been at this period. We must premise, however, that the story in which it is embodied cannot possibly be genuine as a whole. It is known as "the rich man and Lazarus." Once there was a rich man who was clothed in the costliest robes, a cloak of purple wool and an under garment of fine Egyptian linen, and who fared sumptuously every day. At the portico of his noble mansion there lay a wretched beggar of the name of Lazarus, all covered with sores, glad if he might satisfy his hunger with the fragments that fell from the rich man's table; and even these he must share with the dogs of the street that came running up when the broken meats were thrown out. Nay, - lowest depth of humiliation! — these dogs would come and lick his wounds, so familiar had they grown with him. Thus for a while he lived the life of a dog, and then he died; but, as he breathed his last, the angels came and bore him to the paradise in the underworld, to lay him in the bosom of Abraham, in a place of honor at the feast of the provisionally blessed. And into the sumptuous hall Death likewise came and snatched the owner of the palace from the midst of his abundance and enjoyment; but he, while the last honors were being paid him upon earth with lavish care, while his corpse was being richly embalmed and laid in earth as befitted his high rank, went down into the regions of death, to the fire of Gehenna. Here as he lay, tortured with unutterable pain, he raised his eyes and saw far off the feast of the Father of the Faithful, reclining on whose couch he discerned the man who had once been a beggar at his gate. Then he could not restrain the prayer for a moment's respite. "Father Abraham!" he cried, "have pity on me, and let Lazarus come here to dip the tip of his finger in the water and cool my tongue, for I am tortured in these flames." But not even this could be granted him. "Child!" answered Abraham, "remember that you received your full share of blessings in your life, and Lazarus nothing but misery; and, therefore, he is now received here with a loving welcome, while you are in torture. And, besides all this, there is a deep chasm gaping wide between us which none could pass, how great soever his desire, either from us to you or from you to us." wretched man now saw that there was no more hope for him ; but he had still a petition left: "Then, father! send him to my kindred, for I have still five brothers; and let him urge them to beware lest they, too, come into this place of torment." But even this request was refused, not as impossi

The

66

ble, but as useless. They have Moses and the Prophets. Let them listen to them," said Abraham. But the other, remembering only too well how he had known the Scriptures himself, but had scattered their warnings to the winds, made one last appeal: "Nay, but Father Abraham, if a man were to rise from the realms of the dead, then they would repent." The hope was vain, and the appeal was therefore bootless. "If they will not listen tc Moses and the Prophets," said the patriarch in conclusion, " they would not be convinced though one should rise from the dead."

This is unquestionably a composite story. Luke appears to have had in view the heathen world shut out from every hope and blessing in contrast to the privileged but pitiless Jews; but this cannot have been the original significance of Lazarus and the rich man. And even apart from the modifications introduced by the Evangelist in accordance with his own conception, the story is evidently not a single whole. The latter part, perhaps from "and besides all this," is an addition; and in any case the request that Lazarus may be sent to earth and all that follows it has no connection with what goes before. If we go on to ask the meaning of the whole and of the separate details, we have no difficulty, to begin with, in recognizing a very marked Ebionite spirit. The rich man is accused of nothing but spending his treasures for his own enjoyment. There is not so much as a hint that he was irreligious or unfeeling. And Lazarus tastes the joys of paradise not for his piety, but simply as a compensation for his misery upon earth. Nor does the repentance which the Law and Prophets should produce mean any thing else than the distribution of all one's wealth in alms. Equally obvious is the concluding blow at the unbelief of the Jewish aristocracy which would not even yield to the preaching of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Yet another proof of the late origin of the parable is the representation of a state of provisional compensation in the shadow-land before the resurrection. Such a conception was certainly foreign to Jesus himself.

This is the only parable in which a proper name occurs; and this point has naturally given rise to no little speculation. Perhaps the name Lazarus, which is the same as Eleazar, is merely symbolical, and should be taken in its original signification as "God-help." Perhaps, too, the beggar is called

1 Luke vi. 24, xvi. 9, 11, xi. 41.

2 Acts iv. 1 ff., 23, v. 17.

after Abraham's servant,' who had become the type of the faithful slave, the virtuous member of the lower classes. If so, Lazarus perhaps represents the humbler classes in general, regarded of course in the most favorable possible light. In that case it is exceedingly possible that the rich man represents the distinguished and luxurious priestly order. The Jewish tradition tells of the gold and silver dinner-services of the Sadducees; and it is well known that they troubled themselves very little about the common people, and placed them almost on a level with the heathen. The dogs, which were not domestic animals but were loathed as unclean beasts, certainly represent the heathen. Finally, one might be tempted to find in the five brothers of the rich man a reference to the most distinguished of the high-priestly families, namely that of Annas; for Josephus tells us that this man was pronounced the most enviable of mortals because, after filling the office of high priest for many years himself, he subsequently saw it held by each of his five sons. Meanwhile we must leave it uncertain how far this parable may be founded upon some saying or description of Jesus, some reproach he hurled at the Sadducees, or some threat that the position of things should one day be reversed.

