the account of our Saviour's prophecy relating to the destruction of Jerusalem: it is related, as you see, in the twentyfourth chapter of Matthew, the thirteenth of Mark, and the twenty-first of Luke. When you have read and compared these separate narratives, you will feel more pleasure in attending to a relation of the manner in which the prophecy was fulfilled."

"What an ingenious plan this is!" said Harry, who saw, at a glance, the convenience of having the three accounts printed in separate columns on the same page.

When Mrs. Beaufoy returned, Harry told her that he had compared the different relations of the prophecy with each other, and found that the evangelists agreed on points of importance, but varied in many little circumstances.

"That is a reason for believing the account they have given to be a true account. The kind of agreement and va

VARIATION OF THE EVANGELISTS. 167

riation you have noticed, is exactly what might be expected to take place, if three persons, relating the same story, did not write in concert, but each separately recorded the impression left upon his own mind. One of the trifling variations you have noticed, is a pleasing evidence of the correctness and simplicity with which each evangelist relates the same fact with different shades of distinctness, corresponding with the situation of the respective writers. It regards the persons to whom this prophecy of our Lord was addressed. Luke was not one of the apostles, neither was he, as appears from the introduction to his own Gospel, an eyewitness of our Lord's actions. He says, indefinitely, THEY asked him when the desolation he had predicted should take place, but he mentions neither the place nor the time when this inquiry was made. Matthew, an apostle, and attending upon Christ in person, is much more particular:

he describes the disciples pointing out the magnificence of the Temple to our Lord, as they were leaving that edifice together; and adds, that they afterwards privately asked a more particular explanation, when Christ was sitting upon the mount of Olives. Mark is the most exact of the three, in relating this transaction. He says, that one of the disciples called the attention of our Saviour to the buildings of the Temple, and particularizes Peter and James, and John and Andrew, as being the persons who subsequently asked for information. He also informs us, that Christ was sitting on that part of the mount of Olives which was opposite to the Temple."

"This is, indeed, a curious gradation of exactness; but you have not assigned any reason for Mark being more particular in his account than the other evangelists."

66

Mark," replied Mrs. Beaufoy, "is be

AGREEMENT OF THE EVANGELISTS. 169

lieved to have been the particular friend and companion of Peter, and to have written his Gospel from Peter's information, so that it may be almost regarded as the work of that apostle*. You must therefore see, that it was natural for Peter, when he related the circumstance to Mark, to mention the names of the other apostles who took part with himself in that conversation; and also that the situation, with respect to the Temple, of the place where they were sitting, should recur to his memory. It is in these slight variations, these minute touches, that we are often unexpectedly struck by the simplicity and correctness of the writers of the New Testament."

"Such comparisons are very curious," said Harry; "and there seems to be more dependance on the accuracy of the history, when little variations can be accounted for in this way. But what a great help

Paley, p. 110; and Lardner, Hist. Apost. ch. vii.

this Harmony is, in comparing the different accounts! Now that it is lying open before me, will you be so kind as to explain the fulfilment of this prophecy?"

"The general agreement of the predic tion with the event is evident. I believe you are aware that it refers to the ruin of the Jewish nation, and the capture of Jerusalem by Titus. This took place in the reign of the Roman emperor Vespasian, thirty-six years after the crucifixion of our Saviour. The Gospel of Matthew is believed to have been written in the first year of the reign of Claudius, about twenty-eight years before this memorable prediction was fulfilled. The Gospels of Mark and Luke were approved, the one by St. Peter, the other by St. Paul, who both suffered martyrdom, as I have told you, under the emperor Nero; therefore, these Gospels also must have been written several years before the siege of Jerusa