10.  Very numerous attempts have been made to construct harmonies of the four gospels.  One plan is to form out of the whole, in what is supposed to be the true chronological order, a continuous narrative embracing all the matter of the four, but without repetitions of the same or similar words.  Another plan is to exhibit in chronological order, the entire text of the four gospels arranged in parallel columns, so far as two or more of them cover the same ground.  The idea is very imposing, but the realization of it is beset with formidable if not insurmountable difficulties.  It is certain that the evangelists do not always follow the exact order of time, and it is sometimes impossible to decide between the different arrangements of events in their records.  In the four narratives of the events connected with the resurrection all harmonists find themselves baffled.  Had we a full account of all the particulars of that exciting scene, we might undoubtedly assign to the different parts of each narrative its true place in the order of time.  But with our present means of information this is impossible.  Experience shows that the most profitable way of studying the evangelical narrative is to take each gospel as a whole, but with continual reference to the parallel parts of the other gospels, so far as they can be ascertained.  In this work a good harmony, like that of Robinson, may render essential service, though its arrangements must in many cases be regarded only as tentative—­essays at obtaining the true order, rather than the certain determination of it.

The relative number of chapters in the different gospels does not give their true relation in respect to size.  The chapters are respectively 28, 16, 24, 21; which are to each other in the proportion of 7, 4, 6, 5 1/4.  But estimating according to the number of pages (in an edition without breaks for the verses), it will be found that the gospel of Luke holds the first place, its size being to that of the other gospels nearly as 60 to 57, 35, 46.  The relation of Matthew’s gospel to that of Mark, in respect to the quantity of matter is then nearly that of 8 to 5.

In the notices of the separate gospels which follow it is not thought necessary to give an elaborate analysis of their contents.  The aim will be rather to exhibit the prominent characteristics of each, and its special office in the economy of divine revelation.

II.  MATTHEW.

11.  The unanimous testimony of the ancient church is that the first gospel was written by the apostle Matthew, who is also called Levi.  With his call to the apostleship he may have assumed the name of Matthew, as Saul took that of Paul.  He was of Hebrew origin, the son of Alphaeus, and a tax-gatherer under the Roman government, Matt. 10:3; Mark 2:14; 3:18; Luke 5:27, 29; 6:15; Acts 1:13.  He was evidently a man of some means (Luke 5:29), and his office must have required for its proper discharge a knowledge of the Greek as well as of his native Hebrew; that is, Aramaean, as the word Hebrew means in the New Testament, when applied to the vernacular of the Palestine Jews.