te/am5t to ! /ories ( ,isaac & ( ,samuel4 ,9 contra/ to e>li] writ]s ,/4 ,luke _h an excell5t ,bir?tradition at 8 disposal4 ,accord+ to 8 s\rces ! com+ & future ,messianic greatness ( ,jesus _h be5 div9ely =etold4 ,8 bir? 0 h]ald$ by angelic *oirs1 & humble %eph]ds br\ght _! me$ ( wor%ip & ( praise4 ,by an insight div9ely giv51 m5 l ,simeon & wom5 l ,anna saw 9 ,him ! *ild ( promise4 ,he 0 to be a light = revelation to ! ,g5tiles & ! glory ( ,8 p ,israel4 ,we ne$ n /ay to look m closely into ! /ory1 :i* d\btless has be5 work$ up z reg>ds its =m by ! ,evangeli/'s h&4 ,suffice x to say t ,/4 ,luke's picture is t ( a ,wondr\s ,bir?1 sup]naturally =etold2 n a virg9 bir?47#gj7 ,"s "t aft] he _h p5n$ 8 n>rative1 possibly aft] x _h be5 dispat*$ to ,!ophilus1 b at any rate be=e ! ,gospel ga9$ a wid] circulation1 ,/4 ,luke receiv$ ! tradition ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,at :at "t & f :at s\rce ! /ory rea*$ him we are q unable to say2 possibly x 0 f "s read] or read]s to :om he _h submitt$ 8 n>rative2 possibly ! /ory travell$ along "s indep5d5t *annel4 ,9 any case ! probability is t ! tradition 0 imp>t$ to ,/4 ,luke by "s "o :o claim$ to possess a full] & a bett] acc\nt1 & ^: claim ! ,evangeli/ respect$ & admitt$4 ,hav+ reg>d to ,/4 ,luke's /&+ & me?ods z an hi/orian1 we pref] to believe t ! tradition rea*$ him ?r\gh a def9ite & p]sonal *annel1 ?an to suppose t ( 8 own initiative he freely alt]$ a valuable s\rce out ( def]5ce to a gr[+ !ory4 ,! hi/orical value ( ! new in=mation is a "q we are n n[ consid]+4 ,x is "p ( our !ory1 h[ev]1 t x satisfi$ ! m9d ( ,/4 ,luke2 to him ! ,virg9 ,bir? 0 hi/oric fact4 ,probably ! /ory appeal$ to him at once z a fitt+ explanation ( ! unique p]sonality ( ,jesus4 ,x 0 a tradition ri* 9 doctr9al possibilities2 x provok$ reflection1 & x answ]$ que/ions4 ,! ,evangeli/ saw at once t ! /ory mu/ f9d a place 9 8 n>rative4 ,=tunately x 0 n too late1 & =tunately aga9 !re 0 a po9t :]e x c\ld be includ$ )\t entail+ ! necessity ( rewrit+ cc4 i1 ii entirely4 ,he _h only to ins]t ! words we h n[ 9 i4 #cd f4 into ! address ( ! angel1 & to add to ! op5+ words ( ! ,g5ealogy ! phrase 8z 0 suppos$01 to obta9 a n>rative 9 :i* tru?s previ\sly unkn[n to him f\nd suffici5t /atem5t4 ,if we c suppose t ! adaptation ( :at he _h previ\sly writt5 0 n dra/ic en\gh1 we obta9 a hypo!sis :i* at lea/ does ju/ice to e result we h yet secur$4 ,! view t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is an int]polation made by ,/4 ,luke himself 0 put =w>d by ,zimm]mann 9 ,/udi5 und ,kritik5 7p4 #bgc f47 9 #aijc4 ,8 treatm5t 7cf4 ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bfi n47 diff]s 9 sev]al respects f t outl9$ above4 ,zimm]mann posits an ,aramaic ,jewi% ,*ri/ian s\rce :i* describ$ a natural bir?1 & sugge/s t x 0 9 ! c\rse ( translat+ ?is docum5t t ,/4 ,luke add$ i4 #cd f4 ,! ,evangeli/ is also cr$it$ ) hav+ alt]$ i4 #bg & ii4 #e1 s z to describe ,m>y z betro!d to ,joseph4 ,zimm]mann also expla9s ii4 #bb 77 z a mi/ranslation1 & ascribes to ,/4 ,luke ! p>5!sis ( ii4 #ce a1 & ! *ronology ( iii4 #ab1 :i* he holds is inaccurate4 ,accord+ to ?is hypo!sis ,/4 ,luke mu/ h be5 acqua9t$ ) ! ,virg9 ,bir? be=e he began to translate ! suppos$ ,aramaic docum5t4 ,?is view is encumb]$ ) difficulty2 =1 if ,zimm]mann is "r1 we %\ld c]ta9ly expect a mu* m dra/ic edit+ ( ! docum5t ?an c be %[n4 ,! ext5t to :i* ?is difficulty appe>s 9 ! case ( our own !ory is "o = :i* we ?9k t ju/ification c be giv547#ga7 ,9 ! case ( ,zimm]mann's hypo!sis ! ob/acle is too great4 ,on ?is view we _c und]/& h[ ! ,evangeli/ all[$ himself to write d[n ^? expressions :i* are incompatible ) ! ,miracul\s ,conception47#gb7 ,! view we h pref]r$ agrees ) t ( ,zimm]mann 9 posit+ a s\rce or s\rces :i* describ$ a natural bir?4 ,x diff]s f x 9 d5y+ t ! ,evangeli/ knew ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? at ! "t :5 he made use ( ^? s\rces4 ,we pref] to ?9k t x 0 aft] cc4 i1 ii _h atta9$ :at is sub/antially its pres5t =m 9 ,greek1 t ,/4 ,luke came to he> ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 & t x 0 !n t he ins]t$ i4 #cd f4 ,?is supposition includes ! positive advantages ( ,zimm]mann's !ory1 & x agrees bett] ) ! exi/+ lit]>y ph5om5a ( ,lk4 i1 ii47#gc7 ,,ii4 ,lit]>y ,conditions ,"u ,:i* ! ,gospels ,7 ,writt5 ,9 hold+ ! view we h outl9$1 we h no ?\ght ( runn+ ) ! h>e & hunt+ ) ! h\nds4 ,our !ory is n int5d$ z an eir5icon4 ,x is n an attempt to make ! be/ ( two worlds1 ! critical & ! dogmatic4 ,if we appe> to h introduc$ ! ,virg9 ,bir? into ! ,?ird ,gospel by ! back door1 aft] we h b[$ x out at ! front1 ?is is simply because ! evid5ce leaves u no alt]native4 ,our !ory makes room = ! tw(old fact1 z x seems to u1 7#a7 t ! ,virg9 ,bir? is n an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel1 & 7#b7 t ,/4 ,luke wrote ! "o passage 9 ! ,gospel :i* ass]ts ! doctr9e2 ?us = u x is inevitable4 ,if1 f ano!r po9t ( view1 our hypo!sis seems a bold v5ture1 we may ju/ly claim t ! facts are su* z to dem& a bold treatm5t4 ,nor is x a suffici5t objection to say t ! !ory is complex4 ,life is a complex ?+1 & !re are few times :5 we ne$ to rememb] x s mu* z :5 we are ?9k+ ( ! production ( an hi/orical "w4 ,ap>t f o!r claims :i* c be made1 our !ory has "o important1 if g5]al1 advantage2 x takes acc\nt ( ! elem5t>y facts ( human composition4 ,h we giv5 suffici5t ?\ght to ! fact t a writ] l ,/4 ,luke may well h turn$ back to review1 & ev5 to alt]1 9 ! light ( fur!r in=mation1 :at he _h already writt58 ,is n ?is :at ne>ly e "o does :o writes or relates any?+ at all8 ,is x n inde$ r a r>e ?an a usual proce$+ to write a /ory f />t to f9i% )\t ins]tion1 omission1 & revision8 ,9 8 8,introduction0 ,dr4 ,james ,m(fatt has drawn att5tion to ^! ?+s1 & especially z !y conc]n ,/4 ,luke's two works4 ,he %[s t int]polation may take place 8ei!r 7a7 at ! h&s ( ! au?or himself1 or 7b7 by subsequ5t editors ( ! volume1 aft] ! writ]'s dea?1 or 7c7 by scribes 7or editors7 ( ! text0 7p4 #cf74 ,"u 7a7 he ref]s to in/ances 9 ,aes*ylus1 ,h]odotus1 ,virgil1 ,juv5al1 ,m>tial1 & ,lucretius4 8,sev]al passages 9 ! ,de ,r]um ,natura 7e4g4 ii4 #afehc7 are also to be expla9$ mo/ naturally z additions made by ,lucretius himself to ! orig9al draft1 & 9 ! case ( ! ,?ird ,gospel or its sequel x is n unlikely t ,luke may h reedit$ 444 8 "w0 7p4 #cg74 ,dr4 ,m(fatt gives a v int]e/+ mod]n example 9 ! case ( ,nor?ang] ,abbey1 :i* 0 fir/ compos$ by ,jane ,au/5 9 #agih4 8,9 ! fif? *apt]1 h[ev]1 we h an allusion to ,miss ,edgewor?'s ,bel9da--a novel :i* did n appe> until #ahja4 ,?is proves t ,miss ,au/5's "w lies be=e u 9 a revis$ =m2 ! fir/ draft 0 gone ov] by ! au?oress be=e its f9al publication "s ye>s lat]0 7p4 #cg747gd7 ,x w sc>cely be d5i$ t ! possibility ( int]polation by an orig9al au?or has (t5 be5 ov]look$ by _m critics4 ,!y are n sl[ to f9d ! ins]tions ( lat] read]s & scribes1 b (t5 x seems tacitly to be assum$ t ! orig9al writ]s mu/ h writt5 ) logical & almo/ un]r+ precision4 ,curi\sly en\gh1 some?+ l ! ,v]bal ,inspiration ( ,scripture is requir$ to ju/ify "s ( ! critical results rea*$4 ,?is is a doctr9e long s9ce discr$it$1 b be+ dead x yet speaks4 ,x w h to be all[$1 we ?9k1 t me*anical !ories ( ,inspiration h n yet left u free to p]ceive ^? ord9>y conditions ( writ+ "u :i* ! ,new ,te/am5t writ]s wrote4 ,! aft]ma? ( ,v]bal ,inspiration /ill bl9ds u to ! commonplaces ( composition4 ,( all ,new ,te/am5t au?ors ,/4 ,luke is p]haps ! la/ to h issu$ 8 works )\t modifications4 ,! high art :i* is selfevid5t 9 a mod]n writ] l ,rob]t ,l\is ,/ev5son 0 n atta9$ )\t corrections1 sub/itutions1 r$raft+1 & rewrit+4 ,)\t draw+ ! p>allel too closely1 & )\t impugn+ 8 real inspiration1 we may well cr$it "s ( ^! processes to ,/4 ,luke4 ,?is1 h[ev]1 is an argum5t we _c press too f>1 =1 z w be se5 9 ! foll[+ section1 !re is good gr\nd = ! belief t ,/4 ,luke's revision ( 8 "w 0 nev] complete4 ,x is suffici5t = our hypo!sis to f9d room = a measure ( revision & = ! pres5ce ( modifications requir$ by new in=mation4 ,! nature ( ,/4 ,luke's task is an add$ reason = expect+ ^! processes4 ,9 8 ,preface 7i4 #ad7 ,/4 ,luke %[s a desire to produce a full & accurate record1 & claims to h trac$ ! c\rse ( all ?+s f ! fir/4 ,any new in=mation be>+ ^u ! ,bir? & ! hidd5 ye>s ( ! ,infancy w\ld be especially welcome to him4 ,any "o1 moreov]1 :o has _h any?+ to d ) collect+ memoirs kn[s t n infrequ5tly new facts come to h& j :5 ! task seems wellnigh complet$1 facts = :i* a place mu/ be f\nd1 h[ev] great ! difficulties may be4 ,we are n inde$ left entirely to conjecture4 ,we c exam9e ,/4 ,luke's treatm5t ( ! ,m>kan record4 ,! modifications :i* he introduces are manife/1 & !y arise 9 diff]5t ways4 ,_m ( !m are /yli/ic1 o!rs are int5d$ to cle> up difficulties1 :ile x is 9 e way probable t o!rs aga9 are corrections introduc$ z ! result ( new in=mation4 ,if1 f su* causes1 ,/4 ,luke does n hesitate to modify ! /atem5ts ( ,/4 ,m>k's ,gospel1 x is inconceivable t he w\ld h refra9$ f alt]+ 8 own n>rative if occasion %\ld arise4 ,we h at lea/ "o def9ite example1 )9 ,/4 ,luke's works1 ( a /ory :i* has be5 modifi$ 9 ! light ( fur!r in=mation4 ,9 ,lk4 xxiv !re is good gr\nd = ?9k+ t ! f9al p>t+ ( ,jesus f ,8 disciples is n describ$ z an ,asc5sion1 & app>5tly x takes place at ! close ( ,ea/] ,day4 ,9 ,acts i we h ! /ory ( a =ty days' int]val1 dur+ :i* ! ,ris5 ,*ri/ tea*es ,8 disciples ! ?+s conc]n+ ! ,k+dom ( ,god 7i4 #c74 ,! ,asc5sion is describ$ z an act ( visible levitation4 ,jesus is tak5 up into heav5 & a cl\d receives ,him out ( ,8 disciples' sight 7i4 #i74 ,z !y /& gaz+ upw>ds two m5 appe> by _! side clo!d 9 :ite g>m5ts1 :o decl>e t ,jesus %all return 9 l mann] z !y beheld ,him go+ into heav5 7i4 #aj f474 ,! disciples !n return to ,j]usalem4 ,x c h>dly be d5i$ t ?is is a totally diff]5t /ory f t :i* is told 9 ,lk4 xxiv4 ,:atev] its hi/orical value may be ! presumption is t x re/s ^u a tradition :i* _h come to ,/4 ,luke's k aft] he _h complet$ 8 ,gospel4 ,app>5tly he acquir$ 8 new in=mation :5 x 0 too late to alt] 8 e>li] "w4 ,o!rwise we may believe t ! /ory w\ld h appe>$ 9 ! ,gospel & n 9 ! ,acts4 ,x may freely be grant$ t ! =ego+ consid]ations are ( a purely g5]al "*4 ,admitt$ly !y d n prove t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 is a specific in/ance ( modification4 ,our ju/ification ( ?is hypo!sis is ! results we h rea*$ 9 ,*apt]s ,,ii & ,,iii4 ,:at we h j urg$1 h[ev]1 is suffici5t to %[ t our !ory is n by any means inh]5tly impossible1 b is consonant ) ,/4 ,luke's proc$ure & me?ods z a writ]4 ,,iii4 ,! ,objections to ,:i* ! ,above ,!ory is ,expos$ ,we h n[ to consid] :at is p]haps ! /ronge/ objection to :i* our !ory is expos$4 ,x may be /at$ z foll[s3 ,if ! ,virg9 ,bir? is a lat] elem5t 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel introduc$ by ,/4 ,luke himself1 ! ,evangeli/'s revision ( cc4 i1 ii might reasonably h be5 expect$ to be mu* m ?or\gh ?an x is4 ,:y1 = example1 does he leave unt\*$ ! ref]5ces to ,joseph & ,m>y z 8! p>5ts0 ( ,jesus8 ,:y does he n qualify 8 ambigu\s ref]5ce to 8_!0 purification8 ,:y is he /ill untr\bl$ by _! a/oni%m5t1 & by _! failure to und]/& ! words ( ,jesus at ,j]usalem8 ,:y does he n ins]t "s cle>] ref]5ce to ! ,davidic desc5t ( ,m>y1 or at lea/ give u reason to believe t he look$ ^u ,jesus z ! adopt$1 & !re=e legal1 son ( ,joseph8 ,:y does he leave ! ,son%ip m5tion$ 9 ! fir/ "p ( ! angel's spee* 7i4 #cac7 app>5tly ( a purely ,messianic "*8 ,:y does he n provide occasion 9 ! ,annunciation = ! t]ms ( ,m>y's "q 9 i4 #cd8 ,9 %ort1 are we n back aga9 face to face ) ! same difficulties ) :i* our inve/igation op5$8 ,^! are "s ( ! difficulties :i* our !ory raises4 ,9 reply to ?is objection !re are two prelim9>y consid]ations to be borne 9 m9d4 ,!y are n argum5ts 9 ! s5se ( ?+s :i* c be prov$2 !y are r possibilities :i* ought s]i\sly to be tak5 into acc\nt4 7#a7 ,9 ! fir/ place x %\ld be recogniz$ t we may n h all ! details ( ,/4 ,luke's actual recon/ruction be=e u4 ,some?+ may h be5 alt]$ or excis$2 we h ! result2 we may n h all ! /ages4 ,us5] 7,,eb41 col4 #ccej7 has ass]t$ t /atem5ts ( fact h actually be5 omitt$ f ! orig9al n>rative2 he is ev5 able to tell u :at !y are6 ,he ?9ks t we c 8inf] ) c]ta9ty0 t 9 ! orig9al =m ( ! n>rative aft] i4 #ch /ood ! fur!r /atem5t t ,m>y 0 !n tak5 to wife by ,joseph & t %e conceiv$ by him4 ,us5] sugge/s t ?is /atem5t 0 8judg$ inadmissible0 by ! r$actor :o int]polat$ i4 #cd f41 & t 9 consequ5ce x 0 expung$4 ,!re c be little d\bt t reason+ su* z ?is requires omnisci5ce z well z intuition6 ,& ! same criticism w\ld be j 9 reply to any "o :o %\ld elect to tell u exactly :at ,/4 ,luke himself has alt]$ or omitt$4 ,^! are ?+s :i* we d n "k1 & :i* we _c "k2 we _c ev5 8inf] ) c]ta9ty0 t ,/4 ,luke has omitt$ any?+ at all4 ,b ! broad possibility t he may h effect$ trans=mations & modifications 9 cc4 i1 ii1 :i* we _c n[ trace1 is q ano!r matt]1 &1 inde$1 is by no means improbable4 ,& if ?is is s1 mu/ x n affect ! judgem5t we pass ^u ! skill or lack ( skill :i*1 on ! !ory propos$1 ,/4 ,luke has %[n8 ,we may n "k all4 ,obvi\sly1 we _c prove ?is1 b x is a consid]ation :i* we ought to h 9 m9d4 7#b7 ,a second ?+ to be rememb]$ is t1 if our !ory is true1 we d n "k any?+ ( ! actual circum/ances "u :i* ! new tradition 0 introduc$ into ! ,gospel2 x may h be5 9 ha/e4 ,did ! /ory rea* ! ,evangeli/ at ! la/ mom5t8 ,or1 if n1 0 !re a process ( sift+ & te/+ ( ! new in=mation1 :i* left little "t :5 at l5g? ! fateful decision 0 tak51 & ! ,evangeli/ took up 8 p58 ,aga9 we _c prove ^! ?+s1 b aga9 we _c d5y !m4 ,& if we _c d5y !m1 we mu/ n ignore !m4 ,only if we d ignore ^! possibilities1 are we at lib]ty to insi/ t ! recon/ruction %\ld h be5 m dra/ic4 ,if1 z we ourselves ?9k1 ! supposition is reasonable1 t i4 #cd f4 0 add$ :5 ! ,evangeli/ _h only j he>d ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 we h cle>ly a good answ] to ! objection we are consid]+4 ,! =ego+ argum5ts are speculative2 !re are1 h[ev]1 m positive consid]ations to urge4 ,9 addition to :at has be5 said1 we may po9t out 7#c7 ! fact t ,/4 ,luke's writ+s left 8 h& )\t a pa9/ak+ f9al revision1 & 7#d7 ! diff]5t effect ^u ! m9d ( a new piece ( in=mation z comp>$ ) a belief1 :i* has be5 held = "s "t1 & has already become an intellectual presupposition4 7#c7 ,t ,/4 ,luke's writ+s left 8 h&s )\t a f9al revision is /rongly support$ by ! lit]>y ph5om5a ( ! two works4 ,! cle>e/ evid5ce is f\nd 9 ! ,acts1 9 :i* we probably h a clos] lit]>y p>allel to ! ,bir? ,/ories ( ,lk4 i1 ii ?an 9 ! re/ ( ! ,gospel itself4 ,writ+ on ! ,acts 7,acts ( ! ,apo/les1 ,eng4 ,tr41 pp4 #bjc ff47 ,h>nack gives a li/ ( m ?an two hundr$ 8in/ances ( inaccuracy & discrepancy04 ,h>nack does n accept !m all1 & %[s t !y are ( diff]5t types1 _m ( !m be+ comp>atively trifl+ & unimportant4 ,"s are cases ( anacolu?on & ( transition f indirect to direct spee* & vice v]sa4 ,!re are also 8cases :]e ,/4 ,luke introduces p]sons ) a c]ta9 unconc]n1 or 9 o!r places seems to =get t he has already introduc$ !m0 7p4 #bcj74 ,h>nack po9ts out t 8! details ( a /ory are "h & !re ins]t$ lat] or aga9 e>li] ?an _! prop] place0 7p4 #bbg71 & he ass]ts t 8in/ances ( r$undancy1 ( awkw>d repetition1 ( sil5ce ^u important po9ts1 & ( extraord9>y brevity1 c be adduc$ f diff]5t p>ts ( ! book0 7p4 #bcj74 ,he f9ds 8in/ances ( discrepancy0 9 ! ?ree acc\nts ( ! conv]sion ( ,/4 ,paul1 ! lett] ( ,claudius ,lysias1 ! report ( ,fe/us1 ! la/ spee* ( ,/4 ,paul at ,rome1 & 9 o!r passages 7p4 #bca74 ,adequately to ent] into ?is v int]e/+ "q w\ld take u too f> beyond ! limits ( our ma9 subject4 ,x is p]haps n unfair to sugge/ t ,h>nack's long li/1 z giv5 9 pp4 #bjcbe1 is capable ( v consid]able r$uction4 ,!re is great =ce 9 ,ramsay's rem>k3 8,he :o reads ,luke )\t apply+ practical s5se & "mwit & exp]i5ce w always misund]/& him01 & 9 8 caution3 8,:5 y ?9k y f9d an #8inconsi/5cy' 9 ,luke1 y %\ld look c>efully :e!r y h be5 suffici5tly apply+ ^! qualities1 be=e y condemn ! suppos$ fault0 7,luke ! ,physician1 p4 #ee74 ,ramsay himself admits1 h[ev]1 t !re are inconsi/5cies :i* _c be d5i$1 & holds t !y %[ t 8! "w nev] receiv$ ! f9al =m :i* ,luke int5d$ to give x1 b 0 /ill incomplete :5 he di$0 7ib41 p4 #bd74 ,9 8 e>li] "w1 ,/4 ,paul ! ,travell] & ! ,roman ,citiz51 ,ramsay has made ! same sugge/ion1 illu/rations ( :i* he f9ds 9 ,acts xvi4 #ai1 #bj & xx4 #d1 #e47ge7 ,we may describe ! impression :i* ,/4 ,luke1 z a writ]1 makes ^u u by say+ t1 :ile 8 "w is m>k$ by great lit]>y art1 & :ile x is *>act]iz$ by _m /rik+ in/ances ( hi/orical accuracy1 yet1 at ! same "t1 ! ,evangeli/ %[s a c]ta9 unconc]n 9 matt]s ( detail 7,h>nack w\ld call x 8a c]ta9 lit]>y c>elessness071 ! results ( :i* w\ld probably h disappe>$ _h he subject$ 8 works to a close f9al revision4 ,if ?is view is j !re is little weight 9 ! objection t1 on ! !ory we h /at$1 ,/4 ,luke's recon/ruction might h be5 expect$ to be m dra/ic ?an x is4 ,! inconsi/5cies he has left are l ^? :i* we f9d else:]e & are a feature ( 8 works z !y /&4 7#d7 ,our f9al argum5t is ( a psy*ological k9d4 ,x re/s1 z we h said1 ^u ! diff]5ce betwe5 an intellectual prepossession & ! fir/ effect ^u ! m9d ( new in=mation4 ,! previ\s argum5t might seem to po9t 9 ano!r direction4 ,w n ! "* ( ,/4 ,luke's writ+s suffici5tly expla9 ! lit]>y ph5om5a ( ,lk4 i1 ii1 on ! view t he taught ! ,virg9 ,bir? f ! fir/8 ,9 ! light ( ! discrepancies :i* occur 9 ! ,gospel & ! ,acts1 c we n believe t aft] all ! ,virg9 ,bir? is an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,gospel8 ,?is cont5tion w\ld be an example ( :at ,h>nack has call$ attempt+ to ga!r apologetic figs f sceptical ?i/les47#gf7 ,we d n ?9k t 9 ?is case ! h>ve/ w\ld realize expectations4 ,x mu/ be rememb]$ t ! two cases are n p>allel4 ,9 ! "o case we beg9 ) a writ] ^: m9d is fill$ ) an intellectual presupposition1 ) a k1 t is to say1 ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? presuppos$4 ,"u ^! circum/ances ! miracle mu/ be 8a necess>y /one 9 ! /ructure01 & its effect det]m9ative4 ,if ! ,virg9 ,bir? _h be5 kn[n to ,/4 ,luke = "s consid]able "t1 we _c ?9k t ,lk4 i1 ii w\ld h possess$ ! features to :i* we h call$ att5tion 9 ,*apt] ,,ii4 ,9 ! o!r case--t ( our hypo!sis--! ,virg9 ,bir? is a piece ( new in=mation1 &1 if ?is is s1 we submit t inconsi/5cies left 9 ! adapt$ n>rative we> a diff]5t hue4 ,x is "o ?