133. Chapter 20 - A Geographical Study of the Final Week
Chapter 20 - A Geographical Study of the Final Week Walk about Zion, and go round about her;
Number the towers thereof;
Mark ye well her bulwarks; Consider her palaces: That ye may tell it to the generation following.
Jerusalem
Besieged, battered, overthrown, demolished, rebuilt, Jerusalem has been the most fought over city on earth. The fearful predictions of Jesus that the city would be utterly destroyed by the Romans were fulfilled, and the succeeding centuries have added frequent repetitions of that frightful siege. The Modern City The fact that the city has been destroyed and rebuilt so many times makes more difficult the effort to locate the scenes in the life of Jesus which are the source of the imperishable fame and glory of the city. Today the inundation of Zionist immigrants and modern tourists has covered the hills and valleys about the ancient city with all sorts of new buildings which range from the luxurious Zionist buildings west of the Joppa gate to all sorts of residences that now reach halfway to Bethlehem and also far out on the Joppa Road. In the midst of all this modern development still stand the ancient walls of Jerusalem, frowning sternly, but helplessly, in the face of modern artillery. The present walls were built (in a.d. 1542) by Suleiman, sultan of the Ottoman Empire. The city enclosed in these walls is shown by archaeological excavations to be much smaller than the Jerusalem of the time of Jesus. The fundamental landmarks, however, are easily discerned, and a study of the geography of the city throws much light upon the Gospel narratives and helps to clear up some problems very difficult to understand as one reads the four independent accounts of the final week of Jesus’ ministry. The Garden of Gethsemane The Mount of Olives, ranging east of the ancient city, with the Valley of Kidron between, has not been modernized as much as the territory on the other sides of the city. This is due in part to the sacred scenes that make it famous and in part to the fact that it has been for many centuries the burying ground of both Jew and Mohammedan. The most famous site, and the most clearly identified, is the Garden of Gethsemane on the western slope of the mount not far across the Kidron Valley from Stephen’s gate. If the original garden was not exactly on this spot, it must have been very near. It probably was somewhat larger than the territory now enclosed by a ten-foot wall, and controlled by the Roman Catholic Church. While the decadent, age-old olive trees now in the garden hardly can be so old as the time of Christ, they still remind us that, as the name “Gethsemane” suggests, this garden probably was an olive orchard. It was not by chance or unusual procedure that Jesus went to the garden from the upper room on the night He was betrayed, for Judas, knowing that Jesus was accustomed to spend much time in the seclusion of this garden, was able to guide the soldiers to Gethsemane. To the East of the City
Three main routes lead over or around the Mount of Olives to the east. The ordinary route to Bethany and on to Jericho leads south along the western base of the Mount of Olives to the break in the range between the Mount of Olives and the Hill of Offense, and then swings sharply east and northeast over the mountain. This affords a gradual ascent. The usual route for entry into the city from the mount is straight down from the summit. This is the probable route which Jesus followed upon the occasion of the triumphal entry, since He started from Bethany after having secured the colt and its mother from Bethphage, also on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives. The place at which He paused and lamented the fate of Jerusalem is usually thought to be the point where the full panorama of the city comes into view. The entrance to the temple area was undoubtedly made through the Golden Gate, which Josephus tells us was reached from the Mount of Olives by a wonderful viaduct across the Kidron Valley. The Mohammedans have had a tradition that the city would be captured only through the Golden Gate. In order to prevent this, they walled it up. The towers of the gate are still visible in the wall. The Site of the Temple The temple area was built with tremendous effort by Solomon, as he constructed retaining walls along the narrow crest of Mount Moriah and filled in the space with dirt so as to make a level place broad enough for the temple and its related buildings. The northwest corner had to be cut down to the level. The eastern and southern ends had to be raised to a great height. The character of the work necessary, as seen in the archaeological remains, the detailed descriptions of its location and nature in the Bible and in Josephus, together with the unbroken line of testimony of tradition as to the nature of the sacred buildings that have been erected on the temple area, make this whole location indisputable. Beyond all question the Mosque of Omar today covers a part of the space occupied by the temple of Solomon and its successors built by Zerubbabel and his helpers, and by Herod the Great. The Mosque of Omar is also called the Dome of the Rock, since it is really not a mosque, but a shrine covering an immense rock, evidently the spot on which the brazen altar was located for the sacrifice of animals in the court of Solomon’s temple.
