Map of our Saviour's Journeys on the first Day of Passion Week. N.B.-The localities of Jerusalem on this Map are in accordance with the views of Dr. Robinson. For more exact identifications, see the art. JERUSALEM. For the arguments assigning our Lord's triumphal entry into the city to Monday, see PALM SUNDAY. (Matt. xxi, 18, 19; Luke xxi, 37, 38; xix, 47, 48; Matt. das Iscariot, learning their desire, went and engaged to xxi, 20-22). This, the last day of Jesus's intercourse betray his Master into their hands, on the first opportu with the public, was filled with various discussions (Wed-nity, for a fixed reward (Matt. xxvi, 1-5, 14-16, and parnesday, March 16, A.D. 29). The hierarchy, demanding allels). the authority for his public conduct, were perplexed by The same day Jesus sent two of his disciples into the his counter-question as to the authority of the Baptist's city, with directions where to prepare the Passover meal mission, and he seized the occasion to depict their incon- (Luke xxii, 7-13), and at evening, repairing thither to sistency and criminality by the parables of the two sons partake of it with the whole number of his apostles [see sent by their father to work, and the murderous garden- LORD'S SUPPER], he affectionately reminded them of ers, with so vivid a personal reference as to cover them the interest gathering about this last repast with them; with confusion (Matt. xxi, 23-46, and parallels). The then, while it was progressing, he washed their feet to mooted question of the lawfulness of tribute to a Gentile reprove their mutual rivalry and enforce condescension power, being insidiously proposed to him by a coalition to one another by his own example [see WASHING THE of the Pharisees and Herodians, was so readily solved by FEET], and immediately declared his own betrayal by him by an appeal to the very coin paid in tribute, that one of their number, fixing the individual (by a sign they again retired, unable to make it a ground for pub- recognised by him alone) among the amazed disciples lic charges against him (Matt. xxii, 15-22, and parallels). (Luke xxii, 14-17, 24; John xiii, 1-15; Luke xxii, 25The case of seven brothers successively married (under 30; John xiii, 17-19, 21, 22; Matt. xxvi, 22–24; John the Levirate law) to the same woman being next sup- xiii, 23-26; Matt. xxvi, 25; and parallels). Judas imposed by the Sudducees, he as easily disposed of the im- mediately withdrew, full of resentment, but without the aginary difficulty concerning her proper husband in the rest suspecting his purpose; relieved of his presence, other world by declaring the non-existence of such re- Jesus now began to speak of his approaching fate, when lations there, and refuted their infidelity as to the future he was interrupted by the surprised inquiries of his dislife by citing a passage of Scripture (Matt. xxii, 23-33, ciples, who produced their weapons as ready for his deand parallels). Seeing the Sadducees so completely si- fence, while Peter stoutly maintained his steadfastness, lenced, one of the Pharisaical party undertook to puzzle although warned of his speedy defection (John xiii, 27Jesus by raising that disputed point, What Mosaic in- 33, 36-38; Matt. xxvi, 31-33; Luke xxii, 31-38; and junction is the most important? but Jesus cited the du- parallels); then, closing the meal by instituting the ties of supreme devotion to God and general benevolence Eucharist (q. v.) (Matt. xxvi, 26-29, and parallels), Jeto man as comprising all other moral enactments, to sus lingered to discourse at length to his disciples (whose which the other so cordially assented as to draw a com- questions showed how little they comprehended him) mendation from Jesus on his hopeful sentiments (Mark on his departure at hand, and the gift (in consequence) xii, 28-34, and parallel). Jesus now turned the tables of the Holy Spirit, with exhortations to religious activupon his opponents by asking them, Whose descendant ity and mutual love, and, after a prayer for the divine the Messiah should be? and on their replying, David's, safeguard upon them (John xiv, 1-xv, 17; xiii, 34, 35; of course, he then asked how (as in Psa. cx, 1) he could xv, 18-xvii, 26), he retired with them to the Mount of still be David's Lord? which so embarrassed his ene- Olives (John xviii, 1, and parallels). Here, entering mies that they desisted from this mode of attack (Matt. the garden of Gethsemane, he withdrew, with three of xxii, 41-46). Jesus then in plain terms denounced be- the disciples, a short distance from the rest, and, while fore the concourse the hypocrisy and ostentation of the they fell asleep, he three times prayed, in an agony (q. hierarchy, especially their priesteraft, their sanctimony, v.) that forced blood-tinged sweat from the pores of his their ambition, their extortion, their casuistry, and their forehead, for