+ to introduce into a n>rative :at is inconsi/5t to "o's presuppositions4 ,x is q ano!r ?+ n to p]ceive inconsi/5cies at once1 :5 our k is enl>g$ by a totally new fact4 ,a presupposition is mu* m despotic ?an a subsequ5t discov]y4 ,x is common k t ! implications ( a new po9t ( view are n always imm$iately recogniz$4 ,= a "t old & new live toge!r4 ,x is n by any means an easy task to introduce into a n>rative1 con/ruct$ "u ! guidance ( ali5 presuppositions1 a fact ( an entirely new ord]4 ,t ,/4 ,luke %\ld h p]=m$ 8 task s well argues no little skill 9 lit]>y craftsman%ip4 ,t 8 "w 0 n completely done is aft] all no m ?an we might expect4 ,f ! /&po9t ( lit]>y exactitude1 no d\bt ! bett] plan w\ld h be5 to rewrite ! n>rative1 or at lea/ to subject x to a rigor\s prun+4 ,b we ought n to compla9 if ^! ?+s h n be5 done4 ,/4 ,luke 0 probably too mu* ( an arti/ to feel ! m]ciless logic ( 8 new in=mation2 & ! result is a compromise4 ,9 connexion ) our !ory we d n ?9k t ?is is an unreasonable view to take4 ,! difficulties are c]ta9ly mu* great] ^u ! !ory t ,/4 ,luke knew ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? f ! fir/4 ,grant$ c]ta9 presuppositions1 & we c say ) good reason :at a writ] l ,/4 ,luke w\ld n be likely to d4 ,assume ! entrance ( a new fact1 trans=m+ by a :ole _w ( diff]5ce ! writ]'s po9t ( view1 & :o c say j :at he w\ld d8 ,we c say1 ( c\rse1 t he w\ld introduce 8 new k1 if p]suad$ ( its tru?2 b :5 we come to ! details ( recon/ruction1 we are face to face ) ! unc]ta9ties ( ! p]sonal equation4 ,! logical proc$ure is dra/ic revision4 ,if ! writ] /ops %ort ( ?is1 z he may v well d1 & attempts to fuse 8 mat]ial1 seams mu/ %[ & m>k+s rema94 ,?is is precisely :at we f9d 9 ,lk4 i1 ii4 ,9 i4 #cd f4 & its context we c detect ! seams2 9 c4 ii we c see ! m>k+s4 ,x w be recogniz$ t ! situation is q diff]5t on ! view :i* cr$its i4 #cd f4 to a lat] ,*ri/ian editor4 ,aga9/ ?is !ory ! objection we are consid]+ has mu* great] =ce4 ,= x is unlikely t ! r$actor w\ld approa* ! ,gospel ) a k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? b lately ga9$4 ,on ! contr>y1 x w\ld probably be a doctr9e ) :i* he _h long be5 famili>4 ,accord+ly1 9 addition to ! o!r objections t we h rais$ aga9/ ! !ory ( late int]polation1 x w\ld be legitimate to ask1 ,:y has ! r$actor n done 8 "w bett]8 ,our own hypo!sis--t ,/4 ,luke _h only j ent]$ into a k ( ! new tradition--is1 inde$1 ! "o !ory :]e we h ! lea/ ne$ to ask ?is "q4 ,= ! reasons giv51 we believe t ! objection t ,/4 ,luke's revision %\ld h be5 m dra/ic is n insup]able4 ,t !re is difficulty we all[4 ,b !re is probably no solution ( ! ,lukan problem1 n ev5 ! correct "o1 :i* w n leave difficulties ( a k9d4 ,! problem is complex & ! facts (t5 elusive4 ,x is on ! gr\nd t ! !ory we h sket*$ leaves lea/ difficulties1 & does ju/ice to ! facts z !y appe>1 t we v5ture to f9d 9 x a reasonable solution ( ! problem ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? 9 relation to ! ,?ird ,gospel & to ,/4 ,luke4 ,,iv4 ,c]ta9 ,consequ5ces ,x rema9s = u to consid] c]ta9 consequ5ces :i* foll[ if our hypo!sis is true4 7#a7 ,9 ! fir/ place1 we c claim ,/4 ,luke z a witness to ! tradition ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,?is is a result ( fir/ importance4 ,= ^? :o reg>d ,/4 ,luke z a v cr$ul\s p]son ) a special 8fondness0 = 8a good miracle01 ?is conclusion w mean little4 ,b = ^? :o are impress$ by 8 claim to be reg>d$ z a good hi/orical writ]1 x is n a view to be lightly e/eem$4 ,!re are ^? :o w consid] t ,/4 ,luke's witness settles ! hi/orical "q1 & w be dispos$ on ! gr\nd ( 8 au?ority to accept ! tradition4 ,b ) great] reason !re are o!rs :o w feel t1 ) all 8 excell5ces z an hi/orian1 ,/4 ,luke has ! elem5t>y human "r to make a mi/ake1 especially :5 he is dep5d5t ^u ! evid5ce ( o!rs4 ,! det]m9+ feature is cle>ly ! "* ( 8 s\rce or s\rces4 7#b7 ,a fur!r fact to be notic$ is t ,/4 ,luke's witness m>ks a v e>ly /age 9 ! spread ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition4 ,9 ?is respect !re is a contra/ betwe5 ! ,?ird & ,fir/ ,gospels4 ,9 ! ,?ird ,gospel ! tradition is /at$1 b its problems are sc>cely felt4 ,!re is a =e%ad[+ ( ?is 9 ! words 8z 0 suppos$0 9 ! ,g5ealogy1 b n m4 ,/4 ,luke has n really felt ! problem ( ! ,davidic desc5t4 ,he has n envisag$ t v /rik+ treatm5t ( ! problem :i* we %all h occasion to po9t out 9 ! ,mat?aean ,g5ealogy 7see pp4 #hi ff474 ,/4 ,luke's n>rative is nei!r didactic nor apologetic4 ,x is almo/1 b n q1 a simple n>rative ( :at is implicitly accept$ z fact4 ,9 mak+ ?is qualification we are ?9k+ ( ! arti/ic =m :i* ! e>li] n>rative embodi$ 9 ,lk4 i1 ii has impos$ ^u ,/4 ,luke's acc\nt ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 b ?is is a matt] :i* w come up aga9 a little lat]4 ,! fact t is ( out/&+ int]e/ is t ,/4 ,luke c\ld sit d[n to write a ,gospel1 ) a desire to trace out all ?+s accurately f ! fir/1 & yet "k no?+ ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 until aft] ! great] "p1 if n ! :ole1 ( 8 "w 0 complet$4 7#c7 ,x is ! fact j not$ :i* helps u to date ! fir/ appe>ance ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition2 its date is b\nd up ) ! "q ( ! date ( ! ,?ird ,gospel4 ,?is is a "q :i* w receive fur!r treatm5t 9 our f9al *apt] 7pp4 #aag ff474 7#d7 ,our hypo!sis po/ulates an e>li] n>rative ( ! ,bir? ( ,jesus :i* knew no?+ ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,! relation ( ?is n>rative to ! lat] tradition ne$s c>efully to be consid]$4 ,we h already express$ ! op9ion t ! e>li] n>rative 0 probably tak5 f a good hi/orical s\rce4 ,ramsay has not$ signs ( a womanly _s 9 ! :ole n>rative1 & ?9ks t x may well g back ei!r to ,m>y1 or to "s "o :o 0 v intimate ) h] 7cf4 ,0 ,*ri/ ,born at ,be?lehem81 pp4 #gdhh2 ,luke ! ,physician1 pp4 #ac1 #ej74 ,s&ay is n able to speak q s confid5tly z to ! ne>ness ( ! s\rce to ,m>y1 b ?9ks t x c\ld n be 8m ?an two or ?ree degrees remov$ f h]04 8,x mu/ h be5 ne> en\gh01 he says1 8to reta9 ! f9e t\*es :i* ,pr(essor ,ramsay s well br+s out0 7,outl9es1 p4 #aie n474 ,^! views h won consid]able support 9 ,great ,brita94 ,x w be rememb]$1 ( c\rse1 t !y h reg>d to ! :ole ( ,lk4 i1 ii1 to ! n>rative1 t is to say1 z an acc\nt ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,! same argum5ts are valid1 h[ev]1 = ascrib+ a good hi/orical f\ndation to ! n>rative1 ev5 if i4 #cd f4 is a lat] addition4 ,! probability is t ! s\rce1 :e!r docum5t>y or oral1 is ( ,pale/9ian orig91 & t x po9ts back ultimately1 if n imm$iately1 to ! ,holy ,family4 ,on our !ory1 h[ev]1 :ile sil5t z to ! pat]nity ( ,joseph1 ! s\rce _h no?+ to say ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,x describ$ ! nonmiracul\s bir? ( ! longexpect$ ,messiah4 ,at fir/ sight ! high hi/orical value ( ?is e>li] s\rce w\ld appe> to be detrim5tal to ! tradition ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,b x is n c]ta9 t ?is is s4 ,!re is m =ce ?an has (t5 be5 all[$ 9 ! sugge/ion t ! facts ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? may h be5 purposely )held f public k = _m ye>s by ^? :o knew !m47#gg7 ,assum+ = ! mom5t ! tru? ( ?is view1 we may ask1 ,w\ld no?+ at all be told8 ,if we ?9k x probable t "p at lea/ ( ! /ory w\ld be relat$1 x may be t ! tradition ^u :i* ,/4 ,luke fir/ drew is a v]sion ( t "p4 ,we might ev5 haz>d ! sugge/ion t x 0 ! publication ( ?is /ory by ,/4 ,luke :i* drew out ! full] n>rative4 ,9 o!r words1 ! fact t ! e>li] tradition makes no ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir? ne$ n be fatal to ! tru? ( ! lat] /ory exp&$ 9 i4 #cd f4 ,?is1 ( c\rse1 is speculation2 b1 at any rate1 ! possibilities are su* z to =bid ! speci\s argum5t--! ,holy ,family "k no?+ ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?6 ,we tread ^u firm] gr\nd :5 we urge t ! high] ! hi/orical value ( ! e>li] /ory ! less likely w\ld ,/4 ,luke h be5 dispos$ to modify x 9 def]5ce to fur!r in=mation1 unless he _h atta*$ consid]able value to ! new tradition1 & 0 p]suad$ ( its tru?4 7#e7 ,z reg>ds ! orig9 ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition impli$ 9 ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 we h to confess t we are completely 9 ! d>k4 ,we h /at$ our pref]5ce = ! view t x came ?r\gh a p]sonal *annel 7p4 #gc74 ,we are unable to ?9k t 9 writ+ i4 #cd f4 ,/4 ,luke 0 himself m]ely translat+ !ology into n>rative4 ,b :o ! int]m$i>y 0 we _c tell4 ,on our !ory1 ! tradition _c h be5 directly imp>t$ to ! ,evangeli/ by ,m>y4 ,:e!r1 9 ! end1 ! /ory c be trac$ back to h]1 is a "q we _c n[ discuss4 ,at ?is /age x w\ld be no m ?an a guess to connect x ) ! wom5 m5tion$ 9 ,lk4 viii4 #b1 #c2 xxiv4 #aj1 or ) ! daught]s ( ,philip 7,acts xxi4 #h1 #i74 ,9 an hi/orical inquiry x is nev] safe to ascribe a tradition to an au?ority1 unless we h solid gr\nds = s do+4 ,o!rwise1 we import a bias into ! inve/igation1 if inde$ we d n beg ! "q4 ,! mi/ake is "o :i* has be5 made m ?an once 9 discuss+ ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,9 ! pres5t case we h no?+ :atev] to guide u1 & accord+ly we h to acquiesce 9 ! b>e conclusion t ,/4 ,luke accept$ ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 b t we d n "k any?+ ab\t 8 au?ority1 except t x satisfi$ 8 m9d4 7#f7 ,! =m 9 :i* ! tradition rea*$ ,/4 ,luke c h>dly h be5 ! brief /atem5t ( i4 #cd f4 ,! lit]>y =m ( t passage is det]m9$ by t ( ! e>li] n>rative4 ,! latt]1 z we h said 7p4 #gc71 is some?+ m ?an a b>e transcript ( ev5ts4 ,x is a product ( high art1 & is %ap$ ^u ,old ,te/am5t models4 ,ramsay f9ds 9 x a ,greek elem5t4 ,! /ory has be5 8re?\ght out ( ! ,hebraic into ! ,greek fa%ion0 7,luke ! ,physician1 p4 #ac74 ,! div9e mess5g] becomes to ,/4 ,luke 8! w+$ p]sonal be+ :o1 l ,iris or ,h]mes1 communicates ! w & purpose ( ,god0 7op4 cit41 p4 #ac74 ,hav+ reg>d1 h[ev]1 to ! ,old ,te/am5t bir?/ories ( ,isaac1 ,samson1 & ,samuel1 x is d\btful if we really ne$ ?is sugge/ion4 ,9 any case1 we may say t x is ! m\ld 9 :i* ! e>li] /ory has be5 ca/1 :i* acc\nts = ! lit]>y =m ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition 9 ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,! tradition :i* ,/4 ,luke receiv$ probably conta9$ ! sub/ance ( :at is /at$ 9 v]se #ce1 & ass]t$ t ,jesus 0 begott5 ( ,m>y by ! ,holy ,_s4 7#g7 ,! hi/orical value ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel is a "q :i* _c be answ]$ until ! problem is treat$ z a :ole4 ,our /udy ( ! ,lukan problem adds to ! mat]ial at our disposal4 ,x confirms our conclusions 9 ,*apt] ,i z reg>ds ,/4 ,paul & ,/4 ,m>k4 ,x also enables u to say t ,/4 ,luke1 9 8 lat] ye>s1 came to believe & tea* ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 on gr\nds :i* are unkn[n to u1 b :i* he himself deem$ suffici5t4 ,,*apt] ,v4 ,,! ,,virg9 ,,bir? ,,& ,,! ,,fir/ ,,gospel ,m ?an ! o!r ,synoptic ,gospels1 ! ,fir/ ,gospel comes be=e u z an 8(ficial0 docum5t ( ! ,*ri/ian ,*ur*4 ,our ,?ird ,gospel 0 some:at ( ! nature ( a 8private v5ture01 & h[ inadequately ! value ( ,/4 ,m>k's ,gospel 0 recogniz$ 9 ! fir/ half ( ! second c5tury appe>s 9 ! fact t its survival seems almo/ accid5tal1 all exi/+ copies be+ d]iv$ f a s+le mutilat$ ,,ms47#gh7 ,:e!r1 !n1 we c claim ! au?ority & sanction ( ! ,fir/ ,gospel = ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 is cle>ly a "q ( fir/rate importance4 ,to "s ! "q w appe> det]m9ative2 b = ^? also1 :o feel t 9 any case ! hi/orical value ( ! witness w\ld rema9 an op5 "q1 a conclusion z reg>ds ! problem is ( v great significance1 9 view ( its hi/orical implications4 ,9 ! pres5t *apt] our purpose is to inquire h[ f> ! ,fir/ ,gospel be>s witness to ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 & :at ! "* ( its witness is4 ,0 ! n>rative1 z we h x today1 pres5t 9 ! ,gospel f ! fir/8 ,is ,mt4 i1 ii a lat] ins]tion1 or is ! passage i4 #ahbe an int]polation8 ,extremely int]e/+ discussions h also aris5 ar\nd ! "q ( ! ,mat?aean ,g5ealogy & ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af1 & ^! call = notice4 ,! "q ( ! hi/orical value ( ! tradition ( ,mt4 i4 #ahbe mu/ 9 ! ma9 be po/pon$1 b ! possibilities1 & su* positive facts z em]ge1 c be not$4 ,p]haps ! be/ me?od ( approa* is to consid] fir/ ! "* ( ! ,g5ealogy1 ap>t altoge!r f ! "q ( its au?or%ip4 ,! details ( ! textual problem ( ,mt4 i4 #af w be discuss$ 9 an ,app5dix to ! *apt]4 ,! rema9+ po9ts to be treat$ are ! g5u95ess ( cc4 i1 ii1 ! unity ( ^! *apt]s1 & la/ly ! s\rces & implications ( ! n>rative1 toge!r ) a survey ( ! results rea*$4 ,i4 ,! ,*>act]i/ics ( ! ,g5ealogy ,among ! features :i* m>k ! ,g5ealogy we may note ! foll[+3 7#a7 ,its purpose is to %[ ! ,davidic desc5t ( ,jesus by trac+ ! royal l9e 7cf4 v]se #f 8,david ! k+074 7#b7 ,! /ructure is obvi\sly artificial47#gi7 ,! ,g5ealogy is arrang$ 9 ?ree gr\ps ( f\rte5 g5]ations1 an arrangem5t to :i* ! writ] himself calls att5tion 7v]se #ag74 ,9 ord] to secure ?is /ructure1 ! names ( ,joa%1 ,amaziah1 & ,az>iah are omitt$ 7cf4 #a ,*ron4 iii7 & ! ?ird gr\p cov]s a space ( ab\t six hundr$ ye>s4 8,if any s\rce ( ! s*ematism is want$1 ! cabbali/ic int]pretation ( 1 ^: ?ree lett]s are equival5t by gematria to ! numb] #ad1 is ! mo/ probable0 7,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bej n474 7#c7 ,! v]b is us$ ?r\gh\t ( legal1 n physical1 desc5t47#hj7 ,?is inf]5ce is drawn f ! artificial "* ( ! ,g5ealogy4 ,its omissions are obvi\s1 & mu/ h be5 s bo? to ! compil] & 8 read]s4 8,! contempor>ies ( ! ,evangeli/ knew _! ,bible at lea/ z well z we d4 ,!y knew t !re 7 m ?an f\rte5 g5]ations betwe5 ,david & ! ,captivity1 t ,joram did n beget ,uzziah1 & t ,josiah did n beget ,jeconiah0 7,burkitt1 ,evan4 ,da ,meph41 ii1 p4 #bfj74 ,if ! passage ,mt4 i4 #ahbe1 z well z ! ,g5ealogy1 comes f ! h& ( ! ,evangeli/1 ! v]b mu/ cle>ly indicate legal p>5tage2 b !re is suffici5t gr\nd = ?is view )9 ! ,g5ealogy itself4 7#d7 ,! ref]5ces to wom5 9 ! ,g5ealogy are unique1 & are be/ expla9$ z due to an apologetic purpose4 ,!y _c be s well expla9$ z reflect+ a univ]sali/ic int]e/ 7,heff]n1 quot$ by ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bea74 ,9 contra/ to ! ,g5ealogy 9 ! ,?ird ,gospel1 t 9 ,mt4 traces ! desc5t no f>!r back ?an to ,abraham2 x is fundam5tally ,jewi%4 ,!re c be little d\bt b t ! writ]'s purpose is to rebut ,jewi% sl&]s already curr5t reg>d+ ! bir? ( ,jesus4 8,?r\gh\t ! :ole ,g5ealogy ! ,evangeli/ appe>s to be tell+ u 9 an audible aside t ! heir _h (t5 be5 born out ( ! direct l9e or irregul>ly4 ,?am> ! daught]9law ( ,judah1 ,rahab ! h>lot1 ,ru? ! ,moabitess1 & ! unnam$ wife ( ,uriah1 are =c$ ^u our att5tion1 z if to prep>e u = /ill great] irregul>ity 9 ! la/ /age0 7,burkitt747#ha7 ,if ^! are ! *>act]i/ic features ( ! ,g5ealogy1 x is cle> t f ! fir/ x 0 compil$ ) ! ,virg9 ,bir? presuppos$4 ,x is1 9 fact1 an attempt to pres5t t belief 9 connexion ) ! claim t ,jesus 0 ( ,davidic desc5t1 ?r\gh ! legal relation%ip 9 :i* ,he /ood to ,joseph47#hb7 ,?us1 ! ,mat?aean ,g5ealogy is unique2 x diff]s altoge!r f t 9 ,lk4 ,if to u its =m seems =c$ & unreal1 t is because we fail to come to x f ! hi/orical po9t ( view4 ,f ?is /&po9t we may ask1 ) ,w4 ,c4 ,all5 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 #f73 8,if ! editor simply tri$ to give expression to ! two facts :i* _h come d[n to him by tradition--! fact ( ,*ri/'s sup]natural bir? & ! fact t ,he 0 ! ,davidic ,messiah1 & did n attempt a logical syn!sis ( !m1 :o %all blame him80 ,we are n "h conc]n$ ) ! "q ( ! tru? ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 b simply ) ! view t ! compil] ( ! ,g5ealogy held t belief1 & = ?is inf]5ce a high degree ( probability c be claim$4 ,if ?is is ! "* ( ! ,g5ealogy1 x mu/ foll[ t ! textual problem ( ,mt4 i4 #af diff]s consid]ably 9 importance f ! ?\ght ( a qu>t] ( a c5tury ago4 ,x is becom+ increas+ly recogniz$ t1 :atev] ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af may be1 x c make little diff]5ce to ! "* ( ! ,g5ealogy z outl9$ above4 ,its int]e/ is textual & lit]>y r ?an hi/orical4 ,! mo/ int]e/+ /atem5t ( ?is po9t ( view is t ( ,f4 ,c4 ,burkitt 9 8 ,evangelion ,da,meph>re%e 7#aijd1 see vol4 ii1 pp4 #beh ff474 ,on p4 #beh ,burkitt expresses a firm belief t no fre% light ^u ! hi/orical ev5ts ( ! ,nativity has be5 ?r[n ei!r by ! discov]y ( ! ,s9aitic ,syriac ,,ms4 or by ! publication ( ! ,dialogue ( ,timo?y & ,aquila4 ,he says 7p4 #bfa7 t ev5 if ! ,g5ealogy _h end$ ) ! uncompromis+ /atem5t 8& ,joseph begat ,jesus01 x w\ld n prove t its compil] believ$ t ,joseph 0 ! actual fa!r ( ,jesus4 ,9 ?is connexion x is ( great int]e/ to note t ,ar*deacon ,all51 :o upholds ! hi/orical tru? ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 actually adopts 9 8 comm5t>y on ,mt4 7,,icc41 #aijg7 ! read+ impli$ by ! ,s94 ,syr41 z ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af--8;,& ,jacob begat ,joseph4 ,joseph1 to :om 0 esp\s$ ,m>y a virg91 begat ,jesus1 :o is call$ ,*ri/0 7p4 #e74 ,writ+ 9 #aiaf1 ,canon ,box takes a diff]5t view ( ! textual problem1 b is no less emphatic 9 8 ass]tion t1 8ev5 if ! read+ ,joseph 444 begat ,jesus be correct1 x ne$ n imply a belief 9 ! natural g5]ation ( ,jesus0 7,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,jesus1 p4 #ae74 ,la/ly1 we may comp>e ! judgem5t ( ,dr4 ,james ,m(fatt 7,,int41 #aiah73 8,su* modifications z may be due to doctr9al presuppositions are design$ to reset or to %>p5 ! ref]5ce ( ! orig9al text to ! virg9 bir?1 n to ins]t ! dogma 9 a passage :i* 0 orig9ally free f x0 7p4 #bea74 ,^! are great & hon\r$ names1 b ! op9ion is n "o :i* cries out = ! cloak ( au?ority2 x spr+s directly out ( ! "* ( ! ,g5ealogy itself4 ,if is us$ ?r\gh\t ( legal p>5tage1 x w\ld cle>ly be s 9 ! la/ /ep1 if x %\ld be prov$ t ?is also conta9$ ! ^w 4 ,inde$1 we %\ld naturally expect to f9d t ^w 9 v]se #af4 ,at ! same "t1 x w\ld n be "r to reg>d ! textual problem z "o ( m]ely academic int]e/4 ,x gives a valuable sidelight ^u ! hi/ory ( ! exegesis ( ,mt4 i1 ii 9 ! e>ly ,*ri/ian c5turies4 ,x enables u to see h[ ! ,mat?aean n>rative 0 view$1 ! difficulties x rais$1 & ! way 9 :i* !y 7 met4 ,?us x ?r[s into /rong relief ! unique "* ( ! ,g5ealogy4 ,x also %$s a welcome light ^u ! treatm5t :i* ! text ( ! ,gospels receiv$ at ! h&s ( _! e>lie/ read]s be=e ^! writ+s _h acquir$ ! /atus ( sacr$ books4 ,ev5 !n if we h f9ally to acquiesce 9 ,dr4 ,m(fatt's /atem5t3 8,! textual problem ( i4 #af is n yet settl$01 ! "q is "o ( absorb+ & ( fruitful int]e/47#hc7 ,= our imm$iate purpose x is en\gh to say t ! results1 s f> z !y g1 /r5g!n r ?an weak5 our belief t ! compil] ( ! ,g5ealogy work$ "u ! presupposition ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,,ii4 ,! ,g5u95ess ( ,mt4 i1 ii ,?is problem c no long] be reg>d$ z a burn+ "q4 ,few s*ol>s ( ! pres5t day w\ld cont5d t ! ,fir/ ,gospel ev] circulat$ )\t ^! *apt]s4 ,9 /yle1 9 vocabul>y1 & 9 mode ( treatm5t1 !y are ( a piece ) ! re/ ( ! book4 7#a7 ,! lit]>y /yle ( ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ is n s m>k$ z t ( ,/4 ,luke1 b x has nev]!less a di/9ct "* ( its own4 ,z comp>$ ) t ( ,/4 ,m>k1 x is 8m prosaic & col\rless01 b x is 8m calm & balanc$0 7,milligan747#hd7 ,pr(4 ,burkitt describes x z foll[s3 8,i wi% ,i c\ld ?9k ( "s o!r ^w ?an #8=mality' by :i* to "n ! *ief *>act]i/ic ( ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/'s lit]>y /yle4 ,=mality sugge/s rigidity1 g5]ally ) a c]ta9 measure ( incapacity1 & ^! are n among 8 defects4 ,on ! contr>y1 ,mat!w has great lit]>y skill1 z well z dignity4 ,ev]y?