Archaeologists differ as to the location of Solomon’s palace, and we cannot be absolutely certain where the high priest’s palace was located, the palace in which Jesus was tried three times and in which Peter denied his Lord. It probably was closely adjacent to the temple area, if not in some part of this area which covers about thirty-five acres. Although various reconstructions of Herod’s temple have been attempted, it is not possible for us to locate the exact limits of the various courts and buildings of the temple where so many stirring and supremely important events in the ministry of Jesus occurred. Most of His preaching in the temple area must have been done, not in the court of Israel, where only male Israelites over twenty years of age might enter or the court of women which was open to Jews of both sexes, but the larger court of the Gentiles where the largest crowds would gather. The New Testament makes it clear that preaching services were not uncommon in the great temple court. It was doubtless equipped with a pulpit for preaching and teaching. Even without the lengthy and detailed descriptions of Josephus concerning the glory of the temple which Herod the Great built, we should have some idea of its splendor and magnificence from fleeting glimpses given in the New Testament. When the Bible student attempts to trace, as best he can, the geography of those tragic hours which accompanied the end of Jesus’ ministry, he walks with somewhat uncertain steps, because the Gospel accounts do not consist of a dry collection of dates and places, such details being only introduced incidentally and when essential to the all-important facts recorded, because the repeated destruction of the city has obliterated many landmarks, and because the locations pointed out by tradition are so often contradictory to the information given in the New Testament. The Upper Room
We should like to know just where Jesus met in that upper room with the twelve for those final hours of precious fellowship and instruction. Catholic tradition points to the second story of a building outside the Zion gate, south of the city. But when they tell us that this building (called the Coenaculum) is also the tomb of David and that the building just across the way was the palace of Caiaphas, the concentration of points of interest in one spot immediately uncovers the absurd custom of making up for lack of evidence by quantity of assertions and by the identification of the place with a plurality of Biblical events. The Coenaculum is a possible location of the scene of the last supper, for archaeology has uncovered paved streets and walls south of this point on Mount Zion, indicating that this section was formerly within the city limits.
Almost any other part of the city as far removed from the temple area and the concentration of enemies of Jesus is just as possible a location. We can be very sure, however, that the upper room was not in any building just across the street from the palace of the high priest. Jesus took every precaution to prevent these very precious last hours with His disciples from being interrupted. Not even the disciples knew where they were to meet, with the exception of the two sent with strange instructions to go into the city and follow a man with a pitcher on his head who would be passing down a certain street at a certain point at the very moment they arrived. The house into which the man would enter they would find to be owned by a disciple who would gladly furnish the upper room for their observance of the Passover. Thus Judas was prevented from knowing where the group would meet until after they had assembled in the room and there was no chance for him to withdraw and guide the soldiers of the high priest to the place. When Jesus finally drove him from the upper room, revealing to Judas, but not to the other disciples, his treachery, Judas evidently made his way immediately to the temple authorities. The time occupied by Judas in making this journey, awakening the authorities and securing an audience with the high priest, and collecting the company of soldiers, gave further leisure to Jesus for supremely important instruction to His disciples. Much of this was delivered to them as they walked through the night. Westcott supposes that Jesus was standing in the deserted court of the temple itself when He uttered the prayer recorded in the seventeenth chapter of John. If this is true, then Jesus led His disciples there on His slow journey from the upper room to the Garden of Gethsemane. We are not told whether Judas led the soldiers first to the building where Jesus had been meeting with His disciples for the Passover and then, finding Him gone, led them to the next likely place — the Garden of Gethsemane, where Jesus was accustomed to go. If Judas followed this course, then further time intervened — time which was spent by Jesus in prayer.