The tension had gradually reached its height. We possess a clear indication of this in a parable, most likely due to Jesus himself, placed by all three Evangelists in this period, and characterizing the last hours of the conflict with the overpowering foe. We must picture Jesus in the temple, shortly before he left it for the last time, speaking in the hearing not only of the multitudes but of several of the high priests and Scribes, who had lately given up all attempts to conceal their anger and aversion. It was an imitation of a denunciation by the prophet Isaiah,2 which he began in sombre tones as follows:

A certain man planted a vineyard, set a hedge round it, sunk a wine-press, and built a watch-tower; and when every thing was complete let out the vineyard to a company of husbandmen for a stated portion of the produce, and went himself into a foreign land. So when the grape harvest had come. he sent one of his servants to his tenants to receive his share of the fruits. But the tenants seized the servant and beat him and sent him back empty-handed. Then the owner sent another servant, but they wounded him in the head and mal.

1 See vol. i. pp. 155-161.

2 See vol. ii. p. 251.

treated him shamefully. Still he sent another, but they killed him. Then he sent many more, but they maltreated some and killed others. His forbearance was not yet exhausted, and at last he sent his son; for he thought "at least they will respect my son." But when the husbandmen saw him, they said to each other, "There is the heir! Let us kill him and keep his heritage ourselves." So they seized him, and dragged him outside the vineyard, and slew him.

After a moment's pause, Jesus went on with an emphasis that could not be mistaken: "Now when the master of the vineyard returns, what will he do to the husbandmen? He will put those wretches to the death that they deserve, and give the vineyard to others who will bring him the fruits in due season.' After another moment's pause he concluded: "Have you never read that passage of the scripture,1The stone which the builders rejected is made the chief cornerstone; it was the Lord that made it so, and it is wonderful in our eyes'?"

So we read in all three Gospels, with only unimportant variations. But Matthew and Luke have each of them a few words more; the latter,2 following up the metaphor of the stone, says: "Whoever falls on this stone shall be broken, out on whomsoever it falls it shall dash him to pieces;" the former, interpreting the story itself, adds: "Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God shall be taken away from you and given to a people that brings forth its fruits." Both of these sayings may very well be genuine, though the last of them is out of place. They both of them illustrate the thought of the discourse, if it needs any further illustration. Jesus sketches with moving and startling distinctness God's rule over Israel, who has cast his warnings to the wind, who has maltreated and slain the prophets in times past, and is on the point of laying murderous hands upon the Messiah now; together with the certainty of the approaching judgment now that the last effort has failed. In conclusion, he foreshadows in a single breath his own rejection and exaltation, with the assurance that the guilt of men cannot really thwart the purpose of God to raise the new Temple of which he, the Messiah, will be as it were the foundation. Meanwhile we have never heard such gloomy words from him before; and this is not surprising, for now that the contest is as good as over,

1 Psalm cxviii. 22, 23.

2 Matthew xxi. 44 is not genuine.
8 Compare pp. 297, 298.

the tone of deliberate announcement naturally takes the place of menacing appeal.

There still remain two points for our consideration. The Evangelists place this parable immediately after the conversation about the authority of Jesus and the baptism of John.1 Now, the connection of thought, "You who have rejected John, the last of the prophets, will lay hands upon me also," is very marked, and in so far the arrangement is a good one. But, for all that, the parable is certainly out of place at the commencement of the work of Jesus in Jerusalem. How could the courteous forms of address and controversy we have witnessed be possible after the utterance of such a sentence? And at that early period it would have been a needlessly exasperating defiance, and would not even have been true, for no definite determination had as yet been reached to make away with Jesus. And since this parable is clearly the last public utterance of the Master in the hearing of his enemies, it is exceedingly noteworthy that it contains the first distinct assertion he ever made before them of the significance of his person and his office. Here he ranks himself above the prophets. and speaks of himself as the corner-stone of the edifice of God. He exclaims to them, as it were, "However obstinately you refuse to recognize me, I am the man - I declare it plainly who is to found the kingdom of God."

And this brings us to our second observation. The Gospels are more or less uncertain as to whether the parable refers to the people of Israel or to their leaders, the Scribes and High Priests. The fact is that though there were many of the common people who took the side of Jesus, with or without hesitation, yet on the whole the leaders had Israel as a people with them. But for that very reason, although the historical interpretation and the comparison of other passages in which the metaphor of the vineyard appears compel us to think of Israel as a whole, yet the parable is aimed in the first instance and almost exclusively against the leaders. They are the builders who reject the stone; it is they who are determined to keep the inheritance; that is to say, to maintain their influence and supremacy, cost what it may. When the kingdom of God is given to a new people of the Lord, recruited from the common herd of Israel, from sinners and from heathen, then the leaders who have dashed themselves against this stone will pay a fearful penalty!

1 See pp. 371, 372.