+ t he says is put ) admirable cle>ness & lucidity2 :at he writes d[n he has fir/ und]/ood himself4 ,if !re is an exception to be not$ he notes x0 7,,ght41 p4 #ahf74 ,n[ ?is same /yle is manife/ ev]y:]e ?r\gh\t ! ,gospel1 9 cc4 i1 ii1 z well z else:]e47#he7 ,! !ory !re=e t ^! *apt]s are a lat] ins]tion lab\rs "u an imm5se initial disadvantage4 ,x requires to be expla9$ h[ x is t ?is *>act]i/ic lit]>y /yle is j z manife/ 9 cc4 i1 ii z 9 ! re/ ( ! ,gospel1 9 spite ( ! fact t ! subjectmatt] ( ^! *apt]s is peculi> & di/9ct4 7#b7 ,! ,vocabul>y & con/ructional =ms ( cc4 i1 ii are also *>act]i/ic ( ! ,gospel z a :ole4 ,burkitt 7,evan4 ,da,meph41 ii1 p4 #bei7 in/ances eight words f ^! *apt]s z 8*>act]i/ic ,mat?aean words04 ,^! words are giv5 bel[4 ,! /ati/ics h be5 obta9$ by trac+ ! record ( ! words 9 ,m\lton & ,g$5's ,concordance 7d\btful cases & quotations be+ omitt$74 ,in/ances ,in/ances ,in/ances 9 ,mt4 i1 9 ,mt4 9 ! ii4 iii re/ ( xxviii4 ! ,,nt4 #d #f #d 7) #b #aa ,mk4 7#a71 names7 ,lk4 7#b71 ,jn4 7#h71 ,ac4 7#b71 ,pl4 7#d71 ,heb4 7#a74 #e #a #j #d #h #ac #d #h #j #a #f #d #c #hf #fg #d #i #i ,9 addition to ! li/ giv5 by ,burkitt1 we may note also ! foll[+3 ,in/ances ,in/ances ,mt1 z 9 ,mt4 i1 9 ,mt4 comp>$ ii4 iii ) ! xxviii4 re/ ( ! ,,nt4 #f #aj #a_/c ( ,,nt4 ,record4 #c #i #a_/d ( ,,nt4 #a #ac #a_/c ( ,,nt4 #a #bc #b_/e ( ,,nt4 #a #e #a_/b ( ,,nt4 #a #h #a_/b ( ,,nt4 #a #h #a_/b ( ,,nt4 #a #g #b_/e ( ,,nt4 #a #d #a_/b ( ,,nt4 ,o!r words :i* repay exam9ation are 1 1 1 1 4 ,! argum5t is n1 ( c\rse1 t no "o b ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ c\ld h us$ ^! words--t w\ld be absurd2 b t !y are words :i* he uses frequ5tly1 & 9 ne>ly e case m frequ5tly ?an any o!r ,new ,te/am5t writ]47#hf7 ,an int]e/+ fact is in/anc$ by ,w4 ,c4 ,all5 7op4 cit41 p4 lxxxvi74 ,he notes z a *>act]i/ic ( ! ,gospel 8a t5d5cy to repeat a phrase or con/ruction two or ?ree times at %ort int]vals04 ,fifte5 examples ( ?is are giv51 "o ( :i* occurs 9 ,mt4 ii4 ,?is la/ is an in/ance 9 :i* ! g5itive absolute is foll[$ 9 ?ree cases by 7ii4 #a1 #ac1 #ai74 ,we may add t ! same con/ruction appe>s 9 i4 #bj4 ,sir ,j4 ,c4 ,hawk9s %[s 7,,hs41 #bnd ,ed41 pp4 #e1 #ca7 t !re are sev5 in/ances ( ?is con/ruction 9 ! re/ ( ,mt41 z comp>$ ) a s+le case 9 ,lk4 ,"o o!r detail ( con/ruction may be not$4 ,m ?an half ! ,new ,te/am5t record ( ) ! subjunctive 7:i* occurs 9 ii4 #ac7 belongs to ! ,fir/ ,gospel4 ,on ! o!r side1 we h to set d[n ! fact t 9 ,mt4 i1 ii !re are "s tw5tyeight words1 exclusive ( prop] n\ns1 :i* d n occur 9 ! re/ ( ! ,gospel47#hg7 ,b ne>ly half ( ^! are acc\nt$ = by ! subjectmatt]4 ,! rema9+ in/ances are n m num]\s ?an we might naturally expect4 ,on ! o!r h&1 if cc4 i1 ii are a lat] ins]tion1 we c\ld reasonably look = m4 ,s f>1 !n1 z ! l+ui/ic facts w take u1 we may say t1 consid]$ z a :ole1 !y support ! view t ,mt4 i1 ii are f ! same h& z ! re/ ( ! ,gospel4 7#c7 ,! mode ( treatm5t 9 ^! *apt]s is t ( ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/4 ,?is writ] is di/+ui%$ by ! m>k$ int]e/ :i* he takes 9 describ+ ! new fai? z ! true fulfilm5t ( ! old4 ,?is *>act]i/ic appe>s 9 ! quotations :i* he makes f ! ,old ,te/am5t4 ,among ^! !re are twelve :i* /& out di/9ct47#hh7 7i7 ,9 ea* case !y are prec$$ by ! words1 89 ord] t t :i* 0 spok5 by ! prophets might be fulfill$01 or words to t effect4 7ii7 ,) "o exception 7iii4 #c71 !y are quot$ 9 ?is ,gospel alone4 7iii7 ,:at is m important1 mo/ ( !m are bas$ ^u ! ,hebrew1 :]eas ! rema9+ quotations 9 ! ,gospel 7except xi4 #aj7 are tak5 f ! ,septuag9t47#hi7 ,= our pres5t purpose ! significant ?+ is t ^! *>act]i/ic quotations are di/ribut$ ?r\gh\t ! :ole ( ! ,gospel4 ,no less ?an five ( !m occur 9 cc4 i1 ii1 & x is n too mu* to say t _! pres5ce is a k9d ( wat]m>k au!nticat+ ! g5u95ess ( ^! *apt]s4 ,comb9+ ! =ego+ argum5ts we may ju/ly claim t ! hypo!sis ( int]polation is viol5t 9 ! extreme4 ,dr4 ,m(fatt sums up a v widely accept$ view :5 he says3 8,nei!r ! /yle nor cont5ts ( #ab af=d valid evid5ce = suspect+ t !y are a lat] ins]tion 9 ! gospel0 7,,int41 p4 #bej74 ,,iii4 ,! ,unity ( ,mt4 i1 ii ,! argum5ts us$ 9 ! prec$+ section are suffici5t to %[ t cc4 i1 ii1 z a :ole1 come f ! ,evangeli/'s h&4 ,b ?is conclusion does n exclude ! possibility t c]ta9 p>ts may be ( lat] date4 ,9 p>ticul>1 x c\ld be said1 & has 9 fact be5 claim$ t ! ,g5ealogy1 ! passage i4 #ahbe1 or bo?1 are int]polations2 & t orig9ally ! ,fir/ ,gospel knew no?+ ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,^! que/ions mu/ n[ be treat$4 ,!re is n ! same ne$ = u to exam9e ! section describ+ ! visit ( ! ,wise ,m5 & its sequel 7c4 ii74 ,?is section is ( great importance 9 a discussion ( ! ,nativity n>ratives1 b 9 relation to ! ,virg9 ,bir? x is second>y z comp>$ ) ! ,g5ealogy & ! passage i4 #ahbe4 ,! section is treat$ by ,canon ,box 9 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,jesus1 pp4 #aicc4 #a4 ,! ,g5ealogy ,we are n conc]n$ to ask at ?is po9t :e!r ! ,g5ealogy ev] exi/$ indep5d5tly ( ! ,gospel1 & is ?us a s\rce :i* ! ,evangeli/ has work$ up & incorporat$ 9 8 own "w4 ,! "q we h to consid] is :e!r ,mt4 i4 #aag is a g5u9e "p ( ! ,gospel4 ,! case 9 fav\r ( ?is view is ov]:elm+ly /rong4 ,its weight lies 9 ! fact t ! peculi> *>act]i/ics ( ! ,g5ealogy 7p4 #hi f47 are ! peculi> *>act]i/ics ( ! re/ ( ! ,gospel4 7#a7 ,?is is manife/ 9 ! /rong int]e/ tak5 9 ! ,davidic ,son%ip4 8,! ,gospel accord+ to ,mat!w may be call$ ,! ,book ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 ! ,son ( ,david 444 ,! special aim ( ,mat!w1 9 "o ^w1 is to repres5t our ,"l z ! legitimate ,heir ( ! royal h\se ( ,david0 7,burkitt1 ,evan4 ,da,meph41 ii1 p4 #bei74 ,we may p>tially illu/rate ?is claim by ! ,new ,te/am5t record ( ! t]m 8,son ( ,david04 ,!re are #h in/ances 9 ,mt4 o!r ?an i4 #a1 & #f 9 ! re/ ( ! ,new ,te/am5t 7#c 9 ,mk4 & #c 9 ,lk474 ,! regal aspect ( ,*ri/'s ,son%ip is also illu/rat$ 9 ,mt4 xix4 #bh1 xxv4 #cd 7cf4 ,all51 op4 cit41 p4 lxiv74 7#b7 ,z reg>ds ! artificial /ructure ( ! ,g5ealogy1 we may note t ?is too is *>act]i/ic ( ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/'s mann]4 ,he is fond ( arrang+ 8 mat]ial 9 gr\ps ( ?rees4 ,all5 enum]ates tw5ty?ree in/ances outside cc4 i1 ii 7ib41 p4 lxv74 ,simil>ly ! d\ble sev5 reflects 8! au?or's p5*ant = t sacr$ numb]0 7,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bej1 :o notes f\r o!r examples 7p4 #beg774 7#c7 ,we are unable to illu/rate f ! re/ ( ! ,gospel ! legal use ( 1 b :]e else save 9 ! ,g5ealogy c\ld we expect to f9d x8 ,x is ! unique "* ( ! ,g5ealogy :i* requires t usage4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ! po9t ( view :i* det]m9es ! usage is ! po9t ( view ( cc4 i1 ii z a :ole4 ,z 9 i4 #aag1 s 9 i4 #ah;ii4 #bc1 ! /&po9t is t ( a writ] :o desires to comb9e two div]se beliefs1 ! ,virg9 ,bir? & ! ,messiah%ip ( ,jesus4 7#d7 ,! apologetic motive manife/ 9 ! ,g5ealogy is also *>act]i/ic ( ! ,fir/ ,gospel4 ,n only is ! same motive pres5t 9 e section ( cc4 i1 ii1 b 9 o!r connexions & 9 e "p ( ! ,gospel1 ! desire to def5d & to int]pret is evid5t2 notably ?is is ! case 9 ! /ory ( ! ,baptism1 ! acc\nt ( ! ,gu>d at ! ,tomb & ! ,resurrection n>ratives47#ij7 7#e7 ,! nature ( ! ,g5ealogy leaves little room = ! l+ui/ic te/4 8,yet ev5 "h we h ! *>act]i/ic 9 v4 #af1 & ! objective way t ! writ] speaks ( #8! ,*ri/' 9 v4 #ag is q 9 ! mann] ( ,mt4 xi4 #b0 7,burkitt1 op4 cit41 p4 #bei74 ,tak5 toge!r ^! argum5ts ju/ify u 9 conclud+ t ,mt4 i4 #aag comes f ! ,evangeli/'s p54 #b4 ,! ,passage ,mt4 i4 #ahbe ,x is ?is passage :i* leads u to ! he>t ( ! :ole "q1 = "h1 9 ! angelic message to ,joseph1 ! ,virg9 ,bir? is ass]t$ unmi/akably4 ,we %\ld be ju/ifi$ 9 mak+ use ( ! results we h already obta9$4 ,if ! ,g5ealogy comes f ! h& ( ! ,evangeli/1 & if x is ( ! "* we h alleg$1 !re c be no "q b t ,mt4 i4 #ahbe is also a g5u9e "p ( ! ,gospel4 ,9 view1 h[ev]1 ( ! importance ( ! section1 x may be well n to avail ourselves ( ?is argum5t4 ,s*mi$el's objections to ! passage 7,,eb41 col4 #biei f47 may n unfairly be summ>iz$ z foll[s3 7i7 ,mt4 xiii4 #ee 78,is n ?is ! c>p5t]'s son807 8directly contradicts ! !ory ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?01 7ii7 ,mt4 ii c be und]/ood )\t presuppos+ ! /ory1 7iii7 ,be?lehem is n m5tion$ until ii4 #a1 7iv7 ,mt4 i4 #ahbe is n f ! same h& z ! ,g5ealogy1 :i* 8c\ld nev] h be5 drawn up aft] ,joseph _h ceas$ to be reg>d$ z ! real fa!r ( ,jesus04 ,( ^! argum5ts ! la/ arises out ( ,s*mi$el's view ( ! ,g5ealogy1 :i* is1 t 9 its orig9al =m 9 ! ,gospel x ass]t$ ! physical pat]nity ( ,joseph 7! ,virg9 ,bir? be+ a lat] ins]tion74 ,ne$less to say1 on ?is view1 ,mt4 i4 #ahbe mu/ be reject$4 ,we h already discuss$ ! nature ( ! ,g5ealogy1 & h se5 reason to take a totally diff]5t view ( x4 ,! ,g5ealogy1 z we und]/& x1 furni%es no gr\nd ( objection to i4 #ahbe1 b r ! contr>y4 ,nor d ,s*mi$el's rema9+ objections c>ry ! weight claim$4 7#a7 ,z we h obs]v$ on p4 #ca1 ,mt4 xiii4 #ee simply reflects ! op9ions ( our ,"l's contempor>ies4 ,unless we make ! gratuit\s assumption t ! ,evangeli/ w\ld nev] h reflect$ a view :i* he did n himself %>e1 we are n ju/ifi$ 9 rais+ an objection to i4 #ahbe f ?is p>ticul> passage4 7#b7 ,z reg>ds c4 ii1 x is true t :at is !re relat$ c1 if necess>y1 be und]/ood )\t presum+ ! /ory ( i4 #ahbe4 ,nev]!less1 ! *apt] is q congru\s ) :at is told 9 t passage1 &1 inde$1 agrees bett] ) ! presupposition ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,9 a n>rative writt5 f ! /&po9t ( ,joseph1 we may note t1 :ile ,m>y is spok5 ( no less ?an five times z ! "m ( ,jesus 7ii4 #aa1 #ac1 #ad1 #bj1 #ba71 :]ev] ,joseph is m5tion$1 we h inv>iably ! q neutral expression 8! "y *ild0 7ii4 #ac1 #ad1 #bj1 #ba74 ,also ! quotation1 8,out ( ,egypt did ,i call my son0 7ii4 #ae71 by ! v reason ( its exegetical viol5ce1 is m intelligible if ! ,evangeli/ has already n>rat$ ! /ory ( ! sup]natural bir?4 ,to h real weight1 ,s*mi$el's objection %\ld be able to po9t to m ?an ! fact t c4 ii c be read 8)\t ! presupposition ( ! virg9 bir?04 ,if i4 #ahbe is an int]polation1 we might reasonably expect /atem5ts 9 c4 ii inconsi/5t ) t passage4 ,&1 moreov]1 x w\ld be gratuit\s to say t !y h be5 c>efully suppress$1 9 view ( ^? :i* survive 9 ,lk4 i1 ii to :i* we h call$ att5tion 9 ,*apt] ,,ii4 7#c7 ,t ,be?lehem is n m5tion$ until ii4 #a is true4 ,b z an objection to i4 #ahbe ?is fact w\ld be ( significance1 if ! latt] 7 simply a n>rative ( ! bir? ( ,jesus4 ,b to ass]t ?is is to mi/ake its "*1 :i* is didactic & apologetic4 ,joseph r ?an ,jesus is ! c5tral figure ( ! section2 ! bir? is n ann\nc$ until ! clos+ words4 ,! ref]5ce to ,be?lehem 9 ii4 #a is c]ta9ly abrupt1 b x w\ld h be5 q z abrupt 9 i4 #be4 ,no?+ 9 i4 #ahbe1 if we h reg>d to its "*1 requires a ref]5ce to ,be?lehem )9 ! passage4 ,! onus ( pro( really re/s ^u ^? :o d5y ! g5u95ess ( i4 #ahbe4 ,x may n be )\t advantage1 h[ev]1 to set d[n reasons :i* lead u to believe t ! passage comes f ! ,evangeli/'s h&4 7a7 ,z 9 ! case ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 !re is no textual au?ority = ! omission ( ^! v]ses4 ,:ile we recognize ! free h&l+ :i* ! text ( ! ,gospels may h receiv$ dur+ ! fir/ half ( ! second c5tury1 x does n appe> likely on g5]al gr\nds t ,mt4 i4 #ahbe is an int]polation4 ,! addition to ! text ( a say+ ( ,*ri/1 or ( a comm5t1 or ev5 ( an incid5t drawn f float+ ,*ri/ian tradition1 we c und]/&1 z well z a c]ta9 am\nt ( /yli/ic alt]ation4 8,doctr9al modifications01 h[ev]1 ( su* a :olesale "* z ! pres5t in/ance w\ld be1 if ! passage is a lat] ins]tion ( unkn[n orig91 are q ano!r matt]4 ,t ,mt4 i4 #ahbe %\ld h be5 ins]t$ 9 a ,gospel1 :i*1 on ?is !ory1 taught ! physical pat]nity ( ,joseph1 & %\ld h be5 ins]t$ )\t leav+ traces 9 ! lit]ature ( ! e>ly ,*ri/ian c5turies1 is mo/ improbable4 ,! sole support f e>ly ,*ri/ian lit]ature is ! /atem5t ( ,epiphanius t ! text us$ by ,c]9?us lack$ ! passage4 ,_h we m in=mation ( ?is k9d1 !re w\ld be gr\nd = ! !ory ( int]polation2 z x is1 ! basis is too sl5d] & unc]ta947#ia7 7b7 ,! /&po9t & mode ( treatm5t 9 ,mt4 i4 #ahbe is t ( cc4 i1 ii1 & ( ! ,evangeli/4 ,z 9 ! re/ ( cc4 i1 ii1 x is ! didactic & apologetic int]e/ t is upp]mo/4 ,joseph is ! c5tral figure1 & !re is ! same use ( 8! ma*9]y ( dreams0 z 9 c4 ii1 & 9 ! /ory ( ,pilate's wife 7xxvii4 #ai74 7c7 ,! same may be said ( ! vocabul>y & ! /yle4 ,six words appe> :i* are n f\nd else:]e 9 ! ,gospel17#ib7 b ) ! exception ( "o 771 !y are suffici5tly expla9$ by ! peculi> subjectmatt]4 ,on ! o!r h&1 !re are at lea/ five 8*>act]i/ic ,mat?aean words017#ic7 :ile o!r features di/9ctive ( ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ appe> 9 ! op5+ words ( v]se #bj1 ! ref]5ce to ,joseph z ! 8son ( ,david01 ! phrase 8,behold1 an angel ( ! ,"l01 & especially ! quotation ( v]se #bc ) its introductory =mula4 ,9 view ( ^! argum5ts1 x is n too mu* to apply to ,mt4 i4 #ahbe :at ,burkitt says ( ,mt4 i4 #ah;ii4 #bc4 ,if ! passage 8be n an integral "p ( ! ,fir/ ,gospel1 x mu/ be c\nt$ "o ( ! clev]e/ ( lit]>y adaptations1 a v]dict t is n likely to be pass$ on x by a sane criticism0 7op4 cit41 ii4 #bei74 ,,iv4 ,implications1 ,s\rces1 & ,results 7#a7 ,9 ! e>li] sections ( ?is *apt] an attempt has be5 made to prove t ! ,virg9 ,bir? is an orig9al elem5t 9 ! ,fir/ ,gospel4 ,! sugge/ion t x is a lat] ins]tion f an unkn[n h& breaks d[n on exam9ation1 & our conclusion is t ! doctr9e 0 taught by ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/4 ,!re is no ne$ to raise ! "q :e!r ! doctr9e 0 a lat] elem5t introduc$ by ! ,evangeli/ himself into a "w :i* orig9ally knew no?+ ( x1 = !re is absolutely no evid5ce po9t+ 9 t direction4 ,9 ?is respect ! passage ,mt4 i4 #ahbe diff]s altoge!r f ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 ,aga9/ ! =m] passage no inconsi/5cies1 ei!r 9 ! imm$iate context or 9 ! ,gospel z a :ole1 c be %[n4 ,f "o end to ! o!r ! n>rative is gov]n$ by ! same presuppositions & reflects ! same po9t ( view4 ,:e!r ! ,g5ealogy ev] exi/$ indep5d5tly & 9 ano!r =m is a view = :i* little c be said4 ,!re are no gr\nds = ?is !ory )9 ! ,g5ealogy z x /&s1 & ! textual problem ( ,mt4 i4 #af does n require ! supposition 7see pp4 #aje ff474 ,! possibility _c1 ( c\rse1 be exclud$4 ,if ! ,evangeli/ did make use ( an exi/+ ,g5ealogy1 x 0 probably "o :i* impli$ ! real pat]nity ( ,joseph4 ,9 t case he has completely trans=m$ x1 & mu/ h done ?is ei!r be=e1 or at ! "t :5 he fir/ wrote cc4 i1 ii4 ,b ! exi/5ce ( su* a s\rce is pure speculation4 ,x is m probable t ! ,g5ealogy is ! ,evangeli/'s own composition1 con/ruct$ n = hi/orical b = didactic purposes47#id7 7#b7 ,! "q ( ! implications ( ,mt4 i1 ii is "o ( great int]e/4 ,! n>rative is v f> f be+ an attempt to relate ! /ory ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? = ! fir/ "t4 ,on ! contr>y1 x is probable t ! doctr9e 0 already kn[n to ! read]s ( ! ,fir/ ,gospel1 & t x _h become a subject ( controv]sy4 ,x is f ?is po9t ( view t ! ,evangeli/ writes2 x is = ?is reason t he tells ! /ory f ! /&po9t ( ,joseph4 ,x is n difficult to imag9e ! circum/ances "u :i* ! ,mat?aean n>rative came to be writt54 ,once ! /ory ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? _h begun to circulate1 int]e/ mu/ soon h be5 ar\s$ 9 ! position & attitude ( ,joseph4 ,h[ 7 8 natural fe>s allay$8 ,:at action did he take8 ,:at became ( ! ,davidic desc5t8 ,su* que/ions w\ld press = answ]4 ,outside ! ,*ri/ian community ^! difficulties w\ld inevitably become ! occasion ( sc&al1 z ! case 0 9 lat] times4 ,! ,evangeli/'s n>rative is an attempt to meet ^! difficulties4 ,8 view1 or ! view he reflects1 is t ! fe>s ( ,joseph 7 allay$ by a div9e message4 ,! subsequ5t action ( ,joseph1 also "u angelic direction1 0 to complete ! legal act ( w$lock be=e ! *ild 0 born4 ,! difficulty ( ! ,davidic desc5t is ! problem attack$ 9 ! ,g5ealogy4 ,accord+ to sev]al writ]s x is ! same int]e/ :i* gov]ns ! n>ratives ( c4 ii4 8444 ! ,nativity ,/ory %[s u ! al>m ( ! usurp] ,h]od1 :5 he le>ns t ! legitimate rul] has be5 born )9 8 dom9ions4 ,z ,saul tri$ to kill ,david1 s ,h]od tries to kill ,jesus2 & ,jesus f9ds a refuge 9 ,egypt1 z ,david f\nd a refuge among ! ,phili/9es0 7,burkitt1 op4 cit41 ii4 #bei2 cf4 ,box1 op4 cit41 p4 #ai74 7#c7 ,! "q ( ! s\rce or s\rces f :i* ! ,evangeli/ obta9$ ! n>rative ( ,mt4 i4 #ahbe _c be adequately discuss$ 9 itself & 9 relation to ! ,fir/ ,gospel alone4 ,nev]!less x is wor? :ile to ask h[ f> we c g )9 ^? limits4 ,f ! evid5ce suppli$ by ! ,gospel itself1 we _c say t ! n>rative re/s on ! te/imony ( ,joseph4 ,if ! ,virg9 ,bir? is hi/orically true1 ?is view has mu* probability 9 its fav\r4 ,b to urge su* an orig9 = ! ,mat?aean n>rative1 z "p ( ! pro( = ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 is n p]missible1 s9ce obvi\sly x begs ! "q4 ,_m writ]s ?9k t ! n>rative really does come f ,joseph himself because x reflects 8 /&po9t4 ,among/ o!rs ?is is ! op9ion ( ,bi%op ,gore 7,! ,new ,!ology & ! ,old ,religion1 p4 #abf f471 & ( ,dr4 ,orr 7,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,*ri/1 pp4 #hc ff4747#ie7 ,su* a conclusion travels beyond ! facts ( ! case4 ,t ! n>rative is writt5 f ,joseph's /&po9t is1 ( c\rse1 beyond "q4 ,x may be1 h[ev]1 t ?is fact is suffici5tly acc\nt$ = by ! apologetic "* ( ! n>rative4 ,we d n say "h t ?is is ! case1 b we d say t to claim m is to put an outside int]pretation ^u ! n>rative4 ,ev5tually ?is is1 ( c\rse1 inevitable2 our f9al conclusion reacts ^u our view ( ! e>li] problems2 b 9 ! con/ructive /age ?is is a p]il s$ul\sly to be avoid$4 ,! possibility has to be all[$ t ! n>rative ( ,mt4 i4 #ahbe may be ! result ( an inf]5ce :i* arose )9 ! ,*ri/ian community1 & :i* has clo!d itself 9 an imag9ative & pictorial =m4 ,9 answ] to ! "q1 ,h[ 7 ! fe>s ( ,joseph allay$81 x w\ld be natural to reply1 ,by a div9e message1 & curr5t beliefs w\ld supply an explanation ( ! means & ! me?od by :i* su* a message w\ld be convey$4 ,angelic m$iation w\ld acc\nt = ! "o1 j z revelation by a dream w\ld expla9 ! o!r4 ,! pres5ce ( inf]5ce 9 ! ,synoptic n>ratives is p]haps n s widely recogniz$ z x ought to be4 ,:e!r we ought to be s ready z we (t5 are to suppose ! exi/5ce ( special in=mation1 docum5t>y or oral1 :5 ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ & ,/4 ,luke add details to ! ,m>kan n>rative1 or relate entirely new facts1 is a p]t95t "q4 ,9 _m cases !re is mu* ju/ice 9 ! supposition4 ,9 o!r cases x may easily be t ! new detail or n>rative has be5 %ap$ by inf]5ces play+ ^u difficulties or ambiguities left by e>li] n>ratives & traditions47#if7 ,?is w\ld be a p]fectly natural circum/ance1 ! exi/5ce ( :i* w\ld be m readily ackn[l$g$ if obsolete !ories ( ,inspiration did n cont9ue to exact unlawful tribute4 ,9 ! case ( ! ,fir/ ,gospel ?is use ( inf]5ce is sometimes manife/1 especially 9 ! acc\nts ( ! ,burial & ! ,resurrection ( ,jesus47#ig7 ,:atev] judgem5t may be pass$ ^u ,pr(4 ,kirsopp ,lake's brilliant exam9ation ( ! ,resurrection n>ratives1 !re c be little d\bt b t he has %[n t inf]5ce1 z well z in=mation1 %ap$ ! =mation ( e>ly ,*ri/ian tradition4 ,?is conclusion1 ev5 if accept$1 w\ld n ju/ify u 9 suppos+ t ! n>ratives ( ,mt4 i1 ii are no?