22.  On the two genealogies see AndLOL 62-68; WeissLX I. 211-221; Godet on Luke, iii. 23-38.  These refer Luke’s genealogy to Marv.  Hervey SBD^2 1145-1148, Plummer on Luke, iii. 23, EdersLJM I. 149, GilbertLJ 81f., with the early fathers (see Plummer), refer both to Joseph.  For the view that they are unauthentic see Holtzmann, Hand-comm. I. 39-41; Bacon in HastBD II. 137-141.

23.  On the “brethren” of Jesus see Mayor, HastBD I. 320-326; AndrewsLOL 111-123.  These make the brethren sons of Joseph and Mary.  Lightfoot, Galatians^10, 252-291, regards them as sons of Joseph by a former marriage.

VI

John the Baptist

24.  On the character and work of John the Baptist see KeimJN II. 201-266 and references in the index under John the Baptist.  Keim’s is much the most satisfactory treatment; it is, moreover, Keim at his best.  See also Ewald, Hist, of Israel, VI. 160-200; WeissLX I. 307-316; FairbSLX 64-79; W. A. Stevens, Homil.  Rev. 1891, II. 163 ff.; Bebb in HastBD II. 677-680; Wellhausen Isr. u. judische Geschichte, 342f.; Feather, Last of the Prophets.  Reynolds, John the Baptist, obscures its excellencies by a vast amount of irrelevant discussion.

25.  On the existence of a separate company of disciples of John see Mk. ii. 18, Mt. ix. 14, Lk. v. 33; Mk. vi. 29, Mt. xiv. 12; Mt. xi. 2f., Lk. vii. 18f.; Lk. xi. 1; Jn. i. 35f.; iii. 25; Ac. xix. 1-3.  Consult Lightfoot, Colossians, 400 ff.; Baldensperger, Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums, 93-152.

VII

The Messianic Call

26.  On the baptism of Jesus see WendtTJ I. 96-101; EdersLJM I. 278-287; BaldSJ 219-229.  WeissLX I. 316-336 says that the baptism meant for Jesus, already conscious of his Messiahship, “the close of his former life and the opening of one perfectly new” (322); KeimJN II. 290-299 makes it an act of consecration, but eliminates the Voice and Dove; BeysLJ I. 215-231 thinks that Jesus, conscious of no sin, yet not aware of his Messiahship, sought the baptism carrying “the sins and guilt of his people on his heart, as if they were his own” (229).  Against Beyschlag see E. Haupt in Studien u.  Kritiken, 1887, 381.  Baldensperger shows clearly that the Messianic call was a revelation to Jesus, not a conclusion from a course of reasoning.

27.  On the temptation see WendtTJ I. 101-105; WeissLX I. 337-354; EdersLJM I. 299-307; FairbairnSLX 80-98; BaldSJ 230-236; BeysLJ I. 231-237; KeimJN II. 317-329.  All these see in temptation the necessary result of the Messianic call at the baptism.

28.  The locality of the baptism of Jesus cannot be determined.  Tradition has fixed on one of the fords of the Jordan near Jericho, see SmithHGHL 496, note 1.  On the probable location of Bethany (Bethabarah) (Jn. i. 28) see discussion in AndLOL 146-151; EnBib 548; and especially Smith’s note as above.