It has been surmised that the upper room was the commodious chamber in the home of Mary, mother of John Mark. We know that this home was the meeting place of the church in the early days of persecution, a few months later. It has also been conjectured that John Mark was the young man who followed the soldiers after the arrest of Jesus and who fled away naked into the night when the soldiers attempted to seize him. If Judas went first to the upper room with the soldiers, this would help to explain how the young man (John Mark) happened to know of the movement to arrest Jesus and to be present near Gethsemane when the arrest occurred. He had heard the soldiers and the crowd of temple guards and servants moving through the streets. The Roman Citadel The Tower of Antonia is pointed Out by tradition as the place where Jesus was tried before Pilate. Here is shown an ancient arch called the Ecce Homo (“Behold the Man”), built over the street called Via Dolorosa (“The Way of Sorrow”). This tower was situated at the northwest corner of the temple area. Nehemiah mentions a castle as being there — to the north of the temple (Nehemiah 2:8). In the Maccabean period, the high priest, Hyrcanus, made his headquarters here. A projecting rock scarp of the mountain made this point a powerful location for a fortress. Herod the Great built a prodigious fortification here and named it in honor of Mark Antony. It was the last place in the city to fall into the hands of the Romans during the final siege of the city. Josephus says that the fortress was built “on a great precipice” — a rock over 87 feet high, and 120 feet high at the southeast corner. Two passages were built underground, which gave access to the temple area. When the Romans captured the city in a.d. 70, they left some of the powerful fortresses standing so that future generations might see this mute testimony to the prowess of the Romans, but when the Jews revolted again in a.d. 132, under Bar Cochebas, and were defeated at Bethur, the Romans razed Jerusalem utterly and plowed over the temple area. A part of the great rock scarp on which the Tower of Antonia was built is still visible today, but the natural site of the fort may have been greatly reduced in this effort to prevent the city from ever again being a military menace. The tower standing today on this same location covers a mosaic floor which may have been part of the very building in which Jesus was tried. Mark 15:16 and Acts 21:34 seem to indicate that the Praetorium was part of the Tower of Antonia, which Luke calls “the castle.”
Golgotha
Catholic tradition declares that the Via Dolorosa was the street along which Jesus carried His cross and that the scene of the crucifixion and resurrection was in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, located off the Via Dolorosa and Christian Street in the northwestern part of the city. It is indeed probable that the journey to Golgotha started from the Praetorium in the Tower of Antonia and proceeded along the Via Dolorosa as far as Valley Street and then up this street to the Damascus gate. The Church of the Holy Sepulcher is a very old building, dating from the time of Constantine in the fourth century. The location of this building far inside the present walls of the city, however, renders it highly improbable, to say the least, that it is at all near to the scene of the crucifixion. Mark 15:20-22 suggests, and John 19:17-20 and Hebrews 13:12 make absolutely certain, the fact that the crucifixion occurred outside the city walls. Those who defend the tradition that the Church of the Holy Sepulcher is over the actual site of the crucifixion argue that the city was much smaller in the time of Christ, and that the northern wall was along the side of the hill inside the present location of the church. They point to certain archaeological remains to substantiate this view. When the foundations of the Grand New Hotel were dug, a short section of what some supposed to be the second wall was unearthed, but the remains were too slight to be conclusive. Shick found some such remains where the German Church stands today. North of the German Church and east of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher were found extensive ruins which have been treasured by the Greek Catholic Church as proving the case. Archaeologists, however, declare that these ruins are not like city walls at all and are probably the fragments of Constantine’s great Basilica. At the close of a.d. 1960 some further foundation walls have been found, but it seems highly improbable that they will prove to be of significance.
Josephus only speaks briefly of this second wall, and its location must remain uncertain. Building a city wall along the side of a hill such as this would have left the city quite defenseless so that it is practically impossible for the wall to have been inside the location of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. Some archaeologists have uncovered such feeble fortifications in the case of one or two Greek cities, but these cities could never have been the tremendous military stronghold which Jerusalem was even from the earliest times. Moreover, in the years just preceding the final destruction of the city in a.d. 70, Agrippa began to build with prodigious effort the famous third wall. The Romans compelled him to cease, and the rest of the wall was constructed in wild haste as the Romans, during two years, fought their way from the coast to begin the siege of the city. Some scholars think this third wall was on the identical location of the present northern wall of the city, but archaeologists have discovered remains of this third wall still further north. This completely shuts out the possibility of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher’s having been outside the walls in the time of Christ, for this would suppose practically no growth of the city through many centuries and then suddenly an enormous expansion in the brief space of forty years from a.d. 30 to a.d. 70. The English general, “Chinese” Gordon, was the first to point out the hill outside the Damascus gate as the most probable location. The hill is shaped like a skull with two caves facing the city that look like eyeless sockets, and even the sight of a picture of the hill plainly suggests “Golgotha” — “the place of a skull.” It is generally agreed by Protestant scholars that the crucifixion occurred outside the northern wall of the city — a view that in recent years has caused a general acceptance of “Gordon’s Calvary” as the most likely location. The ability to locate exactly even these supreme events is not essential to our faith, but a study of the geographical background greatly strengthens our understanding of the life of Christ and helps immensely in clearing up many difficult variations in the narratives. Even the skeptic Renan, when he visited Palestine after many years of attacks upon the Gospel narratives, was so profoundly impressed by the way the land fits the narratives of the New Testament and makes them live anew that he called the land of Palestine a “fifth gospel” which illumined and confirmed the other four.