+ m ?an ! inf]5tial resolution ( difficulties left by ! /ory ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,b x w\ld suffice to make x probable t1 to an ext5t :i* we may leave undef9$1 inf]5ce did play its "p1 ei!r 9 ! m9d ( ! ,evangeli/ or 9 ! ?\ght ( ! ,*ri/ian community4 ,x is1 inde$1 q possible to admit ?is view1 & yet to hold t beh9d ! n>rative !re is a nucleus ( hi/oric fact4 ,dr4 ,gore1 :o believes t ! /ory goes back to ,joseph1 does n hesitate to say3 8444 to suppose su* angelic appe>ances 444 to be imag9ative outw>d repres5tations ( :at 7 9 fact real b inw>d communications ( ! #8div9e ^w' to human s\ls1 is bo? a possible c\rse & "o :i* is q consi/5t ) accept+ ! n>rative z sub/antially hi/orical & true0 7,diss]tations1 p4 #bb f474 ,canon ,box expresses a simil> view :5 he writes3 8,to u ! n>rative seems to exhibit 9 a degree t c h>dly be p>allel$ else:]e 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t ! *>act]i/ic features ( ,jewi% ,midra% & ,haggada4 ,x sets =? c]ta9 facts & beliefs 9 a fanciful & imag9ative sett+1 specially calculat$ to appeal to ,jews4444 ,! task t confronts ! critical /ud5t is to dis5tangle ! facts & beliefs--! fundam5tal gr\ndfactors on :i* ! n>ration is built--f _! decorative embroid]y0 7op4 cit41 p4 #ab74 ,f :at has be5 said above x w be se5 t1 if we re/rict ourselves to ! ,fir/ ,gospel1 !re are ?ree !ories possible reg>d+ ! s\rce or s\rces employ$ 9 i4 #ahbe4 7i7 ,! n>rative1 v mu* z x /&s1 may h come f ,joseph himself4 7ii7 ,inf]5ce & imag9ation may h play$ ^u a nucleus ( hi/oric fact4 7iii7 ,! n>rative may be a /ory )\t hi/oric f\ndation1 :i* has gr[n up1 z ! result ( inf]5ce & imag9ation1 9 answ] to difficulties aris+ out ( a belief 9 ! ,virg9 ,bir? antec$5tly held4 ,s long z we conf9e ourselves to ! ,gospel1 x is n possible to *oose betwe5 ^! views1 unless we are prep>$ to assume t e>ly ,*ri/ian tradition _c h be5 mi/ak5--an assumption :i* cuts ! knot in/ead ( unty+ x4 ,z we are n ready to make t assumption1 we h to be cont5t to leave ! possibilities op51 & to reg>d ! use ( any "o ( !m 9 ! hi/orical inquiry z illegitimate4 ,9 "p ?is is a disappo9t+ decision1 b x is bett] to feel t we h solid gr\nd b5ea? our feet4 7#d7 ,! positive results to :i* we h be5 l$ are 7i7 t ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ knew (1 & believ$ 91 ! /ory ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 & 7ii7 t ! belief 0 %>$ by 8 read]s1 & _h be5 held suffici5tly long = "s ( its problems to be rais$4 ,unque/ionably1 ?is is an important result1 & its place 9 ! hi/orical problem w fall to be consid]$ lat]4 ,app5dix ,to ,*apt] ,v4 ,! ,textual ,problem ( ,mt4 i4 #af ,i4 ,important & wellkn[n discussions ( ! textual problem ( ,mt4 i4 #af are ^? ( ,s&ay 7,outl9es1 pp4 #aigbjj72 ,p4 ,w4 ,s*mi$el 7,,eb41 col4 #bifa ff472 ,f4 ,c4 ,burkitt 7,evan4 ,da,meph41 ii1 pp4 #behff72 ,w4 ,c4 ,all5 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 #h72 ,g4 ,h4 ,box 7,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,jesus1 pp4 #baeah747ih7 ,= purposes ( ref]5ce1 ! mo/ important facts may be summ>iz$ z foll[s3 7,a7 ,fir/1 we h ! text foll[$ 9 ! ,a ,v4 & ,r ,v41 :i* reads3 1 4 ,?is is ! text ( all extant uncials1 v _m m9uscules1 & _m v]sions 7,s&ay74 8,x is def9itely atte/$ by ,t]tullian1 ,de ,c>ne ,*ri/i1 #bj0 7,burkitt74 7,b7 ,a diff]5t text is atte/$ by ! 8,f]r>0 ,gr\p4 ,x is impli$ by a numb] ( important ,,mss4 ( ! ,old ,lat9 ,v]sion1 by ! ,arm5ian1 & by ! ,curetonian ,syriac4 ,?is text is z foll[s3 4 7,c7 ,?irdly1 we h ! ,s9aitic ,syriac4 ,syr4,s94 reads3 8,jacob begat ,joseph2 ,joseph1 to :om 0 betro!d ,m>y ! ,virg91 begat ,jesus1 :o is call$ ,*ri/10 & implies 4 4 4 4 4 4 7,burkitt1 p4 #bfc74 ,! read+ ( ! ,syr4,cur4 is3 8,jacob begat ,joseph1 him to :om 0 betro!d ,m>y ! ,virg91 %e :o b>e ,jesus ! ,messiah04 ,we may also m5tion "h ! passage f ! ,dialogue ( ,timo?y & ,aquila :i* ,conybe>e claims to be ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af4 ,! alleg$ quotation includes ! text z giv5 "u 7,a7 toge!r ) ! words1 8,& ,joseph begat ,jesus :o is call$ ,*ri/04 ,,ii4 7#a7 ,conybe>e's claim1 m5tion$ above1 has fail$ to w9 g5]al acceptance4 ,x is reject$ by ,s*mi$el17#ii7 :o ju/ly asks1 8,h[ c we suppose t an evangeli/ delib]ately add$ ! second half to ! fir/80 7col4 #bifa74 ,s*mi$el's view is t 9 ! passage cit$ f ! ,dialogue 8x is precisely ! y\nge/ text & ! olde/ :i* h f\nd a place peaceably side by side 9 "o & ! same l9e04 ,f4 ,c4 ,burkitt's !ory probably gives ! be/ explanation4 ,he does n ?9k t 8,& ,joseph begat ,jesus :o is call$ ,*ri/0 is meant to be a "p ( ! quotation ( ,mt4 i4 #af1 b is simply ! inf]5ce ( ! ,jew4 8,! ,jew quotes ! ,g5ealogy & !n draws 8 inf]5ce1 :i* is ( c\rse repudiat$ by ! ,*ri/ian disputant0 7p4 #bfe74 ,accept+ ?is view we may leave ! suppos$ quotation outside our discussion4 ,we may note1 h[ev]1 t1 accord+ to ,burkitt1 ! second ( two o!r quotations ( ,mt4 i4 #af 9 ! ,dialogue is int]e/+ 8z af=d+ an actual pro( t ! phrase #8husb& ( ,m>y' 0 liable to *ange04 7p4 #bfe74 7#b7 ,g4 ,h4 ,box reg>ds ! ,curetonian ,syriac z 8an int]pretation r ?an a translation ( ! ,greek text giv5 u by ! #8,f]r>' ,gr\p0 7p4 #baf74 ,burkitt ?9ks x is 8l an attempt to rewrite ! text ( ,s0 7p4 #bfc71 b z he d]ives ! ,syr4,s94 f ! same ,gr\p17#ajj7 8 op9ion leads to ! same result4 ,directly or indirectly ,syr4,cur4 is a witness = ! text 7,b74 ,z su* its g5]al "* 9 ,mt4 i1 ii ne$s to be tak5 into acc\nt4 ,9 i4 #bj x has 8?y betro!d0 in/ead ( 8?y wife04 ,x omits 8h] husb&0 9 i4 #ai4 ,9 i4 #bd x sub/itutes 8,m>y0 = 8?y wife04 ,9 i4 #be x %>es ) ! ,diatess>on ! read+ 8purely dwell+ ) h]01 & x r5d]s by 8%e call$04 ,x is cle> t its text is dom9at$ by a desire to ass]t unmi/akably ! hi/oric fact ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 7#c7 ,w4 ,c4 ,all5 takes ! ,greek text impli$ 9 ! ,syr4,s94 to be ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af4 ,burkitt1 z we h se51 d]ives x f 7,b74 ,= ! pres5t x is important to consid] ! "* ( ! ,syr4,s94 9 relation to ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,9 i4 #ba1 ) ! ,curetonian1 x adds ! words1 8to !e04 ,9 i4 #be x omits 8knew h] n until01 &1 z 9 ! ,engli% v]sions1 x r5d]s by ! mascul9e2 9 ! same v]se x also has ! read+1 8%e bore him a son04 ,at fir/ sight x w\ld appe> z if ! t5d5cy ( ! ,,ms4 is 9 direct opposition to ! doctr9e ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 x is1 h[ev]1 v que/ionable if ?is is ! case4 ,x is n improbable t 8he knew h] n until0 7omitt$ also by ! ,old ,lat4 k7 is an int]polation 9 ! ,fir/ ,gospel4 ,burkitt ?9ks t 8to !e0 9 i4 #ba appe>$ 9 ! ,evangelion ,da ,meph>re%e1 & t 8him0 is a 8m]e /yli/ic addition0 9 ! ,syr4,s94 ,:5 we add t ?is ,,ms4 includes ,mt4 i4 #ahbe1 & ! p>5!sis1 8to :om 0 betro!d ,m>y ! ,virg901 9 ,mt4 i4 #af1 x becomes impossible to suppose t its text is ( 8,ebionite orig904 ,nor is x any m likely t x repres5ts 8! slip ( a scribe04 ,x is too mu* ( a piece ) ! entire repres5tation ( ! ,,ms41 ( :i* ! mo/ we c say is t x h>d5s ! unique po9t ( view :i* is *>act]i/ic ( ! ,evangeli/ himself4 ,:e!r x repres5ts ! orig9al end+ ( ! ,g5ealogy1 9 a =m indep5d5t (1 & e>li] ?an1 ! ,fir/ ,gospel1 is a po9t :i* may be left op51 ?\gh ! view is n "o :i* o!rwise f9ds support f ! ,g5ealogy1 z x n[ appe>s 9 ! ,gospel47#aja7 ,9 any case1 we ought v probably to reject ! view t ! ,syr4,s94 9 ,mt4 i4 #af ass]ts1 or implies1 ! physical pat]nity ( ,joseph4 ,x cle>ly takes to 8ref] to z well z 0 7,burkitt1 p4 #bfc71 b1 hav+ reg>d to its "* z a :ole1 ! /rong probability is t x int]prets 9 ! same s5se :i* x be>s ?r\gh\t ! e>li] l9ks ( ! ,g5ealogy1 viz4 ( legal p>5tage 7,all51 p4 #h74 ,9 ?is case ! scribe :o produc$ ! ,syr4,s94 has rema9$ tru] to ! m9d & _s ( ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ ?an any o!r e>ly ,*ri/ian writ] we "k4 ,:e!r he has pres]v$ ! lett] is m op5 to "q4 7#d7 ,z reg>ds ! r5d]+ 7,b71 x is suffici5t to say t ! 8,f]r>0 ,gr\p & ! ,old ,lat4 ,,mss41 :ile repres5t+ a text :i* diff]s f 7,a71 agree 9 affirm+ ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,"s ( !m d s ) emphasis 7e4g4 c & b74 ,all ( !m 7except q7 conta9 ! ^w 8,virg901 b1 ) ! exception ( c & b1 ! connexion betwe5 7cui7 & 7desponsata7 is left ambigu\s4 ,,iii4 ,we are left1 !n1 ) ?ree read+s1 = ea* ( :i* priority may be claim$ 7^? we h indicat$ by 7,a7 & 7,b71 & t ( ! ,syr4,s94 7,c774 ,x is highly probable t 7,c7 is d]iv$ f 7,b72 b x may be well to leave ?is an op5 "q1 s z to h all ! possibilities be=e u4 7#a7 ,c we1 !n1 expla9 ! textual facts already notic$1 if we presume ! orig9ality ( 7,a78 ,x is c]ta9ly rem>kable t1 aft] us+ 9 a legal s5se ?r\gh\t ! e>li] l9ks ( ! ,g5ealogy 7,m(fatt1 ,burkitt1 ,we/cott1 ,box1 ,all51 ,b>n>d1 ,a4 ,j4 ,maclean71 ! compil] %\ld des]t ?is practice1 & use ! v]b ( physical p>5tage 77 9 ! la/ l9k ( ! *a94 ,! compil]1 if we may say s1 does n /rike u z ! k9d ( man :o w\ld h felt ! ne$ ( ?is4 ,x seems mu* m likely t1 toge!r ) "s qualify+ clause 9 ref]5ce to ,m>y1 he w\ld h cont9u$ to employ 9 ! same s5se to ! end4 ,?is is conjecture2 b 7on ! pres5t !ory7 x is a conjecture support$ by ! proc$ure ( ! scribes :o h produc$ 7,b74 ,_! object 7on ! pres5t supposition7 w h be5 to remove ! ambiguities ( 7,a7 9 ,mt4 i4 #af1 s z to /ate ! doctr9e m cle>ly4 ,we c\ld und]/&1 !n1 _! objection to 1 & ! *ange to 4 4 ,:at is less easy to und]/& is ! *ange f to 4 ,x is true t is n )\t ambiguity1 z ! comm5t ( ! ,jew 9 ! ,dialogue ( ,timo?y & ,aquila %[s47#ajb7 ,b1 if ?is 0 a gr\nd ( objection1 :y %\ld ! ambiguity be replac$ by "o t is mu* great]8 ,z we h se51 ! con/ruction ( 7,b7 is s+ul>ly loose4 ,x is ?is fact :i* has cle>ly invit$ ! modifications repres5t$ 9 ! ,syr4,cur4 & ! ,old ,lat4 ,,mss41 & p]haps ! ,syr4,s94 itself4 ,! read+ 7,b7 c]ta9ly does n comm5d itself z a doctr9al modification ( 7,a74 ,fur!r1 ! priority ( 7,a7 does n help u to acc\nt = 7,c74 ,if1 z we believe1 7,c7 is d]iv$ f 7,b71 x is ne$less to discuss ! po9t4 ,b ap>t f t !ory ( ! orig9 ( 7,c71 our conclusion rema9s ! same4 ,we h se5 h[ ne> 9 _s ! scribe ( ! ,syr4,s94 0 to ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/4 ,c we suppose1 !n1 t he w\ld h demurr$ to ! words1 8 ,x is v difficult to ?9k s4 ,= ^! reasons1 9 spite ( its /rong atte/ation1 we f9d x impossible to presume ! orig9ality ( 7,a74 7#b7 ,we rea* a simil> conclusion1 if we assume 7,b7 to be ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af4 ,its s+ul> con/ruction does n readily sugge/ ! craftsman%ip ( ! compil] ( ! ,g5ealogy4 ,x is true t we c give a v good acc\nt ( 7,c7 on ! pres5t assumption4 ,we c adopt ,burkitt's sugge/ion1 & reg>d x z a p>aphrase ( 7,b74 ,b c we d]ive 7,a7 f 7,b78 ,x w\ld be reasonable to expla9 z a correction ( by a believ] :o fail$ to und]/& ! ,evangeli/'s po9t ( view1 & :o desir$ a cle>] ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,b c we imag9e a scribe1 or an editor1 motiv$ 9 ?is way1 replac+ 8to :om 0 betro!d ! ,virg9 ,m>y0 by ! words 8! husb& ( ,m>y08 ,! "q answ]s itself1 & =bids ! assumption ( ! priority ( 7,b74 7#c7 ,c we1 !n1 accept ,ar*deacon ,will\ghby ,c4 ,all5's view1 & f9d ! true text 9 7,c787#ajc7 ,x is q possible1 on ?is !ory1 to give a reasonable explanation ( 7,b71 b1 z 9 ! la/ case1 ! difficulty is to acc\nt = 7,a74 ,we c foll[ ! *ange f to 1 b ! sub/itution ( = ! p>5!sis f\nd 9 7,c7 rema9s z be=e an insup]able objection4 ,at ! same "t ,ar*deacon ,all5 has laid d[n a true & a valuable pr9ciple :5 he writes3 8,! e>lie/ ,greek =m 0 gradually alt]$ f a desire to avoid words :i*1 ?\gh 9 ! int5tion ( ! writ] !y express$ legal p>5tage1 n pat]nity1 9 fact1 might be misund]/ood by ?\ghtless read]s0 7p4 #h74 ,our results ?us f> are negative1 b !y are n b>r54 ,we h frankly to admit t no extant read+1 z a :ole1 comm5ds itself z ! orig9al text ( ,mt4 i4 #af4 ,on ! o!r h&1 we c =m a reasonably good idea ( :at t text 0 l4 ,if we are to make any fur!r advance1 we mu/ h rec\rse to conjecture4 ,x is n at all impossible t future discov]ies may enable u to travel ^u firm] gr\nd4 ,su* a discov]y z t ( ! ,syr4,s94 ,,ms4 by ,mrs4 ,lewis & ,mrs4 ,gibson 9 #aijb %[s t ?is hope is n unreasonable4 ,b meantime1 unless we are cont5t to acquiesce 9 a negative conclusion1 we h no *oice b to resort to conjecture4 ,?is does n mean a leap 9 ! d>k4 ,x is 9 e way likely t p>ts ( ! true text are emb$d$ 9 ! extant read+s1 & x is by no means impossible t1 tak5 toge!r1 ^! read+s may conta9 ! :ole4 ,x may be1 t is to say1 t ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af has f\nd its grave 9 ! read+s we possess4 ,:e!r its resurrection c be accompli%$ is ano!r "q4 ,b1 9 view ( ! g5]al "* ( ! true text1 z indicat$ above1 ! attempt ne$ n be =eclos$4 ,obvi\sly1 our results w be t5tative1 b !y %\ld be some?+ m ?an dubi\s & unc]ta9 9 ! extreme4 ,,iv4 ,9 attempt+ to recon/ruct ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af1 we may v5ture ! foll[+ sugge/ions3 7#a7 ,we h v good gr\nd = reg>d+ 4 4 4 z "p ( ! true text 7?\gh :e!r we read ! nom4 or ! acc4 dep5ds ^u :e!r we pref] or 74 ,n only does ?is expression occur bo? 9 7,a7 & 7,b71 b x is also "o :i* we %\ld naturally expect ! ,g5ealogy to conta94 ,a ,g5ealogy con/ruct$ to %[ ! ,messiah%ip ( ,jesus ends fitt+ly ) ! words 8:o is call$ ,*ri/04 7#b7 ,x is v probable inde$ t ! orig9al text includ$ & n 4 7i7 ,on ?is view1 we c readily und]/& ! misconceptions t w\ld arise1 & give a reasonable explanation ( ! textual v>iants :i* exi/4 7ii7 ,z indicat+ legal p>5tage1 ! expression is n "o f :i* we ?9k ! compil] w\ld be likely to %r9k4 7iii7 ,x is n easy to suppose t ^? :o h employ$ 9 ! read+ 7,b7 w\ld h us$ ?is =m if !y _h n f\nd x already 9 ! text4 7#c7 ,x is probable t ,mt4 i4 #af conta9$ a ref]5ce to ,m>y4 ,?is view is support$ by ! e>li] ref]5ces to wom5 9 ! ,g5ealogy4 8,x is inconceivable t ! ,evangeli/1 :o ?\ght x s]v$ ! purpose t he _h 9 h& to m5tion ,?am>1 ,rahab1 ,ru?1 & ,uriah's wife1 %\ld leave ! /ep conta9+ ,joseph b>e0 7,burkitt1 p4 #bfd74 7#d7 ,( ! two qualify+ clauses op5 to u1 is m likely to be ! old]4 7i7 ,x is an expression su* z we c easily suppose ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ w\ld use 7cf4 ,mt4 i4 #ai74 7ii7 ,x safegu>ds ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 !re w\ld be no po9t 9 describ+ ,joseph z 8! husb& ( ,m>y0 unless t expression bore "s special mean+4 7iii7 ,9 ! ,dialogue ( ,timo?y & ,aquila we possess 8actual pro(0 t ! phrase 0 8liable to *ange0 7,burkitt1 quot$ above1 p4 #ajf74 7iv7 ,! expression c\ld easily be misund]/ood at a "t :5 ! int]e/ 9 ! ,davidic ,son%ip 0 no long] p>am\nt4 7v7 ,9 t case ! phrase 4 4 4 w\ld comm5d itself z a doctr9al modification4 7vi7 ,x w\ld be altoge!r less easy to say ?is ( 4 7#e7 ,x is probable t ,joseph 0 m5tion$ twice4 7i7 ,?is conclusion foll[s ( necessity1 if1 z we h argu$1 & n is orig9al4 7ii7 ,x is impli$ 9 ! e>li] /eps ( ! ,g5ealogy4 7iii7 ,x is atte/$ by ! ,syr4,s941 & ! omission ( ! second 9 7,a7 & 7,b7 is n difficult to expla9 7see lat]74 7#f7 ,x is on ! :ole m probable t 4 foll[$ ! fir/ & n ! second4 7i7 ,?is view is support$ by ! compil]'s me?od4 8,! practice ( ! writ] is to int]pose no words betwe5 ! "n & ! v]b 0 7,burkitt1 p4 #bfc74 7ii7 ,?is ord] enables u to give an explanation ( ! fact t bo? 7,a7 & 7,b7 omit ! second 7see bel[74 ,ga!r+ toge!r ^! sev]al results1 we obta9 ! foll[+ z ! recon/ruct$ text ( ,mt4 i4 #af3 2 4 ,9 addition to ! reasons already giv51 we may also urge ! fact t1 ) ?is text posit$1 we c give ! simple/ & lea/ involv$ acc\nt ( ! orig9 ( 7,a71 7,b71 7,c74 7#a7 ,! scribes :o h produc$ 7,a7 sub/itut$ ! passive 77 = ! active 774 ,?is caus$ ! second to drop out1 its place be+ tak5 by 8f :om0 7fem474 4 4 foll[$ z a grammatical *ange4 7#b7 ,all t ! orig9ators ( 7,b7 _h to d 0 to sub/itute 4 4 4 = 41 & !n1 by omitt+ 1 to leave 4 z ! subject ( 4 7#c7 ,we may expla9 7,c71 ) ,burkitt1 z d]iv$ f 7,b74 ,! ,syriac translator 0 n satisfi$ ) ! loose con/ruction ( 7,b74 ,tak+ to ref] to z well z to 1 he made ! connexion cle>] by ins]t+ a second z ! subject ( ! v]b4 ,9 tak+ ?is la/ /ep1 he ei!r return$ unconsci\sly to "p at lea/ ( ! true read+1 or _h access to good ,greek ,,mss4 :i* we no long] possess4 ,x is ( int]e/ to comp>e ! read+ we h sugge/$ z ! orig9al text ( ,mt4 i4 #af ) o!rs :i* h be5 put =w>d4 ,9 discuss+ "o ( ^! possibilities1 ,s&ay writes 7,outl9es1 p4 #bjj73 8,if we may suppose t ! orig9al text ran 1 t w\ld p]haps acc\nt = ! two div]g5t l9es ( v>iants bett] ?an any o!r04 ,9 spite ( its advantages1 ?is text suff]s "u two disadvantages f :i* ! "o we h pref]r$ is free4 7i7 ,n only is us$ 9 a diff]5t s5se f t :i* x has 9 ! re/ ( ! ,g5ealogy1 b x is ! v same =m ( ! v]b :i* is employ$ diff]5tly4 7ii7 ,! read+ is too smoo? & cle>4 ,ap>t f ! phrase 4 no loophole is left = misund]/&+1 & s no suffici5t />t+po9t is provid$ = ! subsequ5t textual v>iants4 ,burkitt has in/anc$ ! read+ we h pref]r$4 ,9 reject+ ! view t ! ,syr4,s94 repres5ts ! true text1 he writes 7p4 #bfd73 8,_h we su* a text z 4 4 4 ! case w\ld h be5 diff]5t04 ,9 ref]5ce to ?is sugge/ion1 h[ev]1 ,burkitt says1 7i7 ! evid5ce does n po9t t way1 7ii7 9 t case ! ,syr4,s94 w\ld be fur!r f ! orig9al ?an t ( ,b & ,t]tullian1 7iii7 ,syr4,s94 & k w\ld 8agree 9 a common corruption01 & we %\ld h to speak ( ! 