relief from the horror-stricken anguish of intolerance, and bewailed the impending fate of the his soul [see BLOODY SWEAT], and was partially recity (Matt. xxiii, 1-12, 14-21, 29-39, and parallels). Ob- lieved by an angelic message; but Judas, soon appearserving a poor widow drop a few of the smallest coins ing with a force of Temple guards and others whom he into the contribution-box in the Temple, he declared conducted to this frequent place of his Master's retirethat she had shown more true liberality than wealthier ment, indicated him to them by a kiss (q. v.); Jesus donors, because she had given more in proportion to her then presented himself to them with such a majestic means, and with greater self-denial (Mark xii, 41-44, mien as to cause them to fall back in dismay, but while and parallel). A number of proselytes [see HELENIST] Peter sought to defend him by striking off with his requesting through Philip an interview with Jesus, he sword the ear of one of the assailants (which Jesus inmet them with intimations of his approaching passion, mediately cured with a touch, at the same time rebuk while a celestial voice announced the glory that should ing his disciple's impetuosity), Jesus, after a short rethereby accrue to God, and he then retired from the un- monstrance upon the tumultuous and furtive manner believing public with an admonition to improve their of his pursuers' approach, and a stipulation for his dis present spiritual privileges (John xii, 20-50). As he ciples' security, suffered himself to be taken prisoner, was crossing the Mount of Olives, his disciples calling with scarcely one of his friends remaining to protect his attention to the noble structure of the Temple oppo- him (Matt. xxvi, 36-50; John xviii, 4–9; Luke xxii, site, he declared its speedy demolition, and on their ask- 49; Matt. xxvi, 51-56; Mark xiv, 51, 52; and parallels). ing the time and tokens of this catastrophe, he discoursed See BETRAYAL. He was first led away to the palace to them at length, first on the coming downfall of the of the ex-pontiff Annas, who, after vainly endeavoring city and nation (warning them to escape betimes from to extract from him some confession respecting himself the catastrophe), and then (by a gradual transition, in or his disciples (while Peter, who, with John, had fol which, under varied imagery, he represented both events lowed after, three times denied any connection with him more or less blended) he passed to the scenes of the final [see PETER], when questioned by the various servants judgment (described as a forensic tribunal), interspers- in the court-yard, but was brought to pungent penitence ing constant admonitions (especially in the parable of by a look from his Master within the house), sent him the ten virgins) to preparation for an event the date of for further examination to the acting high-priest Ca which was so uncertain (Matt. xxiv, 1-8; x, 17-20, 34-aphas (John xviii, 13-16, 18, 17, 25, 19-23, 26, 27; Luke 36; xxiv, 9, 10; x, 28; xxiv, 13-37; Luke xxi, 34-36; Matt. xxiv, 43, 44; Luke xii, 41, 42; Mark xiii, 21, 34; Matt. xxiv, 45–51; Luke xii, 47, 48; Matt. xxiv, 42; xxv, 1-12; Luke xii, 35–38; Matt. xxv, 13, 31-46). As the Passover was now approaching, the Sanhedrim held a secret meeting at the house of the high-priest, where they resolved to get possession, but by private means, of the person of Jesus (Thursday, March 17, A.D. 29), and Ju xxii, 61, 62; John xxiii, 24; and parallels). This func tionary, assembling the Sanhedrim at daylight (Friday, March 18, A.D. 29), at length, with great difficulty, pro cured two witnesses who testified to Jesus's threat of destroying the Temple (see John ii, 19), but with such discrepancy between themselves that Caiaphas broke the silence of Jesus by adjuring him respecting his Messianic claims, and on his avowal of his character made use of this admission to charge him with blasphemy, to | 19-24; Matt. xxvii, 36, 39-43; Luke xxiii, 36, 37, 39 which the Sanhedrim present assented with a sentence 43; John xix, 25-27; Matt. xxvii, 45-47, 49; John xix, of death; the officers who held Jesus thereupon indulged 28-30; Luke xxiii, 46; Matt. xxvii, 51-53; Luke xxiii, in the vilest insults upon his person (Matt. xxvi, 57, 59-47, 48; and parallels). See PASSION. Towards even63; Luke xxii, 67-71, 63-65; and parallels). See CAIA-ing, on account of the approaching Sabbath, the Jews PHAS. After a formal vote of the full Sanhedrim (q. v.) petitioned Pilate to cause the crucified persons to be early in the forenoon, Jesus was next led to the procu- killed by the usual process of hastening their death see rator Pilate's mansion for his legal sanction upon the CRUCIFIXION], and their bodies removed from so public determination of the religious court, where the hierar- a place; and as the soldiers were executing this order, chy sought to overcome