Geography and the Difficulties in the Narratives The specific purpose of the map accompanying this chapter is not merely to present the contour and outlines of the city and its environs and the problematic location of various scenes in the final week of Jesus’ ministry, but also to offer a detailed geographical solution to the vexed collection of difficulties which confront one in the four independent narratives of the swiftly moving events on the resurrection morning. The map offers a tentative arrangement of the various journeys and events of the day Jesus was raised from the dead. It must be freely admitted that we cannot even prove absolutely the exact location of the crucifixion; the journeys laid out definitely on this map are only conjectural; but they offer an illustration of how the geography, if we had the exact data, could make seeming difficulties in the narrative disappear at sight. We know that the body of Jesus was buried in the new tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, which happened to be in the same general section where the Romans had taken Him for execution: “Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new tomb wherein was never man yet laid” (John 19:41). How extensive a territory John meant to indicate by this word “place,” we cannot tell, but it must have been the same general section outside the city. The Women That the women started from Bethany to go to the tomb very early on the first day of the week is implied, although it is not definitely stated in the narratives. Jesus had been accustomed to spend the night at Bethany during that last week of His public ministry. The home of Lazarus, Mary, and Martha had been headquarters for the inner group of disciples. Mark mentions the names of Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of James, and Salome; Matthew says simply, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary; Luke adds to the two Marys the name of Joanna, and mentions the fact that the group contained others, “the other women with them”; John simply tells of Mary Magdalene, since he concentrates on the exciting experiences of Mary and the fact that the first resurrection appearance was to her. Such variations show the absolute independence of the accounts and destroy single-handed the current radical theory that the Gospel accounts were copied from one another. The Journey
Luke declares the journey of the women to the tomb occurred “at early dawn”; John says, “Now on the first day of the week cometh Mary. Magdalene early, while it was yet dark, unto the tomb” (John 20:1); Matthew has, “Now late (the Greek word also means “after”) on the sabbath day, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week” (Matthew 28:1); but Mark declares, “And very early on the first day of the week, they come to the tomb when the sun was risen” (Mark 16:2). Now the difference between “early dawn” and “while it was yet dark” on the one hand, and “when the sun was risen” on the other, is quite considerable. (Notice the absurd situation of the two-source theorists who hold that Matthew, Luke, and John copied from Mark.) But how is such a surprising variation in the accounts to be explained, even admitting the independence of the accounts? Here is where the geography helps. Bethany was on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives, about a mile from Jerusalem. The journey from Bethany to the tomb would have consumed considerable time, since the women were heavily burdened with spices, since they had to stop on the journey to buy more spices (Mark 16:1 a.s.v.), and had to encircle the city to the north to reach the tomb. Matthew, Luke, and John emphasize the very early hour of the departure from Bethany; Mark mentions the journey with emphasis upon the time of arrival at the tomb (“when the sun was risen”). The Time of the Resurrection In a most remarkable way, the writers emphasize the fact that the resurrection of Jesus occurred during the time between the departure of the women from Bethany and the arrival at the tomb, although they do not attempt to state the exact moment. The women had remained in disconsolate seclusion at Bethany during the closing hours of Friday, through the Sabbath, when they rested (Luke 23:54-56; Luke 24:1), and now, as they start for the tomb in the early dawn of the first day of the week, they do not know that a Roman guard had been watching at the tomb, for they question among themselves how they will muster the physical strength to move the great stone from before the door of the sepulcher (Mark 16:3).