8,we/]n0 text 9 ! s+ul> numb]4 ,! la/ po9t raises a l>ge "q :i* x is impossible to consid] "h4 ,z reg>ds ! second objection1 :ile 9 "s respects 7,c7 w\ld be fur!r f ! orig9al ?an 7,a71 9 o!r & m important respects x w\ld be appreciably ne>]4 ,9 its use ( x w\ld be ne>] to ! orig9al ?an any read+ we possess4 ,z reg>ds ! fir/ objection1 we h frankly to agree t ! textual evid5ce does n po9t t way4 ,we _c po9t to a %r$ ( ,,ms4 evid5ce to support ! conjectur$ read+4 ,a g5]ation ago ?is w\ld h be5 consid]$ a fatal objection4 ,b1 9 view ( ! fre$om ) :i* ! text ( ! ,gospels 0 h&l$ dur+ ! fir/ half ( ! second c5tury1 & :i* ! textual v>iants illu/rate1 ?is objection c no long] be reg>d$ z insup]able4 ,s long z we re/rict ourselves to ! atte/$ read+s1 ! problem rema9s insoluble4 ,if1 !n1 we c rea* a reasonable conclusion on o!r l9es1 we are free to d s4 ,d\btless1 9 default ( atte/ation1 we c describe our results z no m ?an t5tative4 ,b we h no desire to claim m4 ,z ! problem /&s at pres5t1 ! te/ to be appli$ is1 ,:at read+1 conjectur$ or atte/$1 furni%es ! be/ explanation ( ! facts at our disposal81 x be+ rememb]$ t ^! facts include1 n only ! textual v>iants1 b also ! unique "* ( ! ,g5ealogy itself4 ,x may be1 z we h sugge/$1 t new discov]ies await u4 ,b1 unless we h entirely misread ! evid5ce we already possess1 no discov]y is to be expect$ :i* w completely trans=m ! textual problem4 ,9 conclusion1 we may /ate c]ta9 propositions 7ap>t f ! "q ( ! exact word+ ( ! true text ( ,mt4 i4 #af7 :i* h 9 _! fav\r a high degree ( probability4 7#a7 ,! read+s :i* we h call$ 7,a7 & 7,b7 are indep5d5t attempts to alt] ! orig9al text 9 ! int]e/s ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 t is1 !y are 8doctr9al modifications04 7#b7 ,! read+ ( ! ,s9aitic ,syriac is n unfav\rable to ! doctr9e4 ,x %\ld no long] be spok5 ( z 8! ecc5tric read+01 nor %\ld we describe ! translator z influ5c$ by 8h]etical t5d5cies04 7#c7 ,! orig9al text ( ,mt4 i4 #af impli$ ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 b x 0 /at$ f ! unique po9t ( view reflect$ 9 ! ,g5ealogy itself4 7#d7 ,! text 0 liable to misund]/&+1 & ! hi/ory ( ! textual v>iants is ! hi/ory ( t misund]/&+4 ,,*apt] ,,vi4 ,,! ,,hi/orical ,,"q3 ,,its ,,limits ,,& ,,be>+s ,our purpose 9 ! f9al *apt] is to coord9ate ! results we h rea*$1 & to discuss _! be>+ ^u ! hi/orical "q ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,we h also to det]m9e h[ f> /rictly hi/orical consid]ations c take u2 to ask1 t is to say1 )9 :at limits ! problem is hi/orical at all4 ,x w be well fir/ to summ>ize ! conclusions to :i* we h already come4 7#a7 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? 0 n ! subject ( ,apo/olic prea*+1 & app>5tly 0 unkn[n to ,/4 ,paul & ,/4 ,m>k4 7#b7 ,/4 ,luke became acqua9t$ ) ! tradition = ! fir/ "t1 ei!r :5 he 0 9 process ( writ+ 8 ,gospel1 or imm$iately aft]w>ds4 7#c7 ,! ,fir/ ,gospel presupposes ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 :i* _h probably be5 kn[n to its read]s = "s "t1 suffici5tly long = problems to be />t$ & = difficulties to be rais$4 7#d7 ,no satisfactory pro( is =?com+ to %[ t ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ def9itely reject$ ! tradition4 ,! mo/ we c say is t 8 doctr9al sympa?ies lay 9 ano!r direction4 ,on ! positive side our mo/ important result is t we c prove f ! ,new ,te/am5t itself t belief 9 ! ,virg9 ,bir? exi/$ 9 influ5tial ,*ri/ian communities at ! "t :5 ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels 7 writt54 ,we h no fur!r ne$1 !re=e1 to consid] !ories :i* assign ! belief to a lat] age1 & :i*1 by v>i\s int]polationhypo!ses1 deprive ! doctr9e ( ,new ,te/am5t support4 ,^? :o h /at$ su* !ories h r5d]$ s]vice 9 t !y h explor$ an alt]native pa?4 ,on ! view we h pref]r$ ?is pa? proves to be a culdesac4 ,we h !re=e1 to recognize t1 :e!r we accept or reject ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 we mu/ d ?is 9 full ackn[l$gem5t ( ! fact t among e>ly witnesses to ! belief are two out/&+ ,new ,te/am5t ,writ+s4 ,c we g fur!r ?an ?is8 ,to d s we mu/ consid] ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels1 9 respect ( _! mutual relations & ( :at !y conjo9tly imply4 ,i4 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? 9 ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels ,9 consid]+ ! relation 9 :i* ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,gospels /& to ea* o!r & to ! ,virg9 ,bir? ?ree que/ions are ( ! greate/ int]e/ & importance4 7#a7 ,to :at ext5t d ! two ,gospels imply a common tradition & belief8 7#b7 ,h[ f> back c we trace ?is tradition8 7#c7 ,9 :at relation does ! public tradition /& to ! !ory ( an e>li] tradition ( a private & re/rict$ "*8 7#a7 ,9 answ] to ! fir/ "q1 our view is t ea* ,gospel1 9 a diff]5t way1 is a witness to ! same tradition4 ,too mu* has frequ5tly be5 made ( ! !ory t 9 ,mt4 & ,lk4 we h two indep5d5t acc\nts ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition4 ,x may s]i\sly be que/ion$ if ?is !ory is true4 ,mt4 i4 #ahbe is misund]/ood if x is expla9$ z a ,virg9 ,bir? tradition4 ,l ! re/ ( cc4 i1 ii1 its "* is ,midra%ic1 & x is writt5 f an apologetic /&po9t4 ,x w\ld !re=e be mu* tru] to say t x implies ! exi/5ce ( a ,virg9 ,bir? tradition z kn[n to ! read]s ( ! ,gospel4 ,:at =m t tradition took we are ( c\rse unable to say4 ,x is possible t x 0 simil> to ! tradition z x appe>s 9 ,lk4 ,on ! o!r h&1 x may be t ev5 9 ,lk4 ! =m 9 :i* ! tradition is pres5t$ owes some?+ to ! ,evangeli/'s craftsman%ip4 ,if ?is is s1 x w\ld seem t ! n>ratives ( bo? writ]s po9t back to a simpl] tradition or belief1 f :i*1 9 diff]5t ways1 !y came to assume _! pres5t =m4 ,:at is ( *ief importance is ! view t 9 bo? ,gospels we h1 n s mu* two indep5d5t n>ratives ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 z r two indep5d5t witnesses to :at orig9ally 0 "o & ! same tradition4 ,x _c escape our notice t1 9 spite ( _! obvi\s diff]5ces1 ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 & ,mt4 i4 #ahbe conta9 :at is sub/antially ! same /atem5t1 a /atem5t :i* 9 ea* passage is c5tral4 ,9 ,mt4 i4 #bj we read3 8,t :i* is conceiv$ 7 444 7 9 h] is ( ! ,holy ,_s02 & 9 ,lk4 i4 #ce1 aft] ! ref]5ce to ! ,holy ,_s1 we read3 8,t :i* is to be born 7 7 %all be call$ holy1 ! ,son ( ,god04 ,!re is mu* to be said = ! view t bo? expressions po9t back to a common orig9al1 to a primitive belief t ,jesus 0 8born ( ! ,holy ,_s0 7cf4 ,h>nack1 ,date ( ,acts1 c41 pp4 #adb ff474 ,if !n we are unable to accept ! view t 9 ,mt4 & ,lk4 we h two indep5d5t acc\nts ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 we may well ask if ! loss is a real "o4 ,x is probably no?+ ( ! k9d4 ,!re 0 inde$ a c]ta9 advantage 9 feel+ able to po9t to two div]se traditions :i* conv]g$ ^u "o fact4 ,nev]!less1 ! argum5t always _h a c]ta9 weakness4 ,we _h to acc\nt = ! two diff]5t traditions1 & ! explanation 0 a !ory we c\ld nev] prove4 ,x may be t ,/4 ,luke's /ory goes back = its au?ority to ,m>y2 x is v d\btful if ,/4 8,mat!w's0 has any hi/orical connexion ) ,joseph2 b 9 ei!r case nei!r assumption is ju/ifiable 9 an hi/orical inquiry4 ,x mu/ be all[$1 we ?9k1 t our view has s\nd] advantages4 ,in/ead ( claim+ validity = two div]se traditions1 we c po9t to two v diff]5t n>ratives1 :i* arise out ( ! same belief & are indep5d5t witnesses to its exi/5ce 9 ! primitive ,*ri/ian community4 7#b7 ,to :at po9t1 !n1 c we trace ?is tradition8 ,we h argu$ t ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition fir/ began to ga9 curr5cy 9 ! circles 9 :i* ,/4 ,luke mov$ at ! "t :5 ! ,?ird ,gospel 0 be+ writt54 ,we h also se5 t ! tradition 0 already kn[n to ! read]s ( ! ,fir/ ,gospel4 ,if ^! conclusions are valid1 x is evid5t t ! relative ord] 9 :i* ! two ,gospels 7 writt5 w det]m9e ! f>!/ po9t to :i* we c trace ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition z publicly kn[n4 ,:at1 !n1 is ! ord] ( composition 9 ! case ( ,mt4 & ,lk48 ,we may frankly admit t if priority mu/ be assign$ to ,mt41 x becomes difficult to und]/& h[ ,/4 ,luke c\ld h no k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? at ! "t :5 he fir/ took up 8 p54 ,=1 on ?is view1 we ask1 ,mu/ n ! tradition h already rea*$ ! circles 9 :i* he 0 mov+ at ! "t8 ,x w\ld c]ta9ly be m fav\rable to our !ory if we c\ld assign priority to ! ,?ird ,gospel4 ,9 ?is case we %\ld h a v simple acc\nt to give ( ! hi/ory ( ! tradition4 ,we %\ld discov] x em]g+ = ! fir/ "t 9 ,/4 ,luke's ,gospel1 & we %\ld h a ready explanation 79 ! fact ( ! int]val betwe5 ! two works7 = ! apologetic note 9 ! lat] ,gospel4 ,b ! priority ( ! two ,gospels is n a "q to be decid$ simply by ! attitude :i* ! ,evangeli/s display t[>ds ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,mt4 & ,lk4 mu/ be comp>$ ?r\gh\t4 ,:5 ?is is done !re d n appe> to be suffici5t gr\nds = giv+ a vote 9 ei!r direction 7cf4 ,/anton1 ,,ghd41 ii1 p4 #cfh74 ,all t we c say is t ! two ,gospels are indep5d5t works1 & mu/ h be5 writt5 ab\t ! same "t4 ,if !re 0 an int]val1 x _c h be5 great1 = !re are no suffici5t signs t ei!r writ] 0 acqua9t$ ) ! "w ( ! o!r4 ,x is especially difficult to ?9k t ,/4 ,luke w\ld h neglect$ ! ,fir/ ,gospel1 if x _h be5 accessible to him 7cf4 ,lk4 i4 #ad74 ,if1 h[ev]1 we accept1 z a work+ hypo!sis1 ! view t ! two ,gospels 7 writt5 indep5d5tly ( ea* o!r1 & m or less simultane\sly17#ajd7 x w /ill foll[ t ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition 0 already kn[n 9 at lea/ "o influ5tial primitive ,*ri/ian community 7t to :i* ! ,fir/ ,gospel 0 address$7 :ile x 0 unkn[n to ,/4 ,luke47#aje7 ,is ?is a fatal objection1 or does su* a position repres5t :at may well h be5 ! actual situation8 ,we d n ?9k t ! difficulty is too great4 ,! tides by :i* traditions fl[ 9 diff]5t places are n simultane\s2 !y diff] 9 "t1 9 height1 & 9 volume4 ,no practice c\ld be m mis*iev\s ?an ! habit ( dat+ ! relative spread ( e>ly beliefs simply by ! dates ( contempor>y docum5ts4 ,reg>d mu/ be paid to local conditions4 ,9 life z 9 nature !re are v>iations ( curr5t & ( coa/ =mation4 ,!re are limits1 ( c\rse1 )9 :i* ?is caveat holds good2 b1 provid$ ! int]val ( "t is n too great1 ! view t ,/4 ,luke c\ld beg9 to write 9 ignorance ( a tradition already kn[n else:]e is n selfcondemn$4 ,aft] all1 ,/4 ,luke himself _h access to mu* tradition :i* presumably 0 unkn[n to ! ,fir/ ,evangeli/ 7witness ,/4 ,luke's special matt]74 ,conc]n+ ! l5g? ( "t we c all[ ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition to h be5 already kn[n else:]e1 :5 ,/4 ,luke began to write1 !re is room = diff]5ce ( op9ion4 ,if1 z we h cont5d$1 he became acqua9t$ ) x 9 ! process ( writ+ or imm$iately aft]w>ds1 ! p]iod c sc>cely h be5 consid]able4 ,p]haps x ought to be e/imat$ 9 mon?s r ?an 9 ye>s1 b to say m w\ld be idle speculation4 ,! f>!/ po9t !re=e to :i* we c trace ! exi/5ce ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? z a public tradition is "s little "t previ\s to ! composition ( ! ,?ird ,gospel4 7#c7 ,x is a p]fectly fair assumption to make t ! public tradition mu/ h _h a private vogue be=e1 & p]haps = "s "t be=e1 x became public prop]ty4 ,?is view becomes especially probable 9 ! light ( :at we h j se51 viz4 t ! spread ( ! public tradition among ! primitive ,*ri/ian communities cov]$ an appreciable p]iod ( "t4 ,! "q ( ! hi/orical tru? ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? is precisely ! "q ( h[ f> back ! private tradition c be trac$2 :e!r x c g back to ,m>y ! "m ( ,jesus1 & :e!r satisfactory reasons c be giv5 = a sil5ce :i* ext5ds beyond ! p]iod cov]$ by ! ,paul9e ,epi/les & ! ,second ,gospel1 & is brok5 only at la/ 9 ! int]val :i* %ortly prec$$ ! composition ( ! ,gospels ( ,mt4 & ,lk4 ,9 ?is lies ! real hi/orical problem4 ,c ! !ory ( a private au?oritative tradition be v9dicat$8 ,!re are sev]al que/ions :i* be> ^u ?is problem4 ,!y are3 7#a7 ,! "q ( ! date ( ! ,fir/ & ( ! ,?ird ,gospels2 7#b7 ,! ext5t to :i* ! cr$ibility ( ! ,gospels p]mits ( ! possibility ( error2 7#c7 ,! ,alt]native ,!ories ( ! orig9 ( belief 9 ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 7#d7 ,! !ological aspect ( ! tradition4 ,,ii4 ,! ,date ( ! ,gospels 9 ,relation to ! ,virg9 ,bir? ,tradition ,! relation 9 :i* ! "q ( ! ,date ( ! ,gospels /&s to ! results rea*$ is suffici5tly cle>4 ,if we c\ld fix ! "t :5 ,mt4 & ,lk4 7 writt51 we c\ld det]m9e )9 comp>atively n>r[ limits :5 ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition fir/ ga9$ curr5cy4 ,a conclusion ^u ?is po9t w\ld mat]ially affect our e/imate ( ! hi/orical value ( ! tradition4 ,until ?is /age we h delib]ately refra9$ f assign+ dates to ! ,gospels4 ,! only ?+s we h assum$ are ! priority ( ,mk4 & ! practically contemporane\s orig9 ( ,mt4 & ,lk4 ,our ju/ification = ?is c\rse lies 9 ! great v>iety ( op9ion :i* exi/s on ! "q ( date1 & h5ce ! desirability ( keep+ cle>1 z long z we c1 f consid]ations :i* mu/ vitally affect ! results secur$4 ,un=tunately1 z we h said1 no sort ( unanimity exi/s ^u ! "q ( ! date ( ! ,gospels4 ,a glance at ! extremely useful table :i* ,dr4 ,m(fatt pr9ts on page #bac ( 8 ,introduction makes ?is cle>4 ,at fir/ sight ! position w\ld appe> *aotic1 & we might well %r9k f attempt+ to connect our results ) specific dates4 ,x is impossible1 moreov]1 9 a "w l ! pres5t1 to discuss ! "q 9 detail4 ,su* a problem ought to be consid]$ indep5d5tly1 & ) reg>d to all ! facts ( ! case4 ,x w\ld seem be/ !re=e to ask :at ! consequ5ces are1 if we incl9e to any "o ( c]ta9 repres5tative dates4 ,we are at lib]ty1 ( c\rse1 to indicate our p]sonal pref]5ces1 b1 = ! reasons /at$1 we %all h to agree to a measure ( unc]ta9ty4 ,?is is disappo9t+1 b ! responsibility mu/ lie at ! "r door1 & t door is ! pres5t failure ( ,biblical ,s*ol>%ip to arrive at a cons5sus ( op9ion on ! "q ( ! date ( ! ,gospels4 ,p]fect agreem5t !re w nev] be1 b until !re is sub/antial agreem5t e hi/orical inve/igation into que/ions ( ,new ,te/am5t orig9s mu/ prove incomplete4 ,! problem ( ! date ( ! ,gospels is n1 h[ev]1 s *aotic z might at fir/ sight appe>4 ,!re is a /rongly m>k$ disposition to rec$e f ! extremes on bo? sides1 & !re is a v consid]able agreem5t t ! p]iod f #fj to #ajj ,a4,d4 cov]s ! "t dur+ :i* ! ,synoptic ,gospels 7 writt54 ,!re is also a cons5sus ( op9ion t ! ,second ,gospel _c h be5 writt5 lat] ?an ab\t #gj ,a4,d4 ,e decade1 & almo/ e ye>1 h[ev]1 betwe5 #fj & #ajj ,a4,d4 f9ds advocates = ! composition ( ,mt4 & ,lk4 ,!re are1 nev]!less1 ?ree p]iods :i* f9d special fav\r4 ,^! may be briefly m5tion$4 7#a7 ,! fir/ p]iod we may note is ! clos+ ye>s ( ! fir/ c5tury4 ,= ?is view ! ma9 argum5ts are 7i7 ! suppos$ dep5d5ce ( ,/4 ,luke ^u ,josephus1 & 7ii7 ! ecclesia/ical tone ( c]ta9 passages 9 ! ,fir/ ,gospel4 7#b7 ,a second view br+s bo? ,mk4 & ,lk4 )9 ,/4 ,paul's lifetime1 & dates ,mt4 %ortly aft] ! fall ( ,j]usalem4 ,?is is ! op9ion ( ,h>nack 7,date ( ,acts & ( ! ,synoptic ,gospels74 ,x has n won a l>ge foll[+1 ei!r 9 ,g]many or 9 ?is c\ntry1 b x is probably ne>] ! tru? ?an ! previ\s view4 7#c7 ,a ?ird p]iod is ! "t ab\t #hj ,a4,d4 ,"o advantage ( ?is view1 z ,dr4 ,plumm] c&idly admits 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,lk41 p4 xxxi71 is ! fact t x avoids ! difficulties :i* beset ! o!r two4 ,! ma9 argum5t :i* comm5ds x to ,dr4 ,plumm] is t 8su* a date all[s suffici5t "t = ! #8_m' to #8draw up n>ratives' respect+ ! acts & say+s ( ,*ri/04 ,x rema9s = u to indicate :at be>+ ^! repres5tative dates h ^u ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition 9 ! light ( our results4 ,x is cle> t if we mu/ date ,mt4 & ,lk4 9 ! clos+ ye>s ( ! fir/ c5tury1 ! hi/orical value ( ! tradition is r$uc$ to a m9imum4 ,=1 if t tradition is hi/orical1 we are compell$ to assume t = a p]iod ( ab\t n9ety ye>s ! /ory 0 jeal\sly gu>d$1 fir/ by ,m>y h]self & !n by a *os5 few to :om x 0 reveal$4 ,b :o w believe ?is8 ,if we accept ,h>nack's dates1 !n ! p]iod ab\t #fj ,a4,d4 w be ! "t :5 belief 9 ! ,virg9 ,bir? fir/ began to spread4 ,:ile1 if we pref] ! ?ird alt]native1 we mu/ fix ^u a "t "s fifte5 to tw5ty ye>s lat]1 i4e4 ! p]iod f #ge to #hj ,a4,d4 ,x is evid5t t ! case = ! hi/orical tru? ( ! tradition is at its /ronge/ if ,h>nack's dates c be accept$4 ,look+ at ! "q f ! sole /&po9t ( ! "tint]val1 we d n believe t ! ?ird p]iod is impossibly late4 ,h[ev] we look at ! "q1 we are unable to br+ ! public tradition )9 ! lifetime ( ,m>y4 ,b1 provid$ we are n compell$ to date ! ,gospels at ! close ( ! c5tury1 !re d n seem to be insup]able difficulties--s f> z ! "telem5t is conc]n$--aga9/ connect+ t public tradition ) ^? :o 7 ne> h] p]son4 ,x w be se5 t ! "q ( ! date ( ! ,gospels is an important "o4 ,! utmo/1 h[ev]1 we are able to glean 9 ?is field is a some:at negative advantage4 ,our conclusion is t no insup]able difficulty /&s 9 ! way4 ,obvi\sly1 ! onus ( pro( yet rema9s4 ,! long p]iod ( sil5ce mu/ be expla9$1 & ! tru? ( ! tradition v9dicat$4 ,,iii4 ,! ,relation ( ! ,"q ( ! ,hi/orical ,value ( ! ,gospels to ! ,problem ,we mu/ next briefly consid] ! "q ( ! hi/orical value ( ! ,synoptic ,gospels1 s f> z x be>s ^u our imm$iate problem4 ,x is "r to urge t our fir/ aim mu/ be to exam9e ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition )\t bias or presuppositions ( any k9d4 ,b x is no less true to say t our e/imate ( ! cr$ibility ( ! ,gospels z a :ole mu/ react ^u t task 9 ! end4 ,:e!r ! ,synoptic ,gospels are b a tissue ( leg5ds1 or :e!r !y fulfil a good /&>d ( hi/orical value1 are que/ions :i* _c be ignor$4 ,= ^? :o claim infallibility1 z well z inspiration1 = ! ,evangeli/s1 ! problem is at an end3 ,lk4 & ,mt4 tea* ! ,virg9 ,bir?2 ! doctr9e is !re=e true6 ,b = mo/ p today t %ort & easy pa? is impossible4 ,! ,gospels d n claim infallibility1 & _! cont5ts d n bespeak x4 ,!re c be no "q t a tra9$ obs]v] ( today w\ld h describ$ _m incid5ts 9 ! life ( ,jesus v diff]5tly4 ,!re are p>ables :i* h be5 unconsci\sly h>d5$ into miracles1 say+s ( ,jesus :i* h be5 misund]/ood1 /ories :i* h gr[n amid/ ! exig5cies ( controv]sy & 9 ! process ( evangelization4 ,^! ?