his reluctance to involve him- they were surprised to find Jesus already dead; one of self in the matter (which was increased by his exami- the soldiers, however, tested the body by plunging a nation of Jesus himself, who simply replied to their spear into the side, when water mixed with clots of allegations by giving Pilate to understand that his blood issued from the wound (John xix, 31-37). See claims did not relate to temporal things) by charging BLOOD AND WATER. A rich Arimathæan, named Johim with sedition, especially in Galilee, an intimation seph (q. v.), a secret believer in Jesus, soon came and that Pilate seized upon to remand the whole trial to desired the body of Jesus for burial, and Pilate, as soon Herod (who chanced to be in Jerusalem at the time), as he had ascertained the actual death of Jesus, gave as the civil head of that province (John xviii, 28–38; him permission; accordingly, with the help of NicodeMatt. xxvii, 12-14; Luke xxiii, 4-7). Herod, however, mus, he laid it in his own new vault, temporarily wrapon eagerly questioning Jesus, in hopes of witnessing ped in spices, while the female friends of Jesus observed some display of his miraculous power, was so enraged at the place of its sepulture (Mark xv, 42-44; John xix, his absolute silence that he sent him back to Pilate in 38-42; Luke xxiii, 25, 26; and parallels). See SEPUL a mock attire of royalty (Luke xxiii, 8-12). The proc- CHRE. Next day (Saturday, March 19, A.D. 29) the urator, thus compelled to exercise jurisdiction over the hierarchy, remembering Jesus's predictions of his own case, convinced of the prisoner's innocence (especially resurrection, persuaded Pilate to secure the entrance to after a message from his wife to that effect), proposed the tomb by a large stone, a seal, and a guard (see to the populace to release him as the malefactor which WATCH] at the door (Matt. xxvii, 62-66). The women, custom required him to set at liberty on the holiday of meanwhile, prepared additional embalming materials in the Passover (q. v.); but the hierarchy insisted on the the evening for the body of Jesus (Mark xvi, 1). See release of a notorious criminal, Barabbas, instead, and EMBALM, enforced their clamor for the crucifixion of Jesus with Very early next morning (Sunday, March 20, A.D. so keen an insinuation of Pilate's disloyalty to the em- 29) Jesus arose alive from the tomb [see RESURREC• peror, that, after varied efforts to exonerate himself and TION], which an angel opened, the guards swooning discharge the prisoner (whose personal bearing enhanced away at the sight (Matt. xxviii, 2-4, and parallel). his idea of his character), he at length yielded to their The women soon appeared on the spot with the spices demands, and, after allowing Jesus to be beaten [see for completing the embalming, but, discovering the stone FLAGELLATION] and otherwise shamefully handled by removed from the door, Mary Magdalene hastily returnthe soldiers [see MOCKING], he pronounced sentence for ed to tell Peter, while the rest, entering, missed the body, his execution on the cross (Luke xxiii, 13-16; Matt. but saw two angels at the entrance, who informed them xv, 17-19, 16, 20-30; John xix, 4-16; and parallels). of the resurrection of their Master, and, as they were reSee PILATE. The traitor Judas, perceiving the enor- turning to inform the disciples, they met Jesus himself; mity of his crime, now that, in consequence of his Mas- but the disciples, on their return, disbelieved their re ter's acquiescence, there appeared no chance of his es- port (Mark xxi, 2-4; John xx, 2; Luke xxiv, 3-8; cape, returned to the hierarchy with the bribe, which, Matt. xxviii, 7-10; Luke xxiv, 9, 10; and parallels). on their cool reply of indifference to his retraction, he The guard, however, had by this time recovered, and, flung down in the Temple, and went and hung himself on reporting to the hierarchy, they were bribed to circuin despairing remorse (Matt. xxvii, 3-10). See JUDAS. late a story of the abreption of the body during their On his way out of the city to Golgotha, where he was sleep (Matt. xxxiii, 11-15). Mary Magdalene meanto be crucified, Jesus fainted under the burden of his while had roused Peter and John with the tidings of the cross, which was therefore laid upon the shoulders of absence of the body, and, on their hastening to the tomb, one Simon, who chanced to pass at the time, and as they both observed the state of things there, without they proceeded Jesus bade the disconsolate Jewish fe- arriving at any satisfactory explanation of it); but Mamales attending him to weep rather for themselves and ry, who arrived soon after they had left, as she stood their nation than for him; on reaching the place of ex-weeping, saw a person of whom, mistaking him for the ecution [see GOLGOTHA], after refusing the usual nar-keeper of the garden, she