Swift March of Events The enemies of Jesus may have learned of the empty tomb before His friends did. “And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled away the stone, and sat upon it” (Matthew 28:2). “For fear of him the watchers did quake, and became as dead men” (Matthew 28:4). This account immediately follows the record of the start of the women on their journey. “Now while they were going, behold, some of the guard came into the city” (Matthew 28:11), indicates simultaneous journeys, with the women arriving at the tomb after the soldiers had gone. The implication of each of the narratives is that the resurrection occurred in the early dawn, while the women were making their journey. As soon as the Roman soldiers recovered from their swoon, they went immediately to report to the high priests under whose supervision they were in action. From Calvary this would have been a journey through the Damascus gate and down Valley Street to the temple area. It is implied in Matthew that the women approaching the tomb did not meet the departing soldiers, and a study of the geography of Jerusalem helps us to understand how this was possible. Things began to happen thick and fast as soon as the soldiers started on their hurried trip to report to the high priests. The meeting resulted in their plot to spread the false report that the disciples had come and stolen His body while the soldiers slept.
Mary’s Report of the Empty Tomb
One of the most puzzling differences in the narratives is the fact that Mary Magdalene seems to have started on the journey to the tomb with the other women (Matthew, Mark, Luke). Jesus appeared to the women as they were returning to report the empty tomb (Matthew 28:8, Matthew 28:9), yet He appeared first to Mary Magdalene (Mark 16:9; John 20:11.). This shows that Mary Magdalene in some way became separated from the rest of the women. A study of John’s narrative and of the geographical possibilities shows how this could have happened. The women proceeded together until they came in sight of the empty tomb, then Mary instantly turned and ran headlong to carry the startling news to Peter and John (John 20:1). Luke does not give the specific details at this point that John does, and only relates in general that the women reported and that Peter investigated the empty tomb. John gives a minute account of how Mary ran to carry the news to Peter and John. This shows that Peter and John were not spending the night in the same location with the other apostles. For the sake of showing how easily Mary could have been separated from the other women, it is presumed, in the construction of the map accompanying this chapter, that Peter and John were spending the night with some disciple in the western part of Jerusalem. Running to report the exciting news to them would have caused Mary to circle the northern and northwestern walls down to the Joppa gate. The Women at the Tomb
Since the leader of the group of women had already gone to bear the tidings to the leaders of the apostles, the other women were at leisure to examine the empty tomb. “And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, while they were perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in dazzling apparel,” and these angels reported the resurrection of Jesus and instructed them to carry the news to the apostles (Luke 24:3.). Only Luke thus gives an indication that the women took their time about examining the tomb. Matthew summarizes at this point, only mentioning one angel and reporting additional elements of the instructions given by the angel (Matthew 28:5-7). As soon as the women received these commands, they went to tell the apostles, and this journey, presumably, took them back to Bethany whence they had come and where the other apostles were staying, for there is no indication that they encountered Peter and John or Mary as they went; in fact, the opposite is plainly implied.
Since some time had elapsed in their examination of the tomb, Mary had been able to complete her journey, awaken Peter and John, and deliver the surprising news.
Peter and John at the Tomb
Now ensued the exciting race between Peter and John, which is described so vividly in the twentieth chapter of John. The result of this race is taken as one of the indications that John was a young man and Peter much older: “And the other disciple outran Peter, and came first to the tomb; and stooping and looking in, he seeth the linen cloths lying; yet entered he not in. Simon Peter therefore also cometh, following him, and entered into the tomb” (John 20:4-6). The women have gone, the angels have disappeared. Mary Magdalene, exhausted from her race to tell the news, is now following Peter and John as rapidly as she can in returning to the tomb, but she has not yet arrived. The departure of Peter and John from the tomb is described as follows: “So the disciples went away again unto their own home” (John 20:10). This suggests that they now went to the headquarters for the group at Bethany, as would be natural for a conference with the other apostles concerning the surprising developments. This would explain why they do not seem to meet Mary who had been following them to the tomb.