+s are no m ?an we might expect4 ,!y 7 inevitable2 unless we cr$it ! ,evangeli/s ) a me*anical pres]vation f error :i* f9ds no ju/ification beyond our own preconceiv$ notions ( :at a ,gospel ought to be4 ,nor d su* admissions rob ! ,gospels ( real wor?4 ,on ! contr>y1 !y ?r[ _! hi/orical value into /rong relief4 ,= to p]ceive t ! natural infirmities ( ! human m9d h left _! trace ^u ! ,evangelic ,records is only to prep>e ! way = u to recognize h[ close 9 ! ma9 ! ,evangeli/s h kept to ! real facts ( hi/ory4 ,! significant fact is n t !y h made mi/akes1 b t !y h made s few t are ( real importance4 ,we h only to comp>e _! "w ) ! ,apocryphal ,gospels to see1 9 ! case ( ! ,evangeli/s1 :at re/ra9t ! solid facts ( hi/ory ex]cis$ ^u ! natural t5d5cies ( _! m9ds4 ,jli*]1 :o does n hesitate to say t :at ! ,evangeli/s relate is 8a mixture ( tru? & poetry0 7,,int41 ,eng4 ,tr41 p4 #cfh71 nev]!less decl>es t 8! ,synoptic ,gospels are ( priceless value1 n only z books ( religi\s edification1 b also z au?orities = ! hi/ory ( ,jesus0 7ib41 p4 #cga74 8,! true m]it ( ! ,synopti/s01 he says1 8is t1 9 spite ( ! poetic t\*es !y employ1 !y did n repa9t1 b only h&$ on1 ! ,*ri/ ( hi/ory0' ,:at be>+ has su* an e/imate ( ! ,gospels ^u ! hi/oric tru? ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition8 ,obvi\sly1 x does n save u f ! tr\ble ( te/+ ! tradition by su* te/s z we c apply4 ,t ! tradition has f\nd a place 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t is n 9 itself a c]tificate ( tru?4 ,! ,evangeli/s c]ta9ly believ$ ! tradition2 !y 7 intellectually hone/2 b !y may h be5 mi/ak54 ,! ultimate "q is ! tru? ( ! au?orities ^u :i* !y re/$ & ( ! belief !y reflect4 ,_! importance z writ]s is t !y c\nt]sign ! tradition ) ! high au?ority !y possess4 ,b1 h[ev] high _! au?ority1 x is n t ( infallibility4 ,! tru? ( ! ,gospels is ! tru? ( _! s\rces4 ,z reg>ds ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 ! s\rces _c be trac$ back to ,mk4 & ,q1 ! two prim>y ,synoptic docum5ts1 b to ! lat] tradition ( ! ,*ri/ian ,*ur*1 at ! "t :5 ,mt4 & ,lk4 7 writt54 ,! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,evangeli/s h endors$ t tradition2 ! problem ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? is :e!r !y 7 "r4 ,no?+ t we h said 9 ?is section mu/ be con/ru$ to prejudge t "q4 ,t ! ,evangeli/s h accept$ ! tradition1 = u unque/ionably gives x a high] value2 b x is n a det]m9ative value4 ,! ma9 result is to make yet cle>] ! f9al issue1 :i* is1 we repeat1 :e!r ! /ory :i* ! ,evangeli/s endorse c be trac$ back to an au?oritative s\rce4 ,has x ! sanction ( ,m>y or ( ^? :o may be suppos$ to h kn[n h] m9d8 ,,iv4 ,! ,"q ( ,alt]native ,!ories ,9 _m discussions ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 ! "q ( ,alt]native ,!ories occupies a prom95t place4 ,our purpose 9 ! pres5t section is to ask :at place x may legitimately be giv54 ,has x ! importance :i* is (t5 claim$8 ,att5tion has frequ5tly be5 call$ to ! inability ( ^? :o reject ! ,virg9 ,bir? to agree ^u an alt]native !ory4 ,! failure is pat5t4 ,h>nack & ,lob/e91 on ! "o side1 plead = a ,jewi% ,*ri/ian orig9 = ! doctr9e1 9 :i* ! influ5ce ( ,isa4 vii4 #ad play$ a decisive "p2 on ! o!r side1 ,soltau1 ,s*mi$el1 ,us5]1 & o!rs1 trace ! tradition to ! effect ( non,*ri/ian my?s4 ,n only s2 ! advocates ( ea* !ory specifically reject ! o!r4 ,lob/e91 = example1 ?9ks t 8x w\ld be ra% to see direct imitations or positive influ5ces0 9 ! analogies 8betwe5 ! ,biblical my? & leg5ds ( ,greek or ,ea/]n orig904 ,:ile !re 0 mutual action betwe5 ! wor%ip or doctr9e ( paganism & advanc+ ,*ri/ianity1 8no?+ w>rants hi/orical criticism 9 consid]+ ! tradition ( ! miracul\s bir? ( ,*ri/ z m]ely ! outcome ( elem5ts =eign to ! religion ( ,biblical revelation0 7,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,*ri/1 p4 #gf74 ,s*mi$el1 on ! o!r h&1 rejects ! ,jewi%,*ri/ian orig9 ( ! tradition1 8,nor w\ld ,isa4 vii4 #ad h be5 suffici5t to acc\nt = ! orig9 ( su* a doctr9e unless ! doctr9e _h comm5d$ itself on its own m]its4 ,! passage 0 adduc$ only z an aft]?\ght1 9 confirmation4444 ,?us ! orig9 ( ! idea ( a virg9 bir? is to be s\ght 9 ,g5tile,*ri/ian circles0 7,,eb41 col4 #bifc f4747#ajf7 ,x is n /range1 p]haps1 t "s writ]s h press$ ^! contradictions into ! s]vice ( ,apologetics4 ,?us1 = example1 ,dr4 ,orr does n scruple to say3 8,z 9 ! trial ( ,jesus be=e ! ,sanh$rim1 #8nei!r s did _! witness agree toge!r' 0 7op4 cit41 p4 #aeb74 ,he ev5 pres5ts ! rem>kable argum5t t ,dr4 ,*eyne's !ory 8gives ! dea?/roke to all ! !ories t h gone be=e x01 & yet is itself 8absolutely baseless0 7ib41 p4 #agh74 ,sweet's argum5t is m cauti\sly introduc$4 ,he recognizes t ! cont5tion has its limits4 ,he in/ances ,bossuet's argum5t aga9/ ! ,re=mation drawn f ! ,v>iations ( ,prote/antism & ,g4 ,h4 ,lewes's inf]5ce f ! ,hi/ory ( ,philosophy t philosophy is impossible 7op4 cit41 p4 #bii74 ,b1 hav+ said ?is1 ,sweet argues t ! critics agree 9 no?+ 8save dislike & depreciation ( ! docum5ts01 & t 8_! !ories are mutually de/ructive04 ,x appe>s to u t ?is l9e ( argum5t is op5 to s]i\s objection2 x is unfair1 & x is unwise4 ,x is unfair1 because x is nei!r uncommon nor unreasonable to f9d m5 agre$ 9 reject+ a tradition or belief1 & yet at v>iance 9 respect ( !ories ( orig94 ,x is "o ?+ to say t a belief is untrue2 q ano!r ?+ to acc\nt = its exi/5ce4 ,t m5 agree ^u ! "o po9t is m significant ?an t !y diff] ^u ! o!r4 ,! view we h m5tion$ is unwise1 because its triumph may be %ortliv$4 ,!re is always room = ! em]g5ce ( a bett] alt]native !ory1 :i* %all comb9e ! excell5ces1 & avoid ! weaknesses1 ( pione] attempts4 ,x does n ne$ a prophet to sugge/ t ! next alt]native !ory w be psy*ological & eclectic4 ,if ! tradition is n hi/orical1 x is n likely t we c acc\nt = its rise by "o factor alone4 ,we may reg>d x z e/abli%$ t prophecy alone did n create ! tradition1 & t x 0 n inv5t$ on ! analogy ( non,*ri/ian my?s4 ,nev]!less1 x may be t ,isa4 vii4 #ad1 toge!r ) ! idea t und]lies non,*ri/ian leg5ds1 play$ an important "p 9 ! =mation ( ! ,*ri/ian tradition4 ,if ! tradition is n hi/orical1 its ultimate orig9 mu/ be s\ght 9 ! ov]:elm+ impression :i* ,jesus left ^u believ+ he>ts & m9ds2 9 ! conviction t f ! "t ( ,8 ,bir?1 & n only at ,8 ,baptism & ,resurrection1 ,jesus ,*ri/ 0 ! ,son ( ,god by ! ano9t+ ( ! ,holy ,_s4 ,! presumption t ,8 ,bir? mu/ h be5 rem>kable w\ld be /r5g!n$ by ! ,old ,te/am5t /ories ( ! bir? ( ,isaac1 ( ,samson1 & ( ,samuel1 & especially by ! tradition :i* already _h ga!r$ r\nd ! bir? ( ,john4 ,x may also h be5 /imulat$ by ! belief1 f\nd ! :ole _w ov]1 t ! orig9 ( great m5 is sup]natural & miracul\s4 ,ev5 among/ ! ,jews ! idea 0 pres5t1 t ! ,messiah's orig9 w\ld be /range1 & t no man w\ld "k f :5ce he came 7,jn4 vii4 #bg74 ,if !re is reason to presuppose su* a po9t ( view1 we c easily imag9e ! electric effect :i* su* a passage z ,isa4 vii4 #ad w\ld h ^u ^? :o /udi$ ,old ,te/am5t prophecies 9 ! light ( _! exp]i5ce ( ,jesus4 ,x is va9 to object t x is only 9 ! ,,lxx t ?is connexion c\ld be e/abli%$1 & t 9 ! ,hebrew ! ^w r5d]$ 8virg90 means a "y woman ( m>riageable age4 ,! ,fir/ ,gospel 7i4 #bc7 %[s t x 0 ! ,,lxx r5d]+ :i* 0 already read1 & d\btless pref]r$1 9 ! primitive ,*ri/ian community4 ,/ill m fatu\s is x to say1 z x has be5 said aga9 & aga91 t no ,jew ev] int]pret$ ,isa4 vii4 #ad ( ! ,messiah4 ,z well might we say ( o!r passages t no ,jew w\ld h int]pret$ !m ,messianically6 ,! "q is n h[ ,jews reg>d$ ,isa4 vii4 #ad1 b h[ x may h appe>$ 9 ! eyes ( ,jews :o _h come "u ! spell ( ,jesus4 ,! passage _c h creat$ belief 9 ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 b x c\ld h cry/alliz$ a belief = :i* wond] & speculation _h prep>$ ! way4 8,s x mu/ h be560 m5 c\ld well h argu$4 ,on ?is supposition ! belief ant$at$ ! tradition4 ,b t beliefs h creat$ traditions aga9 & aga9 is en\gh to %[ t x c\ld h be5 s "h4 ,nor is ! "telem5t ! insup]able difficulty x has be5 suppos$ to be4 ,! idea t a my? w\ld require fifty ye>s to gr[ is absurd47#ajg7 ,provid$ ! p>5ts ( ,jesus 7 already dead1 ! my? c\ld h sprung up new born4 ,9 sket*+ ! =ego+ !ory our purpose is n to ass]t its tru?1 b r to illu/rate its by no means inh]5t improbability4 ,x c\ld be true2 or1 at any rate1 ?is judgem5t might any day h to be pass$ ^u "s alt]native !ory1 sup]ior to any t has yet be5 /at$4 ,! agreem5t ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition ) hi/oric fact may be ! true solution ( ! problem1 b x is n ! only solution t is possible1 nor c its sup]iority be e/abli%$ by ! comp>ative me?od alone4 ,we !re=e "w along wrong l9es if we attempt to argue ! hi/oric "* ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition by dwell+ ^u ! incongruities & contradictions ( alt]native !ories4 ,! baleful attractiv5ess ( su* a me?od ought /r5u\sly to be resi/$4 ,x may yield a few %[y triumphs1 b few1 if any1 solid results4 ,( c\rse1 if we h fir/ satisfi$ ourselves t ! ,virg9 ,bir? is hi/orically true1 ! practice is less objectionable2 b x is d\btful if ev5 !n x adds mu* to results o!rwise obta9$4 ,to include ! me?od 9 ! process ( pro( is to build ^u s&4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ?is view is equally s\nd1 if our solution ( ! problem is "o ( ! alt]native !ories to :i* we h ref]r$4 ,we h sket*$ a !ory :i* we h claim$ might be true4 ,b :at m c\ld be claim$ by ! comp>ative me?od8 ,its ju/ification or lack ( ju/ification lies else:]e4 ,! possible may n be ! probable1 nor ! probable ! true4 ,! importance ( ! "q we h discuss$ 9 ! pres5t section is t x reveals :at are ! bypa?s & :at is ! highroad ( a true inve/igation4 ,! "q ( alt]native !ories is purely second>y4 ,! highroad is :]e we left x at ! end ( ,section ,,ii4 ,c ! tradition1 endors$ by ! ,fir/ & ,?ird ,evangeli/s1 be v9dicat$8 ,v4 ,doctr9al ,consid]ations ,! ultimate consid]ations :i* det]m9e a true e/imate ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition are doctr9al4 ,x is "o ( ! *ief m]its ( ,lob/e9's wellkn[n book t he s cle>ly recognizes ?is fact3 8,:at mu/ f9ally turn ! scale 444 are reasons ( a dogmatic & religi\s ord]0 7op4 cit41 p4 #gi74 ,we ne$ make no apology = n hav+ dealt ) ! "q ( ! possibility ( ! ,miracul\s ,bir? f ! /&po9t ( ,sci5ce4 ,we d n propose to consid] ! "q at l5g? ev5 n[4 ,! objection t miracles are impossible has long be5 explod$4 ,9 a fam\s lett] to ! ,spectator 7,febru>y #aj1 #ahff7 ,huxley wrote3 8444 d5y+ ! possibility ( miracles seems to me q z unju/ifiable z speculative ,a!ism01 & ,a!ism1 he said1 is 8z absurd1 logically speak+1 z poly!ism04 ,:at we call a 8miracle0 may be no m ?an ! div9e op]ation )9 ! doma9 ( law itself4 ,we h !re=e no gr\nd = say+ t a virg9 bir? is impossible2 :ile1 9 ! case ( ,"o s unique z ,jesus ,*ri/1 su* an ass]tion w\ld be utt]ly absurd4 ,we d n really ne$ any support :i* may be ga9$ f ! "q ( ,p>!nog5esis4 ,! "q is 9 ! fir/ place "o ( evid5ce4 ,b if prim>ily ! "q is "o ( evid5ce1 x does n /op !re4 ,! hi/orical & ! !ological aspects ( ! problem ov]lap2 we _c det]m9e ! "q by weigh+ evid5ce alone4 ,if we attempt to conf9e ourselves to a purely hi/orical inquiry1 ! v]dict mu/ be 8,n prov5047#ajh7 ,x is true1 on ! "o h&1 t ! late appe>ance ( ! tradition is n an insup]able difficulty4 ,! !ory ( a longtreasur$ secret has a logic ( its own4 ,on ! o!r h&1 by ! conditions ( ! case1 we are unable to int]rogate ! witnesses4 ,we _c ask !m :5ce !y d]iv$ :at !y tell u4 ,we _c demon/rate t ! /ory !y relate has ! ultimate au?ority ( ,m>y4 ,all t we c rea* is a primitive belief1 g5]ally accept$ )9 ,new ,te/am5t times1 :i* presumably implies an e>li] private tradition4 ,beyond t po9t we _c travel--)9 ! limits ( ! evid5ce alone4 ,sub/antially ?is position is recogniz$ by ,dr4 ,gore 9 ,diss]tations4 ,:ile affirm+ 8 belief t ! hi/orical evid5ce is 89 itself /rong & cog5t01 he says frankly t 8x is n su* z to compel belief04 8,!re are ways to dissolve its =ce01 he cont9ues4 ,! la/ s5t5ce is n v happily phras$1 b x ne$ n deta9 u4 ,! po9t t is ( greate/ importance is express$ by ,dr4 ,gore z foll[s3 8444 to produce belief !re is ne$$--9 ?is z 9 almo/ all o!r que/ions ( hi/orical fact--besides cog5t evid5ce1 also a p]ception ( ! mean+ & naturalness1 "u ! circum/ances1 ( ! ev5t to :i* evid5ce is borne4 ,to cl9* ! hi/orical evid5ce = our ,"l's ,virg9 ,bir? !re is ne$$ ! s5se t1 be+ :at ,he 01 ,8 human bir? c\ld h>dly h be5 o!rwise ?an is impli$ 9 ! ,virg9ity ( ,8 "m0 7ib41 p4 #fd74 ,! pres5t "w is1 9 "p1 a footnote to1 or illu/ration (1 ?is pr9ciple4 ,we may !re=e be p>don$ = a fur!r ref]5ce to x 9 a passage f ,f4 ,c4 ,burkitt's ,gospel ,hi/ory & its ,transmission1 9 :i* x f9ds an almo/ classic /atem5t3 8,our belief or disbelief 9 mo/ ( ! ,articles 9 ! ,apo/les' ,cre$ does n ultimately re/ on hi/orical criticism ( ! ,gospels1 b ^u ! g5]al view ( ! univ]se1 ( ! ord] ( ?+s1 :i* our tra9+ & environm5t1 or our inn] exp]i5ce1 has l$ u sev]ally to take4 ,! ,bir? ( our ,"l f a virg9 & ,8 ,resurrection f ! dead--to "n ! mo/ obvi\s ,articles ( ! ,cre$--are n matt]s :i* hi/orical criticism c e/abli%0 7p4 #cej f474 ,x is cle>1 !n1 t if fur!r advance is to be made1 we mu/ ent] ! realms ( doctr9e4 ,:at doctr9al purpose1 we mu/ ask1 does ! ,virg9 ,bir? s]ve8 ,does x expla9 ! s9lessness ( ,jesus8 ,is x necess>y to ! doctr9e ( ! ,inc>nation8 ,is x congru\s ) ! doctr9e ( ! ,p]son ( ,*ri/8 ,x is n cont5d$ t an answ] to ^! que/ions 9 ! affirmative w\ld prove ! ev5t to h happ5$4 ,nev]!less1 su* an answ] w\ld unque/ionably inve/ ! ,new ,te/am5t tradition ) a yet high] probability1 suffici5tly great1 9 our judgem5t1 to make belief 9 its hi/orical "* reasonable4 ,if1 h[ev]1 we h to answ] ! doctr9al que/ions 9 ! negative1 !n ! hi/orical "* ( ! tradition receives a fatal bl[4 ,! op9ion1 s frequ5tly express$1 t1 9 any case1 ! ,virg9 ,bir? is n a doctr9e ( ess5tial importance1 is "o t calls = scrut9y4 ,if x means t a man may be a s9c]e foll[] ( our ,"l1 :e!r he believes ! doctr9e or n1 x is1 ( c\rse1 a truism4 ,b if x means t ! doctr9e is ( no importance 9 relation to ! ,inc>nation & ! ,p]son ( ,*ri/1 t is p]haps ! /ronge/ argum5t t c be adduc$ aga9/ ! cr$ibility ( ! miracle4 ,:at is doctr9ally irrelevant is n likely to be hi/orically true4 ,x does n fall 9 ) ! scope ( ?is "w to ent] fully into ! !ological "q4 ,our purpose has be5 to exam9e ! hi/orical & critical que/ions & to %[ :]e ! real problem lies4 ,criticism _c solve t problem4 ,nev]!less1 its contribution is n b>r54 ,x c discuss int]polation !ories2 x c treat ( ! lit]>y =m :i* ! tradition has assum$ 9 ! ,gospels4 ,x c date--imp]fectly x is true--! "t :5 ! belief became curr5t4 ,x c apply broad te/s ( cr$ibility4 ,we ourselves believe t x c say ! miracle may h transpir$4 ,b x _c say m4 ,! la/ ^w is ) ,!ology4 ,on ! !ological side1 ! "q is probably m f>rea*+ ?an is commonly suppos$4 ,individual ,*ri/ian doctr9es c nev] be treat$ 9 vacuo2 !y are int]relat$ "o ) ano!r4 ,x is (t5 said t ^? :o reject ! ,virg9 ,bir? reject also ! physical ,resurrection ( ,jesus1 ! ,asc5sion1 & _m ( ! miracles report$ 9 ! ,gospels4 ,! /atem5t is l>gely true2 x is possible we ought also to include 9 x ! doctr9e ( ! ,preexi/5ce ( ,*ri/4 ,! reason is t ^! d5ials belong to ! same g5]al habit ( m9d2 !y are "p ( ! cont5t ( :at has be5 call$ a 8r$uc$ ,*ri/ianity04 ,x is impossible1 !re=e1 adequately to discuss ! "q ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? on its !ological side1 )\t rais+ ! l>g] "q1 :e!r ?is scall$ 8r$uc$ ,*ri/ianity0 is n ! true fai?1 z di/+ui%$ f a 8full ,*ri/ianity0 :i* 9 reality is florid & ov]gr[n4 ,sweet c sc>cely be said to g too f> :5 he writes3 8,9 %ort1 & ?is is ! gi/ ( ! :ole matt]1 9 ?is controv]sy conc]n+ ! bir? ( ,*ri/1 two fundam5tally diff]5t ,*ri/ologies are grop+ = supremacy0 7ib41 p4 #caa74 ,?is fact has n always be5 recogniz$ by ^? :o ?9k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 b !re c be no "q ( its tru?4 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? is "p ( a l>g] problem2 x mu/ ultimately be e/abli%$1 if at all1 z a coroll>y1 n z an indep5d5t conclusion4 ,! l>g] problem is :e!r we c /ill hold ! ,tr9it>ian ,!ology & ! ,two,nature ,doctr9e ( ! ,p]son ( ,*ri/1 or :e!r we mu/ give to ! ,imman5ce ( ,god a place greatly 9 excess ( any x has yet held 9 ,*ri/ian ?\ght2 :e!r1 inde$1 we c feel x adequate to speak ( ,*ri/ z ,"o 9 :om ! ,imman5t ,god reveal$ & express$ ,himself 9 an altoge!r unique & ultimately inexplicable way4 ,9 any case1 ! conflict is "o ( ,*ri/ologies4 ,! purely naturali/ic int]pretation ( ,jesus holds a m & m prec>i\s place 9 ! field4 ,?is1 !n1 is ! problem ( ! pres5t & ( ! imm$iate future4 ,x is no?+ less ?an ! problem :i* e age has _h to face s9ce ! days ( ,jesus ( ,naz>e?