DECEMBER 27TH, 1943
DECEMBER 27TH, 1943
BELOVED BROTHER, — I received your letter and I am glad to send you a few lines in reply. I will touch upon the difficulties you mention without further prelude.
Upon careful consideration of Matthew 8: 5 - 13 and Luke 7: 1 - 10 I think it will be seen that there is no discrepancy between the accounts given. Luke adds to the account given by Matthew the interesting circumstance that the centurion sent twice to the Lord before he came himself. Luke, writing to a Gentile, relates circumstances which bring out in a striking way the conscious unworthiness with which a Gentile officer approached the Lord, yet, withal, his implicit confidence in the divinely conferred authority of the One to whom he appealed. Luke, by inspiration of the Spirit, records facts which Matthew did not, but they do not conflict in any way with what Matthew writes.
Matthew tells us that two possessed men met the Lord; Mark and Luke only mention one. You say that the two latter tell us there was only one. If they had said so there would have been a serious discrepancy, but if you look at the passages you will see that they made no such statement. It must be borne in mind that the gospels are an inspired selection from an immense amount of material (see John 21: 25). And each evangelist selects by inspiration of the Spirit just those details which were needed to fill out his presentation of Christ. The wisdom of God enters into every detail of the presentation. It is allowable, and most profitable, for us to enquire why the Spirit of God has left out this detail or that in one gospel and inserted them in another. But this is a test, not of the accuracy of Scripture, but of our spiritual discernment of the character of each gospel. To attempt to bring the accounts into harmony in a way of human accuracy is simply to break down the beautiful carved work of the Holy Spirit.
I cannot tell you why Luke apparently gives Lebbaeus the name of Judas, but this is only a proof that I do not know everything; it is wholesome sometimes to remember this.
[p. 328] John using, as I believe, Roman time, tells us that at the sixth hour the Lord was before Pilate; that is, at 6 o’clock Friday morning. He was crucified at the third hour (Jewish time); that is at 9 o’clock in our reckoning. The accounts agree perfectly.
Mr. Darby’s thought was that Matthew 18: 1 was in the dusk of Saturday evening, as we should speak, and that this visit stood by itself, and is not to, be confounded with the subsequent visit of the women very early on the morning of the first day of the week. It is by no means easy to fit all the events together that are given in connection with the Lord’s resurrection. It is not at all necessary that we should do so. We may be quite sure that each evangelist gives them by the Holy Spirit with designed reference to the subject and object of his gospel....
I hope my very brief remarks may be of some help. I am under a good deal of restriction at present. So I will only add my much love in the Lord.
Yours very affectionately in Him,
December 27th, 1943.