Appearance to Mary When Mary finally reached the tomb again, Peter and John had gone. It was then that Jesus appeared to her in the interview recorded with such beautiful simplicity by John (John 20:11.). After this interview, Mary set out (it does not say that she ran or went in haste this time) to tell the news to “the disciples” (John 20:18), a phrase which again suggests the approaching concentration of the whole group at Bethany. In the meantime, as these swiftly moving events had been taking place, the women had been making their longer journey back to Bethany. Immediately after His appearance to Mary, Jesus appeared to the other women before their arrival at Bethany. To the Two at Emmaus
We cannot be sure as to the chronological order of the next two appearances: To Peter in or about Jerusalem; to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus. We do know that both occurred on this same day. The two left Jerusalem during the early portion of the day or else lost contact in some other way with the group of disciples, for they knew that the tomb had been discovered empty by the women and examined by the disciples, that angels had announced the resurrection, but it seems they did not know that Jesus had appeared to Mary and to the other women. Whatever it was which compelled them to leave Jerusalem at this exciting moment and kept them from learning the full news, they had heard enough to cause them to be a good deal more interested in their perplexed questionings and discussion than in the progress of their journey. When Jesus joined them in the journey and the discussion, “their eyes were holden that they should not know him” (Luke 24:16). Mark gives us the additional information that there was something different about His appearance: “He was manifested in another form unto two of them, as they walked, on their way into the country” (Mark 16:12). Emmaus was sixty furlongs (7½ miles) from Jerusalem (Luke 24:13), and it was “toward evening”; the day was “far spent” when they finally arrived at Emmaus. There, as they sat at meat, Jesus revealed himself completely unto them and then vanished. Their Report
They arose and returned to Jerusalem. It was night when they reached the Holy City (Luke 24:33; John 20:19). They found the disciples all gathered together behind closed doors — probably in that commodious upper room which some disciples had so gladly lent to Jesus for the Passover. When the two burst in with the triumphant news of the appearance to them so curiously withheld on the journey, but fully revealed at the table, their account aroused some skepticism on the part of a hardheaded group that were slow to believe such incredible details (Mark 16:12); but there was general acceptance of the fundamental fact that Jesus was raised from the dead, for He had appeared to Peter (Luke 24:34).
Further Appearance The appearance to Peter cannot be exactly placed as to the hour or the spot. A line on the map leads to the empty tomb, but this is only a suggestion to help us visualize the events. The appearance to Peter occurred at some time during the day after the appearances to Mary and the women had been thoroughly discussed by the group of disciples, who were either amazed or incredulous (Mark 16:10; Luke 24:21-23), and before the appearance to the two going on their way to Emmaus; or else it was after the appearance to the two at Emmaus and before their arrival at Jerusalem with the news. The final appearance on this wonderful Lord’s Day was to ten apostles. Thomas was absent, but other disciples were present (Luke 24:33; John 20:19-24).
There is a thrilling and deepening sense of conviction that rises in our hearts as, with the Gospel accounts in our hands, we traverse the dark, narrow, winding streets of Jerusalem, view its hills and valleys, circle its walls and stand in meditation by ancient ruins or sites enshrined by tradition. This map of Jerusalem with journeys and appearances definitely placed is offered not so much as an assertion, but as a suggestion. It shows how easily all the complex and varied details of the four narratives could have happened in the light of probable or possible geographical locations. Perhaps the most important conclusion we can claim for such a geographical study is not conjectural locations and arrangements, but the purely negative realization of how many things there are we do not know, things which, if we just knew them, would make all the differences in the Gospel accounts lose their perplexity and make all the variations fit together with perfect precision. The Unshakable Testimony The myriad variations in details of the four-fold Gospel account are still there: fascinating, perplexing, gripping, and convincing. But they are easier to piece together with the eye of faith as we view the city. And why do we have them? To the unbeliever, they seem hopeless contradictions; to the Christian, startling differences. Yet even John, who wrote many decades after the others and who certainly had Matthew, Mark, and Luke before him, did not follow them, did not apologize for their variations, did not even attempt to harmonize their differences. He rather told, as they had done, his own account under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. He adds amazingly to the differences in minute details, but calmly assures us that he has written so we may believe and may thereby have life; that he has not written all lest the world he full of books and lose the sublime and saving message in the multitude of words.
While we cannot always identify each place or affirm with absolute certainty each solution we offer of complex difference in details, we can joyfully walk by faith and affirm a deep and abiding confidence in the historic verity of the gospel.