--! problem ( ! ,inc>nation4 ,! pres5t writ] takes no %ame to say t ^u ! !ological aspect ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? he has n yet be5 able to satisfy 8 m9d4 ,! long] ! "q is /udi$ ! less easy x becomes airily to bru% ! miracle aside & call x my?4 ,we speak ( ^? :o are impress$ by ! unique spiritual greatness ( ,jesus1 & :o _c expla9 = !mselves ,8 ,p]son 9 t]ms ( humanity alone4 ,! hesitation does n spr+ f vacillation1 nor1 we hope1 f lack ( c\rage & /r5g? ( m9d4 ,x spr+s out ( a s5se ( ! uniqu5ess ( ,jesus4 ,h we adequately grasp$ ,8 greatness8 ,c we say :at is1 or :at is n1 congru\s ) ,8 ,p]son8 ,x is op5 to s]i\s "q :e!r ! individual c expect1 or ought to expect an answ] to ^! que/ions out ( 8 exp]i5ce & ?\ght alone4 ,brief discussions ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? by individual writ]s d n c>ry u v f>4 ,:at is ne$$ m ?an any?+ else is a yet full] disclosure ( ! unfett]$ m9d ( ! ,*ri/ian ,*ur*2 & = ?is we mu/ wait4 ,?is la/ /atem5t may p]haps seem /range4 ,has n ! ,*ur* already express$ h] corporate m9d8 ,has %e n committ$ h]self to ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition8 ,c we n f9d x 9 ,ignatius1 9 ,ju/91 & 9 ! ,cre$s ( ! ,undivid$ ,*ur*8 ,t ^! ?+s are s is too pat5t to be d5i$4 ,b has ! ,*ur* express$ h] unfett]$ m9d8 ,has %e said h] f9al ^w8 ,has %e1 inde$1 ev] be5 9 a position to d ^! ?+s8 ,! appeal to ! almo/ unbrok5 ext]nal witness ( ! ,ca?olic ,*ur* does n c>ry u s f> z we might ?9k4 ,once ! ,gospels _h atta9$ canonical au?ority ! re/ 0 a =egone conclusion4 ,! /atus giv5 to ! ,gospels c>ri$ ev]y?+ else ) x1 & ! ,*ur* 0 no long] free to judge4 ,x is writt51 !re=e x 0 s6 ,moreov]1 ! "q ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? 0 l>gely ov]%ad[$ 9 ! /ruggle ) ,docetism4 ,x is only 9 mod]n times t a m intellig5t attitude t[>ds ! ,gospels p]mits ! ,*ur* freely to pond] ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition 9 ! light ( h] exp]i5ce ( ,*ri/4 ,we may *]i% ! hope t %e has yet great] ?+s to say ( ,*ri/ ?an any %e has yet utt]$4 ,x is 9 its relation to t voice t ! ,virg9 ,bir? w f9d its place4 ,:]e1 !n1 %all we look = ?is expression ( corporate m9d8 ,n p]haps aga9 9 ,consili> ,decrees1 ?\gh :o c say8 ,!re is1 h[ev]1 a corporate m9d t f9ds expression 9 ! affirmations ( simple believ]s1 & 9 ! writ+s ( ,*ri/ian ?9k]s ! _w ov]4 ,! affirmations are nei!r ! m$ley nor ! babel !y are sometimes ?\ght to be4 ,!re is no col\rless uni=mity1 b !re is a real & gr[+ unity1 a h>mony 9 :i* v>i$ voices bl5d4 ,no "o c survey ,*ri/5dom )\t see+ t ev]y:]e d5om9ational walls become less & less =bidd+1 & t e ye> x is m difficult to classify ,*ri/ian ?9k]s "u ! prim labels ( exclusive s*ools4 ,?\ght is unb\nd1 b x is n *aotic4 ,! ?\s& /reams fall to ! riv]s :i* fl[ onw>d t[>ds ! sea t is nev] full4 ,^? only may be pessimi/ic :o _c take long views4 ,we may believe t ! ,_s w yet guide ,8 ,*ur* into all ! tru?4 ,! individual ?9k] ^: voice breaks ! sil5ce w ev] be ne$$4 ,yet 8 task is b a limit$ "o2 he too mu/ li/54 ,= unless1 b5ea? 8 affirmations1 we he> ! und]tone ( a corporate fai? & exp]i5ce1 8 voice w be b ! e*o t r+s among ! empty hills4 ,"o ?+ is c]ta94 ,:atev] ! ultimate issue1 x mu/ be ga91 ev5 if ga9 ?r\gh loss4 ,:e!r x be hi/orical or n1 ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition mu/ always be full ( beauty & ( tru?4 ,if1 on ! "o h&1 ! tradition is involv$ 9 ! corporate exp]i5ce ( ,*ri/1 if x is congru\s ) :at ,he 0 & is1 !n1 admitt$ly1 ! ga9 is great4 ,= ?is means increas$ confid5ce 9 ! facts :i* ! ,evangeli/s relate & ! primitive community believ$3 !re is no brea* ) ! pa/4 ,x means too ano!r foo?old 9 hi/ory = ! !ological int]pretation ( ! ,p]son ( ,*ri/4 ,& ^! are ?+s n lightly to be surr5d]$1 save at ! comm& ( ,tru?4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 ! /ory is a leg5d ( ! ,*ri/ian ,fai?1 t is n an end4 ,/rangely en\gh1 if ! tradition is n hi/orical1 x !reby becomes a valuable piece ( ,*ri/ian apologetic4 ,:o 0 ?is ,jesus1 we ask1 ( :om m5 d>$ to believe t ,he 0 born ( a virg98 ,! fad$ wrea? is no less ! tribute ( undy+ love4 ,t ,jewi% ,*ri/ians c\ld expla9 ! unique div9e p]sonality ( ,jesus by ! miracle ( a virg9 bir? is--if we mu/ solve ! problem s--! highe/ tribute !y c\ld pay4 ,if we f9d x h>d to und]/& h[ !y c\ld ?9k ( ,him 9 ?is way1 )\t ! w>rant ( ! fact1 x may be t our difficulty is j ! measure ( our failure to grasp ! wond] ( _! love4 ,if1 9 ! end1 we mu/ call poetry :at !y call$ fact1 x w n be because we are /rang]s to _! fai?4 ,!y too 7 b\nd by ! spell ( t ,transc5d5t ,face 9 :i* is ! light ( ! k ( ! glory ( ,god4 ,,index ,acts1 ,!1 #ab ff41 #ba4 ,all51 ,w4 ,c41 #f1 #h1 #i n41 #aa n41 #ae n41 #cc n41 #cg1 #db n41 #eb1 #hi n41 #ij1 #ij n41 #ia1 #ib n41 #id1 #ie n41 #if1 #ajead4 ,apocalypse1 ,!1 #bj4 ,argum5t f ,sil5ce1 ,!1 #ac4 ,asc5sion1 #gh1 #acj4 ,bacon1 ,b4 ,w41 #h n4 ,baptism ( ,jesus1 #g1 #be1 #abe4 ,b>n>d1 #hi n41 #ajh4 ,be?lehem1 #af1 #ag1 #ih4 ,bezae1 ,codex1 #be1 #bi4 ,bir?place ( ,jesus1 #af1 #ag f41 #ai4 ,blass1 ,fri$ri*1 #ae n41 #be1 #cb n41 #ej n4 ,bossuet1 #abe4 ,box1 ,george ,h41 #d n41 #e1 #h1 #ae n41 #ch ff41 #dj n41 #da1 #hf n41 #hi n41 #ij n41 #ia1 #ie1 #aja1 #ajc1 #aje1 #ajf1 #ajh4 ,burkitt1 ,f4 ,c41 #cc n41 #ej n41 #hh n41 #hi1 #hi n41 #ij1 #ia1 #ib1 #ib n41 #ic1 #ie n41 #if1 #if n41 #ig1 #ii n41 #ajj1 #ajj n41 #aja1 #ajead1 #abi4 ,c>p5t]1 ,j4 ,e/l91 #dc n41 #dd4 ,ca?olic ,epi/les1 #bj4 ,c]9?us1 #ii4 ,*ase1 #dj n4 ,*eyne1 ,t4 ,k41 #bj n41 #dj n41 #abe4 ,clem51 #dj n4 ,conybe>e1 ,f4 ,c41 #dj n41 #ii n41 #aje1 #ajf1 #ajh n4 ,corporate ,m9d ( ! ,*ur*1 ,!1 #aca f4 ,cre$s1 ,!1 #aca4 ,curetonian ,syriac1 ,!1 #aje ff41 #ajh4 ,dalman1 ,g41 #ei n4 ,date ( ! ,synoptic ,gospels1 #abj ff4 ,davidic ,desc5t1 ,!3 9 ,acts1 #ac4 9 ,lk41 #dd ff41 #hd4 9 ,mt41 #he1 #hi1 #aja4 ,davidson1 ,a4 ,b41 #ci4 ,dialogue ( ,timo?y & ,aquila1 ,!1 #ia1 #ii n41 #aje1 #ajf1 #ajh1 #aaa4 ,diatess>on1 ,!1 #ajf4 ,dionysius ( ,cor9?1 #di4 ,docetism1 #ae n41 #acb4 ,doctr9al ,modifications1 #eb ff41 #ii1 #aac4 ,drummond1 ,james1 #a4 ,ebionites1 ,!1 #cc1 #ajg4 ,epiphanius1 #ii4 ,expository ,times1 ,!1 #ci n4 ,fairbairn1 ,a4 ,m41 #ae n4 8,f]r>0 ,gr\p1 ,!1 #aje1 #ajf1 #ajg f4 ,fir/ ,gospel1 ,!3 apologetic motive1 #if1 #ii1 #aaf4 *>act]i/ic words1 c41 #ic f41 #ii1 #ii n4 date1 #aag f41 #aba4 g5u95ess ( cc4 i1 ii1 #ie ff4 mode ( treatm5t1 #id1 #ii4 quotations1 #id f41 #abf4 s\rce ( ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 #aja ff4 /yle1 #ib f41 #ii4 unity ( cc4 i1 ii1 #ie ff4 ,virg9 ,bir? an orig9al elem5t1 #ajj1 #ajd1 #aae4 ,f\r? ,gospel1 ,!1 #aebj1 #aae4 ,g>dn]1 ,p]cy1 #abh4 ,g5ealogy 9 ,lk41 #bf ff41 #gd1 #hd1 #hi1 #ij4 ,g5ealogy 9 ,mt41 #bg1 #fd1 #hi ff41 #ie ff41 #ig1 #ajj1 #aja4 ,gno/ics1 ,!1 #cc4 ,gore1 ,*>les1 #e1 #ajb1 #ajc1 #abh f4 ,g\ld1 ,ezra ,p41 #i1 #fh n41 #ajc n4 ,grill1 #dj n4 ,gunkel1 #dj n4 ,hck]1 #cb n41 #dc n4 ,h>nack1 ,adolf1 #g1 #g n41 #ae n41 #be1 #bf n41 #cb1 #dj n41 #ee1 #eg1 #eg n41 #eh n41 #fj1 #fb n41 #fc n41 #fd1 #fg1 #hj1 #hb1 #aag1 #aba1 #abd4 ,hawk9s1 ,sir ,john ,c41 #eb n41 #ee1 #eg n41 #fg n41 #ic n41 #id4 ,headlam1 #di n4 ,hebrews1 ,! ,epi/le to1 #ad f41 #ba4 ,heff]n1 #hi4 ,hilg5feld1 #dj n4 ,hillmann1 #dj n41 #ee4 ,hi/orical value ( ! ,synoptic ,gospels1 #abb ff4 ,hob>t1 ,w4 ,k41 #ee4 ,holtzmann1 #dj n4 ,hort1 ,f4 ,j4 ,a41 #cc n41 #ea1 #eh4 ,huxley1 #abh4 ,ignatius1 #af1 #ah1 #aca4 ,inc>nation1 #abi1 #aca4 ,inf]5ce1 its place 9 ! ,gospels1 #ajb f4 ,int]polations1 #gf ff4 ,ir5aeus1 #ae n4 ,jews at ,naz>e?1 ,!1 #h f41 #ca1 #ig4 ,john ! ,bapti/1 #abf4 ,joseph1 #bh f41 #cj ff41 #ih1 #ii1 #aja1 #ajb4 ,jli*]1 ,adolf1 #ae n41 #aah n41 #abc4 ,ju/91 #ae n41 #aca4 ,katt5bus*1 #cf1 #fi4 ,k ( ,jesus1 ,!1 #aj4 ,kn[l+1 ,r4 ,j41 #d1 #dj n4 ,lake1 ,kirsopp1 #cc n41 #if n41 #ajc1 #ajc n4 ,lewes1 ,g4 ,h41 #abe4 ,lewis1 ,mrs41 & ,mrs4 ,gibson1 #aaj4 ,l+ui/ic ,argum5t1 ,!1 its importance1 #bb f41 #ee f4 ,lob/e91 ,paul1 #dd n41 #gj1 #abd1 #abg4 ,loisy1 ,abb ,alfr$1 #dj n4 ,lo(s1 ,fri$ri*1 #hb n41 #abf n4 ,mack9to%1 ,h4 ,r41 #e n41 #g n41 #ac n41 #ae n4 ,maclean1 ,a4 ,j41 #hi n41 #ajh4 ,m>y1 ! "m ( ,jesus1 #i1 #aj1 #aa1 #ce f41 #db1 #dc f41 #de1 #hg1 #aba1 #abb1 #abh4 ,m]x1 #fi4 ,milligan1 ,george1 #di1 #ib4 ,miracles1 #abg f41 #acj4 ,m(fatt1 ,james1 #g n41 #h n41 #ac n41 #ae n41 #ah1 #ah n41 #bd1 #be1 #bf1 #cb1 #dc n41 #di n41 #ej1 #eb n41 #ec n41 #eg n41 #fg n41 #gd1 #gf1 #hi1 #hi n41 #ij n41 #ia1 #ib1 #ie1 #if1 #if n41 #ajf n41 #ajh1 #abj4 ,montefiore1 ,c4 ,g41 #dj n41 #dc n4 ,m\lton1 ,james ,hope1 #ej n41 #ea1 #ec n41 #eh n41 #ei n41 #fb n41 #ib n4 ,m\lton & ,g$51 #eh n41 #ic4 ,m\lton & ,milligan 7,,vgt471 #ce1 #ei1 #ei n41 #fb n41 #fe n4 ,orr1 ,james1 #c n41 #d1 #ae n41 #dj n41 #ajb1 #abe4 ,ox=d ,/udies 9 ! ,synoptic ,problem1 #bf n41 #gf n4 ,papias1 #g4 ,p>!nog5esis1 #abh4 ,pa/oral ,epi/les1 #bj4 ,peake1 ,a4 ,s41 #ae n4 ,p]icope adult]iae1 #ej4 ,p]son ( ,*ri/1 ,!1 #abi ff4 ,pfleid]]1 ,otto1 #dj n4 ,philip1 daught]s (1 #hg4 ,plumm]1 ,a41 #h n41 #bg1 #bi n41 #cc1 #cd f41 #ce1 #cg1 #dc1 #dd1 #eg n41 #fc n41 #fd1 #gj1 #aba4 ,preexi/5ce ( ,*ri/1 ,!1 #acj4 ,protevangelium ,iacobi1 #di n4 ,q1 #g1 #ba1 #bf n41 #abc4 ,ramsay1 ,w4 ,m41 #cb1 #ha1 #ha n41 #he1 #hg4 ,res*1 #ae n4 ,resurrection ( ,*ri/1 ,!1 #d1 #e1 #e n41 #ac1 #ac n41 #ajc1 #abe1 #acj4 ,rob9son1 ,j4 ,armitage1 #ej n4 ,s&ay1 ,william1 #a f41 #ae n41 #af1 #bf1 #bg1 #ej n41 #he1 #hf n41 #hi n41 #ajb n41 #aje1 #ajf n41 #ajg n41 #aab4 ,s&ay & ,headlam1 #d1 #e n41 #ea4 ,s*midt1 ,n41 #dj n4 ,s*mi$el1 ,paul ,w41 #i n41 #aj n41 #bc1 #bd1 #bi1 #cb1 #cb n41 #ce1 #cg n41 #dj n41 #db1 #dc1 #de1 #ee1 #gj1 #ig f41 #aje1 #ajf1 #abd4 ,sci5ce1 #abg f4 ,scott1 ,erne/ ,f41 #ae n41 #ai1 #ai n4 ,second ,adam1 #c1 #d f4 ,simeon1 ,prophecy (1 #bi1 #gc4 ,s9aitic ,syriac ,,ms41 #bi1 #cb1 #cc1 #ajead4 ,s9lessness ( ,jesus1 #abi4 ,soltau1 #abd4 ,spitta1 #dc n4 ,/4 ,luke3 did he tea* ! ,virg9 ,bir?8 #dhga4 8 k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition1 #ac1 #gbd1 #hd f41 #hg1 #aae4 8 revision ( ,lk4 & ,acts1 #gg1 #hj ff41 #ha n4 8 treatm5t ( ,mk41 #gg4 ! ri*ness ( 8 vocabul>y1 #fc1 #fc n4 ,/4 ,m>k's ,gospel1 #hab1 #ba1 #hg1 #aae1 #abc4 date1 #aba4 orig9al end+1 #ab1 #ec1 #fh n4 ,/4 ,paul1 #cg1 #ba1 #hg1 #aae4 ,/anton1 ,v9c5t ,h41 #h n41 #dj n41 #ie n41 #aah4 ,sweet1 ,l\is ,mat!ws1 #d1 #d n41 #abe1 #acj4 ,t]tullian1 #ae n41 #aje1 #aac4 ,text ( ! ,gospels 9 ! ,second ,c5tury1 #di ff41 #ia f41 #ii1 #aac4 ,textual ,problem ( ,mt4 i4 #af1 #ij ff41 #ajj1 #aje ff4 ,?ay],grimm1 #ce1 #fb n41 #fe n41 #ff4 ,!ophilus ( ,antio*1 #a4 ,?ird ,gospel1 #bbdg1 #gbhg4 bir? tradition ( ,lk4 i1 ii1 #gc1 #he f4 date1 #aah1 #aba4 n>ratives ( ,lk4 ii1 #bh ff4 purport ( ! angelic ann\ncem5t 7i4 #cjc71 #cf ff4 ,?ompson1 ,j4 ,m41 #g1 #g n41 #h1 #aj1 #aj n41 #ac n41 #ah1 #ah n41 #cf1 #fi1 #gj4 ,tr9it>ian ,!ology1 #acj4 ,us5]1 ,h41 #i n41 #bc1 #be1 #cb n41 #dj n41 #de1 #ee1 #gi1 #abd4 ,v]bal ,inspiration1 #gf f41 #ajc1 #abb f4 ,virg9 ,bir? tradition3 alt]native !ories1 #abd ff4 apologetic & spiritual value1 #acc4 doctr9al aspects1 #abg ff4 e>lie/ date ( public tradition1 #aag ff4 hi/orical problem1 #aaecc4 !ory ( a private tradition1 #aai1 #aba1 #abh4 ,vlt]1 #dj n4 ,we9el1 #cf1 #fi4 ,weiss1 ,j41 #dj n4 ,wellhaus51 ,j41 #g4 ,w5dl&1 #h n4 ,we/cott1 ,b4 ,f41 #ae n41 #hi n41 #ajh4 ,we/cott & ,hort1 #cc n41 #eg n4 8,we/]n0 ,read+s1 #bdf1 #cbd1 #cc n4 ,wise ,m51 #ie4 ,za*>ias1 #dc f4 ,zahn1 ,!odor1 #ae n4 ,zimm]mann1 #gd f41 #ge n4 ,transcrib]'s ,note3 ,obvi\s pr9t]'s errors h be5 correct$4 ,,footnotes #a ,dr4 ,orr 7,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,*ri/1 #aijg1 #crd ed41 #aiad7 says t 9 e ,paul9e ref]5ce to ! orig9 ( ,*ri/ !re is 8"s peculi>ity ( expression0 7pp4 #aag ff41 #aif74 ,he in/ances 9 ,gal4 iv4 #d1 ,rom4 i4 #c1 ,phil4 ii4 #g1 & speaks ( z ! ^w prop]ly d5ot+ 8born04 ,b ,/4 ,paul nev] uses 1 & ,mt4 xi4 #aa & ,lk4 vii4 #bh are ! only in/ances 9 ! ,,nt4 ,moreov]1 ! papyri %[ t & 7 9 common use 9 ! s5se ( 8to come into be+01 8be born0 7cf4 ,m\lton & ,milligan1 ,,vgt41 #aiae1 p4 #abf a74 ,canon ,box also speaks ( ,/4 ,paul's use ( 8! out(!way 0 7,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,jesus1 #aiaf74 8,?is w\ld h>monise01 he says1 8) ! feel+ t !re 0 some?+ extraord9>y & sup]natural ab\t ! bir?1 :i* l$ to its be+ spok5 ( 9 unusual t]ms0 7p4 #adi n474 ,n to speak ( ! papyri1 :at w\ld ^! writ]s make ( ,jn4 viii4 #eh1 8,be=e ,abraham 0 7 7 ,i am08 ,0 !re 8some?+ extraord9>y0 9 ,abraham's bir? too8 ,= a view simil> to t ( ,orr & ,box see ,sweet1 ,! ,bir? & ,infancy ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 p4 #bcg f4 #b ,comp>e v]se #ab1 8z ?r\gh "o man01 ) v]se #ae1 8! grace ( ! "o man1 ,jesus ,*ri/04 ,cf4 also ,rom4 ix4 #e 7& #a ,tim4 ii4 #e74 #c ,cf4 ,h4 ,r4 ,mack9to%1 ,! ,p]son ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 p4 #fi3 8444 ! passage #a ,cor4 xv4 #ddi is ?r\gh\t conc]n$ n 9 ! lea/ ) ! preexi/5t b ) ! exalt$ ,*ri/4 ,x 0 only 9 virtue ( resurrection t ,he became ! ar*etype & head ( a new race40 ,mack9to% says t ! ,virg9 ,bir? is 8n pres5t0 9 ,gal4 iv4 #d1 8n ev5 h9t$ at0 7p4 #ebh74 #d 8,! fle% ( ,*ri/ is #8l' ours inasmu* z x is fle%2 #8l'1 & only #8l'1 because x is n s9ful3 o/5dit nos quidem hab]e c>nem peccati1 ,filium v]o ,dei similitud9em habuisse c>nis peccati1 non c>nem peccati 7,orig4lat470 7,,%41 ,,icc41 ,rom41 p4 #aic74 #e ,= ^! & o!r details see ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 pp4 #aidbjf2 also ,h>nack1 ,! ,say+s ( ,jesus1 pp4 #bbieb4 #f ,cf4 ,mt4 xi4 #b f4 ,lk4 vii4 #ah f4 #g ,cf4 ,mack9to%1 ,p]son ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 p4 #ebh4 #h ,mr4 ,?ompson ?9ks t 9 ,q 8we are deal+ ) an age t has n yet begun to ?9k ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?0 7ib41 p4 #adj74 ,?is may be true1 b x is n a legitimate inf]5ce to draw f ,q alone4 #i ,cf4 ,plumm]1 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,lk41 p4 #abe4 #aj ,mt4 xiii4 #ee3 8,is n ?is ! c>p5t]'s son84440 ,lk4 iv4 #bb3 8,is n ?is ,joseph's son80 #aa ,s ,w5dl& & ,bacon 7,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bbg f472 ,/anton1 ,,ghd41 ii4 #adb4 ,mt4 xiii4 #ee reads3 8,is n ?is ! c>p5t]'s son801 & ,lk4 iv4 #bb3 8,is n ?is ,joseph's son80 ,! argum5t is t x is v difficult to ?9k t ! lat] ,evangeli/s c h read :at is n[ ,mk4 vi4 #c 9 ! ,m>kan ,s\rce4 #ab 8,mt4 has sub/itut$ #8! ,son ( ! ,c>p5t]' = #8! ,c>p5t]' f a feel+ t ! latt] 0 h>dly a phrase ( due rev]5ce0 7,all51 op4 cit41 p4 #aee74 #ac ,bo? ,s*mi$el 7,,eb41 #bied f47 & ,us5] 7,,eb41 #ccde7 hold t ! incid5t excludes ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,9 ref]5ce to ! words ( ,jesus1 ,j4 ,m4 ,?ompson says3 8,! =ce ( ,8 aphorism ab\t spiritual k9%ip dep5ds on ! reality ( ! human k9%ip :i* ,he at once ackn[l$ges & rejects0 7op4 cit41 p4 #acg74 #ad ,s ,s*mi$el 7op4 cit41 col4 #biee74 ,?ompson ?9ks t ! /ory ( ,mk4 vi4 #af 8c\ld n possibly h be5 told z x has be51 if ! n>rator _h kn[n any?+ ab\t ! ,virg9 ,bir?0 7op4 cit41 p4 #ach74 #ae ,cf4 ,all51 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 xxiv 7c7 7i71 :]e fifty examples ( ?is t5d5cy are giv54 #af 8,! spee*es 9 ! e>li] "p may repres5t n untru/wor?ily ! primitive ,jewi%,*ri/ian prea*+ ( ! p]iod0 7,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #cje74 ,cf4 ,mack9to%1 op4 cit41 p4 #ci4 #ag ,mack9to%1 ib41 p4 #dj f4 8,:at absorbs ! prea*] is ,jesus' deliv]ance f ! grave & entry into glory01 p4 #da4 #ah ,mack9to%1 ib41 p4 #da4 #ai ,= ! opposite view see ,?ompson1 op4 cit41 p4 #adb4 #bj ,x is true diff]5t v]bs & t5ses are us$ ( ! *ildr5 & ( ! ,son4 ,! t5se ( is expla9$ by ! fact t ! ,son assum$ fle% & blood at a def9ite "t n[ pa/4 ,! *ange ( v]b--s f> z x is n expla9$ on /yli/ic gr\nds--is due to ! fact t 7( ! *ildr57 expresses ! univ]sal fact ( human frailty :i* m5 %>e "o ) ano!r1 & ! individual ent]+ ^u ?is /ate4 ,! latt] ^w does n imply a p>ticipation ( a peculi> & di/9ct k9d4 #ba 8,9 po9t ( "t1 ! ,epi/le to ! ,hebrews is ! fir/ sy/ematic sket* ( ,*ri/ian !ology0 7,mack9to%1 ,p]son ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 p4 #gh74 8,x is n s mu* an epi/le z an elaborate treatise0 7,fairbairn1 ,*ri/ 9 ,mod]n ,!ology1 p4 #cbj74 #bb 8,few w\ld say1 ) ,we/cott1 t virg9bir? is impli$ ?\gh n explicitly ass]t$ 9 ,jn4 i4 #ad44440 7,mack9to%1 ib41 p4 #ebh74 #bc ,! view t i4 #ac %\ld be read 8,:o 0 born1 c401 is t ( ,res*1 ,blass1 & ,?4 ,zahn4 ,! read+ appe>s 9 ,t]tullian1 ,ir5aeus1 ,ju/91 b ! weight ( textual au?ority is aga9/ x4 ,nor is ! read+1 z repres5t+ :at ! ,evangeli/ wrote1 intr9sically probable4 ,x w\ld rule out ! mat]nity ( ,m>y z well z ! pat]nity ( ,joseph4 ,! bir? w\ld n only be n 8( ! w ( man02 x w\ld n ev5 be 8( blood04 ,!re w\ld be no?