inquired for the body, but was cotic, he was suspended on the cross between two male- soon made aware by his voice that it was Jesus himself, factors, while praying for his murderers; and a brief when she fell at his feet, being forbidden a nearer ap statement of his offence (which the Jews in vain en-proach, but bidden to announce his resurrection to the deavored to induce Pilate to change as to phraseology) was placed above his head, the executioners meanwhile having divided his garments among themselves: while hanging thus, Jesus was reviled by the spectators, by the soldiers, and even by one of his fellow-sufferers (whom the other penitently rebuking, was assured by Jesus of speedy salvation for himself [see THIEF ON THE CROSS]), and committed his mother to the care of John; then, at the close of the three hours' preternatural darkness [see ECLIPSE], giving utterance (in the language of Psa. xxii) to his agonized emotions [see SABACTHANI] amid the scoffs of his enemies, he called for something to quench his thirst, which being given him, he expired with the words of resignation to God upon his lips, while an earthquake (q. v.) and the revivification of the sleeping dead bore witness to his sacred character, as the by-standers [see CENTURION] were forced to acknowledge (Matt. xxvii, 31, 32; Luke xxiii, 27-31; Mark xv, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28; Luke xxiii, 34; John xix, their midst, disciples (John xx, 11-18; Mark xvi, 11; and parallels though, of course, he added that it had been done un consciously and thoughtlessly. Thus the (poetico-speculative) truth of the ideal Christ was to be maintained, but it soon vanished in the clouds like a mist. In a modified form this mythical theory was advocated by Weisse, who, like others before him, endeavored to solve the miraculous in the life of Christ by the introduction of higher biology (magnetism, etc.), and used Strauss's hypotheses in order to dispose of whatever he found impracticable in his own view. The Tübingen theolo gian, Bruno Bauer (Kritik, der evangel. Gesch, vol. iii), went further, and declaring that he could not see in the accounts of the apostles a harmless poesy, branded them as downright imposture. A much more moderate position was taken by one who utterly disbelieved the fulfilment of the prophecies, Salvador the Jew. He acknowledged the historical personality of Jesus, though the Saviour, in his treatment, came to be nothing but a Jewish reformer (and, of course, a demagogue also). xx, 24-29). Some time afterwards (prob. Wednesday, March 30, A.D. 29) Jesus again appeared to his disciples on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias, as they were fishing; and, after they had taken a preternatural quantity of fish at his direction, coming ashore, they partook of a meal which he had prepared, after which he tenderly reproved Peter for his unfaithfulness, and intimated to him his future martyrdom (Matt. xxviii, 16; John xxi, 1-23). Soon afterwards (probably Thursday, March 31, A.D. 29) he appeared to some five hundred of his disciples (1 Cor. xv, 6) at an appointed meeting on a mountain in Galilee, where he commissioned his apostles afresh to their work (Matt. xxviii, 16-20). Next he appeared to James (1 Cor. xv, 7), and finally to all the apostles together [see APPEARANCE (OF RISEN CHRIST)], to whom, at the end of forty days from his passion (Thursday, April 28, A.D. 29), he now gave a general charge relative to their mission [see APOSTLE], and, leading them towards Bethany, while blessing them he was suddenly carried up bodily into the sky [see ASCENSION] and enfolded from their sight in a cloud [see IxTERCESSION], angels at the same time appearing and declaring to them, in their astonishment, his future re-measure indebted to German rationalism for the great turn in a similar manner (Acts i, 2-12, and parallels). (For a fuller explanation of the details of the foregoing narrative, see Strong's Harmony and Exposition of the Gospels, N. Y., 1852.) See GOSPELS. IV. Literature. Much of this has been cited under the foregoing heads. We present here a general sum mary. It must be acknowledged, however, that these criticisms provoked a more thorough study of the subject, and that orthodox Christianity is therefore in no small interest which has since been manifested in the history of our Lord. The rationalistic works called forth innumerable critiques and rejoinders (most prominent among which were those of W. Hoffmann, Stuttg. 1838 sq.; Hengstenberg, in the Evangel, Kirchenzeitung, 1836; Schweizer, in the Stud. u. Krit. 1837, No. iii; Tholuck, Hamburg, 1838; Ullmann, Hamb. 1838); and finally resulted in the publication of a vast number of productions on the life of Jesus. 1. The efforts to produce a biography of the Saviour of mankind may be said to have begun with the attempts to combine and harmonize the statements of the We call attention, likewise, to the efforts of the Dutch evangelists (see Hase, Leben Jesu, p. 20). See HARMO- theologians, among whom are Meijboom (Groning. 1861), NIES. The early Church contented itself simply with Van Osterzee, and others. A new treatment of the subcollating the narratives of the different apostles and an ject was promised by the late chevalier Bunsen (Preface occasional comment on some passages. See MONOTES- to his Hippolytus, p. xlix) but it never made its appearSARON. In the Middle Ages, as also later in the Roman ance. Ewald, however, continued his work on the Jews Catholic Church, the works written on the life of Christ (Gesch. d. Volkes Israel), closing in a fifth volume with were uncritical, fantastic, and fiction-like, being mere the life of Christ (Leben Christus). The author evireligious tracts (Hase, p. 26). Even after the Reforma- dently is a non-believer in our Lord's godhead (compare tion had given rise to speculation and religious theory, Liddon, Bampt. Lecture, 1866, p. 505). His method of the works on the life of Christ continued to be of a like dealing with the subject has something of the same incharacter. It was not till near the close of the 18th definiteness which characterized the work of Schleiercentury, when the Wolfenbüttel Fragmentists had at- macher (compare Plumptre, Boyle Lecture, 1866, p. 336). tacked Christianity [see LESSING], that the Apologists Ewald views Jesus "as the fulfilment of the O. T.-as felt themselves constrained to treat the history of Christ the final, highest, fullest, clearest revelation of God-as in his twofold nature, as God and also as man. This the true Messiah, who satisfies all right longing for God period was therefore the first in which the life of Christ and for deliverance from the curse-as the eternal King was treated in a critical and pragmatical manner (comp. of the kingdom of God. But with all this, and while Strauss, Leben Jesu, 1864, p. 1). Soon, however, these he depicts our Lord's person and work, in its love, activefforts degenerated into humanitarianism, and even pro-ity, and majesty, with a beauty that is not often met fanity. Herder, the great German poet and theologian, with, there is but one nature accorded to this perfect wrote distinct treatises on the life of "the Son of God" | Person, and that nature is human." Of a very different and on the life of "the Son of man." Some treated of character from all these works are the lectures of Prof. the prophet of Nazareth (Bahrdt, Venturini; later Langs-C. J. Riggenbach, of Basle, who presents us the picture dorf); others even instituted comparisons with men like of our Lord from a harmonistico-apologetic point of view. Socrates, oftentimes drawing the parallel in favor rather Here deserve mention also the labors of Neander, who, of the latter. Others (Paulus, Greiling), in order to "in the conviction, which runs through his Church Hissuit the tendency of the age, hesitated not to strip the fory, that Christendom rests upon the personality of life of Christ of all the miraculous, and painted him Christ," was not a little alarmed by the production of simply as the humane and wise teacher. Such a theo-Strauss, and "with fear and trembling, feeling that conry was, of course, "the reductio ad absurdum of a ration-troversy was a duty, and yet also that it marred the dealism pure and simple” (compare Plumptre, Christ and Christendom, Boyle Lect. 1866, p. 329). The more modern theology (we refer here mainly to German theology since Schleiermacher) attempted to crowd forward the ideal. Thus Hase proposed for his task the treatment "how Jesus of Nazareth, according to divine predestination, by the free exercise of his own mind, and by the will of his age, had become the Saviour of the world." A still more destructive attitude (comp. Lange, I, x sq.) was assumed by Strauss, who, while not denying that Jesus had lived, yet recognised in the accounts of the gospels simply a mythical reflex of what the young Christian society had invented to connect with the prophetical announcements of the old covenant, votion of spirit in which alone the life of his Lord and Master could be contemplated rightly," entered the lists against rationalistic combatants. His excellent work has found a worthy translator in the late Rev. Dr. M'Clintock. We pass over men like Hare, "who reproduce more or less the rationalism of Paulus" (perhaps the first conspicuous work of the rationalistic Germans, though it failed to awaken the general interest that Strauss's work did; comp. Plumptre, Boyle Lect. 1866, p. 329); others also, who, like Ebrard and Lange, "avowedly assume the position of apologists, though their works are at least evidence (as are bishop Ellicott's Hulsean Lect., and the many elaborate commentaries on the Gospels in our country and abroad) that orthodox theo |