+ human ab\t x2 f fir/ to la/ x w\ld be 8( ,god04 ,9 %ort1 ! read+ leads directly to t docetic view ( ! ,p]son ( ,*ri/1 aga9/ :i* ! ,johann9e ,writ+s s e>ne/ly cont5d4 ,! same objection may be urg$ aga9/ ! view t1 9 ! accept$ text ( ,jn4 i4 #ac1 ! ,virg9 ,bir? is pres5t to ! writ]'s m9d 8z a k9d ( patt]n or model ( ! bir? ( ! *ildr5 ( ,god0 7,w4 ,c4 ,all51 ,int]pret]1 ,oct41 #aije4 ,cf4 ,orr1 op4 cit41 p4 #aaa f42 ,box1 op4 cit41 p4 #ade74 ,w\ld n ! ,f\r? ,evangeli/ h reg>d$ su* a comp>ison z almo/ a d5ial t ,jesus ,*ri/ is come 9 ! fle%8 ,h>nack has rec5tly cont5d$ = ! s+ul> & = a ref]5ce to ! ,virg9 ,bir?4 ,he ?9ks t ! v]se 0 add$ 9 ! m>g91 z a comm5t on i4 #ad1 at a v e>ly "t & 9 ! ,johann9e circle 7,peake1 ,comm5t>y on ! ,bible1 p4 #gdg a74 #bd ,cf4 ,s&ay1 op4 cit41 pp4 #ga1 #adcee2 ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 pp4 #ecc ff42 ,e4 ,f4 ,scott1 ,! ,f\r? ,gospel1 ,its ,purpose & ,!ology1 pp4 #cb ff42 ,jli*]1 ,,int41 p4 #cif f4 #be iv4 #dd 78,= ,jesus himself te/ifi$1 t a prophet ha? no hon\r 9 8 own c\ntry071 unless x is a gloss1 probably ref]s to ,judaea1 n ,galilee4 ,cf4 ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #eec4 ,mr4 ,?ompson argues t x ref]s to ,galilee 7op4 cit41 p4 #aeh74 #bf 8,9 ord] to expla9 8 sil5ce1 we mu/ rememb] 8 /rict exclusion ( all t might imply a passivity 9 ! div9e ,logos4 ,x 0 by ,8 own free act t ! ,son ( ,god ent]$ ! _w z man4 ,! evangeli/ %rank f any !ory ( ,8 orig9 t might impair ! c5tral idea ( full activity1 f ! beg9n+ ( ,8 "w to ! end0 7,scott1 ib41 p4 #ahg74 #bg ,accord+ to ,*eyne 7,bible ,problems1 pp4 #gf ff471 ! *apt] conta9s a ,jewi% ,messianic leg5d ( ,babylonian orig91 :i* 0 ! s\rce ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition4 #bh ,! passage :i* beg9s ) ! words3 8,& ,m>y said unto ! angel1 ,h[ %all ?is be1 see+ ,i "k n a man80 #bi ,or 0 tak5 f ,q4 ,see ,h>nack's ,say+s1 p4 #cad2 ,ox=d ,/udies 9 ,synoptic ,problem1 p4 #ahg4 #cj ,,eb41 col4 #biee n4 ,cf4 ,plumm]1 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,lk41 p4 #fc4 #ca ,9 ?is connexion x %\ld be obs]v$ t ! same note ( wond] appe>s 9 ii4 #ah 9 ! case ( all ^? :o he> ! %eph]ds' words4 ,b accord+ to ! t]ms ( ii4 #ag1 :at !y are told is ! angelic message ( ii4 #ajab1 9 :i* ! ,virg9 ,bir? is n m5tion$4 ,! presumption is t ii4 #cc /&s ^u ! same plane4 #cb ,s among o!rs ,s*mi$el1 ,us5]1 ,hck]1 & ,blass1 :o writes 7op4 cit41 p4 #aga n473 8 #8,! esp\s$ wife' ( ! ord9>y text is a v cle> corruption1 due to an assimilation to i4 #bg 7:]e ! case is q diff]5t7 & to dogmatic prejudices 4440 8,t we h "h a case ( real contam9ation is se5 v pla9ly 9 ! old ,freis+ ,,ms41 9 :i* ! anci5t v>iants & /ill /& toge!r 9 imm$iate juxtaposition0 7,us5]1 ,,eb41 col4 #ccej74 #cc ,on ! agreem5t ( ! ,old ,syriac & ,old ,lat9 aga9/ ! great uncials1 cf4 ,kirsopp ,lake 7,! ,text ( ! ,,nt41 p4 #ij f471 8,p]haps ! g5]al result is to make x probable t ,w4 ,h4 7l>gely f lack ( evid5ce7 und]e/imat$ ! possibility t a cons5sus ( ! ,old ,lat9 & ,old ,syriac may give u a really primitive text ev5 :5 oppos$ to ! great uncials04 ,to simil> effect ,burkitt writes1 8,x is1 h[ev]1 9 ! direction "h indicat$--viz41 ! pres]vation ( ! true text 9 a consid]able numb] ( cases by #8,we/]n' docum5ts alone--t criticism may ultimately be able to advance beyond ! po9t rea*$ by ,hort0 7,,eb41 col4 #diij f474 8,i am unable to assume t ! edition ( ,we/cott & ,hort gives u a f9al text 9 ei!r ,gospel ,mt4 & ,mk44 ,9 p>ticul>1 ,i am incl9$ to believe t ! second c5tury read+s1 atte/$ by ! ecclesia/ical writ]s ( t c5tury1 & by ! ,syriac & ,lat9 v]sions1 are (t5 des]v+ ( pref]5ce0 7,w4 ,c4 ,all51 ,,icc41 ,/ ,mt41 p4 lxxxvii74 #cd 8,& ,joseph 444 took unto him 8 wife40 #ce ,:ile we are unable to acquiesce 9 ,s*mi$el's view t 8,m>y takes ! words ( ! angel z ref]r+ to a fulfilm5t 9 ! way ( nature01 we may fairly say t1 if ! passage ,lk4 i4 #cjh is a unity1 ,m>y ought to h be5 repres5t$ z tak+ ! angel's words 9 ?is way1 & t ?is w\ld be ! pla9 natural s5se 9 :i* to take !m4 #cf ,! claim1 !re=e1 t ! sugge/$ translation is support$ by ! words 8) ha/e0 9 v]se #ci 7,box7 _c be su/a9$4 ,moreov]1 ^! words are easily satisfi$ on ! usual view ( a promis$ conception4 ,see fur!r an article by ! pres5t writ] 9 ! ,expository ,times 7,may1 #aiai71 ,is ! ,lukan ,n>rative ( ! ,bir? ( ,*ri/ a ,prophecy8 ,9 l4 #af 9 ! second column read3 8,x c\ld n be any?+ else04 #cg ,e4g4 ,*eyne1 ,conybe>e1 ,grill1 ,h>nack1 ,hillmann1 ,holtzmann1 ,loisy1 ,montefiore1 ,pfleid]]1 ,n4 ,s*midt1 ,s*mi$el1 ,us5]1 ,vlt]1 ,j4 ,weiss4 ,on ! o!r side are ,hilg5feld1 ,clem51 ,gunkel1 ,*ase1 ,/anton1 ,orr1 ,box1 ,kn[l+4 #ch ,b see ,w4 ,c4 ,all51 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 #aj & p4 #ai4 #ci ,"s s*ol>s1 includ+ ,hck]1 ,spitta1 & ,montefiore1 br+ v]ses #cf1 #cg )9 ! int]polation4 ,s*mi$el's pres5tation ( ! argum5t /at$ above is z foll[s3 8,moreov]1 ! case ( ,elizabe? to :i* ! angel po9ts 9 v4 #cf is no evid5ce ( ! possibility ( a sup]natural conception2 x has evid5tial value only if :at has happ5$ to ,elizabe? is m wond]ful ?an :at is be+ promis$ to ,m>y--namely t %e1 9 ! way ( nature1 is to become ! "m ( ! ,messiah0 7,,eb41 col4 #bieg74 #dj ,s*mi$el1 op4 cit41 col4 #bieg4 ,to ! same effect ,j4 ,e/l9 ,c>p5t] 7op4 cit41 p4 #dhg f474 ,comp>e ,lk4 i4 #de :]e ,m>y is prais$ = h] fai?1 & see ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bfh f4 #da ,cf4 ,lob/e91 ,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,*ri/1 p4 #fg4 #db ,cf4 ,m(fatt 7,,int41 p4 #bfh n473 8,! sub/itution 444 is too sl5d] a basis1 & may h be5 accid5tal1 :il/ ! alleg$ omission ( #cde f ! ,protevangelium ,iacobi breaks d[n ^u exam9ation0 7cf4 ,headlam's discussion ) ,conybe>e 9 ! ,gu>dian = ,m>*,april #aijc74 #dc ,! ,new ,te/am5t ,docum5ts1 _! ,orig9 & e>ly ,hi/ory 7,croall ,lectures1 #aiaaab74 #aiac4 #dd ,cf4 also ,burkitt 7,,ght41 p4 #aa73 8444 ! text ( ! ,gospels1 ! actual word+1 & ev5 to "s ext5t ! cont5ts1 7 n treat$ dur+ ! second c5tury ) p>ticul> scrupulosity by ! ,*ri/ians :o pres]v$ & canoniz$ !m4 ,!re is no?+ 9 ! way :i* ,*ri/ians treat$ ! books ( ! ,new ,te/am5t dur+ ! fir/ f\r c5turies t corresponds ) ! c>e be/[$ by ! ,jews ^u ! ,hebrew ,scriptures f ! "t ( ,aquiba onw>ds40 ,see also ,blass1 ,philology ( ! ,gospels1 p4 #gb f4 #de ,cf4 ,s&ay 7,inspiration1 #bnd ,ed41 pp4 #bieh73 8,possessors ( copies did n hesitate to add little items ( tradition1 (t5 oral1 & 9 "s cases p]haps writt51 :i* rea*$ !m0 7#bie74 ,see also ,j4 ,h4 ,m\lton 7,f ,egyptian ,rubbi% ,heaps1 pp4 #ig ff471 & an article 9 ! ,classical ,review = ,m>* #aiae on 8,! ,primitive ,text ( ! ,gospels & ,acts02 ,j4 ,a4 ,rob9son1 ,/udy ( ! ,gospels1 p4 #bd f4 #df ,cf4 also ,hawk9s 7,,hs41 #bnd ,ed41 pp4 #aeb & #aig71 :o in/ances 8additions ( v>i\s k9ds :i* may be reg>d$ z probably editorial0 7p4 #aig7 9 ! ,second & ,?ird ,gospels4 ,see also ,m(fatt 7,,int471 "u head+ 8,glosses 9 ,,nt4 text01 p4 #fda1 :]e ref]5ces are giv5 to cases treat$ 9 ! body ( ! "w4 #dg ,x may1 h[ev]1 h be5 accid5tally lo/4 ,see ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 pp4 #bch ff1 :]e ! "q is discuss$4 #dh ,9 ?is connexion x is important to rememb] t ev5 e>ly or?ographic peculi>ities h be5 accurately pres]v$4 8,i h be5 mu* /ruck by ! numb] ( cases 9 :i* ! old uncials pres]ve spell+s :i* c be prov$ curr5t 9 ! "t ( ! autographs1 b obsolete long be=e ! f\r? c5tury4 ,fai?ful 9 m9utiae1 !y might reasonably be expect$ to be fai?ful also 9 great] matt]s0 7,j4 ,h4 ,m\lton1 9 an article 9 ! ,classical ,review1 ,m>*1 #aiae1 repr9t$ 9 ,! ,*ri/ian ,religion 9 ! ,/udy & ! ,/reet1 #aiai1 p4 #aec74 ,see also ! ,prolegom5a1 pp4 #dbef4 #di ,! italics are ours4 #ej ,plumm]1 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,lk41 pp4 xlviii ff42 ,h>nack1 ,luke ! ,physician1 p4 #ajd f42 ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bgh f42 ,hawk9s1 ,,hs41 #bnd ,ed41 pp4 #ae ff4 #ea ,!re is a wellkn[n difficulty ( punctuation 9 v]se #ce4 ,ought we to put a comma1 ) ,,:41 aft] 8 ,if we d s1 ! subj4 is 1 & is "p ( ! pr$icate4 ,if we omit ! comma1 ! :ole phrase 4 is ! subj41 & ! pr$4 is 4 4 7cf4 ,,rv4 m>g474 ,mo/ critical editors ( ! ,greek text omit ! comma4 ,x is probable1 z ! ,,:4 type %[s1 t ,dr4 ,hort 0 influ5c$ by 8 belief t 4 w5t toge!r z a quotation or rem9isc5ce ( ! ,,ot41 &1 if ! passage comes f ,/4 ,luke1 ?is is a /rong argum5t4 ,on ! o!r h&1 x c be argu$ t if ! words are a ,greek r5d]+ ( an ,aramaic phrase x is improbable1 if n impossible1 t ! p>ticiple %\ld /& alone z ! subj4 ,x is n possible1 ( c\rse1 to settle ! "q by appeal+ to manuscript au?ority1 z ! e>ly ,,mss4 7 practically devoid ( punctuation m>ks4 ,9 our own case1 we are unable to use ei!r ( ! argum5ts cit$1 s9ce ea* re/s ^u ! assumption ( ! ,lukan orig9 ( ,lk4 i4 #cd f41 :i* is ! v po9t we are discuss+4 ,:ile !n we foll[ ! ,,:4 text we h to leave ! "q ( punctuation an op5 "o4 ,if ! comma %\ld be omitt$ we lose ! difficulty ( not$ on p4 #fa1 & we lose also ! argum5t f its con/ruction1 sket*$ on p4 #fd4 ,z1 9 ! end1 we claim t ,lk4 i4 #cd f4 comes f ! h& ( ,/4 ,luke1 we may p]haps be p]mitt$ to express a p]sonal pref]5ce = ! ,,:4 punctuation4 ,/4 ,luke's admitt$ fondness = ,,ot4 phraseology po9ts /rongly 9 ?is direction1 :ile ! !ory ( an orig9al ,aramaic docum5t ga9s no increas$ support1 b r ! contr>y1 z "t goes by4 ,on ! "o h&1 ,h>nack has conv9c+ly %[n h[ mu* ! ,greek ( ,lk4 i1 ii owes to ,/4 ,luke's craftsman%ip 7cf4 ,luke ! ,phys41 pp4 #ajb ff471 &1 on ! o!r h&1 ! argum5t f 8,semiticisms0 becomes less cog5t ! m we "k ( ! papyri 7cf4 ,m\lton1 ,proleg41 pp4 #acah4 ,see also ,gr4 ii4 #abbj74 ,aramaic oral tradition may und]lie cc4 i1 ii1 b ! probability is t ! ,greek ( ^! *apt]s owes its ,,ot4 flav\r to ! m or less delib]ate attempt ( ,/4 ,luke to create an appropriate ar*aic atmosph]e4 #eb ,! v>i\s computations are drawn f ! ,concordance to ! ,greek ,te/am5t by ,dr4 ,w4 ,f4 ,m\lton & ,dr4 ,a4 ,s4 ,g$54 ,9 ! case ( ,/4 ,luke's ,gospel words occurr+ 9 i4 #cd f4 are omitt$4 ,if ^! v]ses are ,lukan1 ?is und]e/imates ! ,lukan evid5ce4 ,x w\ld1 h[ev]1 be begg+ ! "q to include ^! v]ses 9 ! pres5t exam9ation4 ,quotations & d\btful cases 7except :]e m5tion$7 are also omitt$4 #ec ,b cf4 ,dalman1 ,words ( ,jesus1 p4 #bd1 quot$ by ,m\lton1 ,proleg41 p4 #aca4 #ed ,cf4 ,! ,vocabul>y ( ! ,greek ,te/am5t1 by ,m\lton & ,milligan1 p4 #fe a4 ,see also ! note at ! foot ( p4 #aca 9 ! ,prolegom5a3 8,?is phrase 444 occurs 9 ! ,semitic atmosph]e alone44440 #ee & 7see lat]7 are bo? /rongly *>act]i/ic ( ,/4 ,luke's /yle1 b ) ! dative is also v frequ5t4 ,tak+ ! two works toge!r1 & ) ! dat4 are almo/ equally common 74 w4 dat4 hav+ ! great] numb] ( in/ances74 ,9 ! ,g4 ! proportion ( ) ! dat4 to is #e 3 #d4 ,9 ,acts x is #d 3 #e4 #ef ,! italics are 84 #eg ,cf4 ,m\lton & ,milligan1 p4 #abg a4 #eh ,cf4 ,h>nack's ,luke ! ,physician1 p4 #ajd2 ,m\lton1 ,proleg41 p4 #ah4 #ei ,s ,?ay],grimm1 p4 #aag1 :]e x is po9t$ out t ! same idiom appe>s 9 ! ,lat91 9 cognosc]e1 ,ovid1 ,met4 iv4 #eif4 #fj v4 ,m\lton & ,milligan1 op4 cit41 p4 #abg a4 #fa ,s ,l4 ,t4 ,,:4 ,9 bo? cases ,,:4 give 9 ! m>g94 #fb ,!re are 8#bfa words :i* occur 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t only 9 ! gospel ( ,/4 ,luke0 7,h>nack1 ,date ( ,acts1 p4 #b74 ,plumm] 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,lk41 lii7 speaks ( #cab su* words1 b says t #eb are d\btful & #aa occur 9 quotations4 ,includ+ ,acts1 accord+ to ,plumm]1 ! numb] is #gej or 7includ+ d\btful cases7 #hea4 #fc ,p4 #ei4 #fd ,z 9 all ^! enum]ations4 ,see note on p4 #eh4 #fe ,cf4 ,?,gr41 p4 #aeb a1 & = papyri1 c41 ,m\lton & ,milligan1 op4 cit41 p4 #afc b4 #ff ,sir ,john ,c4 ,hawk9s's record ( 7us$ ( speak+ to7 is z foll[s 7,,hs41 #bnd ,ed41 p4 #ba73 ,mt4 #j1 ,mk4 #e1 ,lk4 #ii1 ,ac4 #eb1 ,paul #b1 ,jn4 #ai1 re/ ( ,,nt4 #d4 ,?us = ! ,lukan writ+s ! p]c5tage is #hc4d4 #fg ,m(fatt's rem>k 78,! /yle ( #cde is fairly ,lucan1 ?\gh occurs only once 9 ! ?ird gospel & nev]01 ,,int41 #bfi7 is surely an und]/atem5t4 ,z we h se5 occurs eight times 9 ,acts4 #fh ,see1 h[ev]1 p4 #eg n4 #fi ,a good illu/ration ( ?is po9t is f\nd 9 ! spuri\s end+ to ,/4 ,m>k's ,gospel4 ,z ,pr(4 ,e4 ,p4 ,g\ld %[s 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,mk41 pp4 #cjad7 out ( #afc words #ai 7or m ?an #aa p] c5t47 are n f\nd else:]e 9 ! ,gospel4 ,!y include su* words z 7#e times71 7#c times71 7twice74 ,!re are also two unfamili> expressions3 7v]se #aj7 & 77 4 #gj ,if we c\ld accept ! view t 8see+ ,i "k n a man0 9 v]se #cd is ,/4 ,luke's only ins]tion1 & t he wrote v]se #ce f ! fir/ )\t ?\ght ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 8 po9t ( view w\ld !n be some:at diff]5t4 ,on ?is !ory 8 ?\ght w\ld be t :ile born ( ,joseph & ,m>y ! promis$ *ild 0 none ! less sup]naturally conceiv$4 ,see p4 #fi f4 #ga ,see lat] pp4 #ghhd4 #gb ,cf4 ,v4 ,h4 ,/anton 7,,ghd41 ii1 p4 #bbf f474 #gc ,z reg>ds ! rema9+ details ( ,zimm]mann's hypo!sis1 none ( !m is really necess>y to our !ory4 ,we believe t :at ,/4 ,luke actually wrote 9 ii4 #e 0 8) ,m>y 8 wife0 7see pp4 #cb ff474 ,b 8 new in=mation did n compel him to alt] ?is to 8) ,m>y :o 0 betro!d to him01 ?\gh lat] read]s ?\ght ! *ange 0 necess>y4 ,nor 0 x requir$ to alt] i4 #bg4 ,ev5 9 ! orig9al n>rative 7i4e4 on our !ory1 be=e i4 #cd f4 0 add$7 ! passage may h read z we h x n[1 ! prophecy be+ reg>d$ z utt]$ previ\s to m>riage4 ,!re is no real ne$ to reg>d 8to a virg9 betro!d to a man ^: "n 0 ,joseph0 z an int]polation 9 ! int]e/s ( ! ,virg9 ,bir?1 ei!r 7) ,h>nack7 on ! "p ( a r$actor1 or 7) ,zimm]mann7 on ! "p ( ,/4 ,luke himself4 #gd ,cf4 ,ox4 ,/udies 9 ! ,syn4 ,prob41 pp4 #dag1 #dbj1 :]e ! ,rev4 ,n4 ,p4 ,williams1 ,m4,a41 sugge/s t c]ta9 passages 9 ,mk4 may be lat] ins]tions1 made 8possibly by ,/4 ,m>k himself04 #ge ,9 ,acts xvi4 #ai1 #bj x is said t ! own]s ( ! dem5t$ girl 8seiz$ ,paul & ,silas & dragg$ !m into ! agora be=e ! magi/rates04 ,! words :i* imm$iately foll[ are3 8& br++ !m to ! pres5ce ( ! praetors1 !y said44440 ,ramsay's comm5t is3 8,! expression halts betwe5 ! ,greek =m & ! ,lat9 444 z if ! au?or _h n q made up 8 m9d :i* he %\ld employ4444 ,x is h>dly possible t a writ]1 ^: expression is s concise1 %\ld h int5d$ to leave 9 8 text two clauses :i* say exactly ! same ?+0 7,/4 ,paul1 p4 #bag f474 ,9 ref]5ce to ,acts xx4 #d1 #e1 ,ramsay writes3 8,9 v]se #d we h probably a case l xvi4 #ai f41 9 :i* ! au?ority hesitat$ betwe5 two con/ructions1 & left an unf9i%$ s5t5ce conta9+ elem5ts ( two =ms0 7ib41 p4 #bhi74 ,he adds t ! s5t5ce 8p]haps nev] receiv$ ! au?or's f9al revision04 #gf ,cf4 ,lo(s1 ,:at is ! ,tru? ab\t ,jesus ,*ri/81 p4 #abb4 #gg ,speak+ ( ! late appe>ance ( ! ,virg9 ,bir? tradition ,g4 ,h4 ,box writes 7op4 cit41 p4 #acg73 8,its comp>atively late appe>ance & primitive "* c only be reconcil$ by ! explanation t x is bas$ ^u facts :i* 7 = long treasur$ )9 a n>r[ circle 9 close contact ) our ,"l1 & :i* 7 only gradually divulg$ to ! ,*ur*40 ,cf4 also ,s&ay1 ,outl9es1 pp4 #aic1 #aif4 #gh ,cf4 ,burkitt1 ,! ,gospel ,hi/ory & its ,transmission1 pp4 #bfj1 #bgd f4 #gi ,cf4 ,burkitt 7,evangelion ,da,meph>re%e1 ii4 #bfj72 ,m(fatt 7,,int41 #bej72 ,box 7,! ,virg9 ,bir? ( ,jesus1 p4 #ab72 ,s&ay 7,outl9es1 p4 #bja74 #hj ,s among o!rs ,we/cott1 ,burkitt1 ,box1 ,all51 ,b>n>d1 ,a4 ,j4 ,maclean1 ,m(fatt4 #ha ,evan4 ,da,meph41 ii1 p4 #bfj4 ,cf4 also ,all5 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 #e72 ,box 7ib41 p4 #ad72 ,m(fatt 7ib41 p4 #bea74 #hb 8,x is m]ely an embodim5t1 9 g5ealogical =m--a =m specially calculat$ to appeal to ,jewi% read]s--( ! idea t ,jesus belong$1 ?r\gh ,8 relation to ,joseph1 to ! royal family ( ,david0 7,box1 ib41 p4 #ae74 #hc ,see ,app5dix to pres5t *apt]4 #hd ,! ,n4 ,t4 ,docum5ts1 _! ,orig9 & e>ly ,hi/ory1 p4 #adh4 ,w4 ,c4 ,all5 7op4 cit41 p4 lxxxv f47 seems to emphasize ! m negative aspects ( ! writ]'s /yle1 b calls att5tion to phrases & con/ructions :i* are said to be 8/rik+ly *>act]i/ic ( ! ,gospel04 ,cf4 ,m\lton1 ,gk4 ,gr41 ii1 p4 #bi4 #he ,cf4 ,burkitt 7,,ght41 p4 #ahd f47 #hf ,sir ,j4 ,c4 ,hawk9s po9ts out 7,,hs41 #bnd ,ed41 p4 #i7 t ! 8*>act]i/ic0 words & phrases ( ,mt4 are 8us$ consid]ably m freely 9 ^! two *apt]s ?an 9 ! re/ ( ! book04 #hg 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 79 s5se us$71 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 #hh i4 #bb f41 ii4 #e f41 ii4 #ae1 ii4 #ag f41 ii4 #bc1 iii4 #c1 iv4 #ad ff41 viii4 #ag1 xii4 #agba1 xiii4 #ce1 xxi4 #d f41 xxvii4 #i4 ,( ^! iii4 #c diff]s some:at f ! re/1 & ii4 #bc _c be id5tifi$ ) any s+le ,,ot4 passage4 #hi ,see especially ,/anton 7,,ghd41 ii1 p4 #cdc72 also ,all5 7op4 cit41 p4 lxii7 & ,burkitt 7,,ght41 pp4 #abd ff474 #ij ,cf4 ,burkitt1 op4 cit41 ii4 p4 #bei2 ,box1 op4 cit41 pp4 #aa1 #ai ff42 ,m(fatt1 ,,int41 p4 #bei2 ,lake1 ,! ,hi/orical ,evid5ce = ! ,resurrection ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 pp4 #agh ff4 #ia ,= ! ref]5ce to ,epiphanius see an article by ,f4 ,c4 ,conybe>e1 ,,hj41 i1 p4 #if4 ,conybe>e's ma9 argum5t is drawn f ! edition ( ! ,dialogue ( ,timo?y & ,aquila1 publi%$ by himself 7#ahih74 ,he ?9ks t ! ,dialogue 8reflects an age :5 ,mt4 i4 #ahbe _h already be5 introduc$1 b 0 n pres5t 9 all ! copies0 7p4 #ajj74 ,if we accept ! view advocat$ by ,f4 ,c4 ,burkitt 7,evan4 ,da,meph41 ii4 #bfe7 ?is inf]5ce is n necess>y4 ,see ,app5dix to pres5t *apt]1 p4 #ajf4 #ib 79 s5se us$1 b ! phrase 9 :i* x occurs is probably an ins]tion1 ,burkitt1 ib41 ii1 p4 #bfa71 1 1 1 1 4 #ic 1 1 1 1 4 #id 8,i _c believe t any docum5t und]lies x4 ,on ! contr>y1 ,i believe x is ! composition ( ! ,evangeli/ himself0 7,burkitt1 ,evan4 ,da,meph41 ii1 p4 #bfj74 ,cf4 also ,all5 7,,icc41 ,/4 ,mt41 p4 #e74 #ie ,s&ay 7,outl9es1 p4 #aif7 writes3 8,9 reg>d to ! ,mat?aean docum5t we are 9 ! d>k4 ,! curi\s gravitation ( /atem5t t[>ds ,joseph has a reason2 b beyond ?is !re is n mu* t we c say4 ,x w\ld n foll[ t ! imm$iate s\rce ( ! n>rative 0 v ne> 8 p]son40 #if 8,9 ! hi/orical judgem5t ( ! ,gospels ?is di/9ction betwe5 facts & reflections has frequ5tly to be rememb]$0 7,e4 ,p4 ,g\ld1 ,,icc41 ,/4 ,mk41 p4 #cg74 #ig ,see ,! ,hi/orical ,evid5ce = ! ,resurrection ( ,jesus ,*ri/1 by ,pr(essor ,kirsopp ,lake4 #ih ,unless o!rwise /at$ fur!r ref]5ces to ^! writ]s are to ! works cit$ above4 #ii ,cf4 also ,m(fatt1 p4 #bea2 ,s&ay 7,outl9es1 p4 #aig72 ,w4 ,c4 ,all51 p4 #h4 #ajj 8,! read+ ( ,s itself ,i h come to reg>d z no?+ m ?an a p>aphrase ( ! read+ ( ! #8,f]r> ,gr\p'1 ! ,syriac translator tak+ to ref] to z well z to 0 7p4 #bfc74 #aja ,! =ego+ ?ree alt]natives are ^? not$ by ,dr4 ,s&ay 7,outl9es1 p4 #aii f471 betwe5 :i*1 he says1 8! data d n all[ u to decide absolutely04 #ajb ,ref]r+ to ! ,evangeli/ ! ,jew objects3 8,he says begat out ( ,m>y0 7cf4 ,conybe>e1 ,,hj41 vol4 i1 no4 #a1 p4 #ajj74 #ajc ,we ought to add t ,all5 leaves op5 ! possibility t ! p>5!sis may be a lat] addition1 & t ! orig9al text may h be5 8,& ,joseph begat ,jesus04 8,x seems probable 444 t ! text und]ly+ ,s#a is ! ne>e/ approa* n[ extant to ! orig9al ,greek1 & x mu/ rema9 possible t ev5 "h ! relative clause is an ins]tion0 7p4 #h74 #ajd ,cf4 ,jli*]1 ,,int4 7,eng4 ,tr471 p4 #cfg3 8,9 my op9ion1 bo? took up _! p5s m or less simultane\sly1 ea* unaw>e ( ! o!r's "w1 & bo? actuat$ ess5tially by ! same motive1 i4e4 t ( be/[+ a ,gospel ^u ! ,*ur* :i* %\ld be at once complete1 & well adapt$ bo? to refute unju/ accusations f outside & to edify ! believ]s !mselves40 #aje ,?is appe>s 9 ! fact t ! ,fir/ ,gospel implies1 z we h se51 t ! doctr9e _h already be5 kn[n to its read]s = "s "t4 #ajf ,cf4 ,us5] to ! same effect1 ,,eb41 col4 #ccea4 #ajg ,cf4 ,lo(s1 ,:at is ! ,tru? ab\t ,jesus ,*ri/81 p4 #ib f43 8,leg5ds arise mu* m quickly ?an is assum$ by lib]al !ology s9ce ,/rauss04 #ajh ,s ,pr(4 ,p]cy ,g>dn]1 quot$ 9 ,fai? & ,fre$om1 p4 #afh4