34
The Fundamentals recorded the Greek. It is not said that any one gave the full inscription, nor can we affirm that there was any obligation upon them to do so. Moreover, no one contradicts any other, and no one says what is untrue. Recalling what was said about our having to deal not with different human authors but with one Divine Author, may not the Holy Spirit here have chosen to emphasize some one particular fact, or phase of a fact of the inscription for a specific and important end ? Examine the records to deter mine what this fact may have been. Observe that whatever else is omitted, all the narratives record, the momentous cir cumstances that the Sufferer on the cross was THE KING OF THE JEWS. Could there have been a cause for this? What was the charge preferred against Jesus by His accusers? Was He not rejected and crucified because He said He was the King of the Jews? Was not this the central idea Pilate was provi dentially guided to express in the inscription ? And if so, was it not that to which the evangelists should bear witness ? And should not that witness have been borne in a way to dispel the thought of collusion in the premises ? And did not this involve a variety of narrative which should at the same time be in harmony with truth and fact? And do we not have this very thing in the four gospels? These accounts supplement, but do not contradict each other. We place them before the eye in the order in which they are recorded. This is Jesus
THE KING OF THE JEWS THE KING OF THE JEWS THE KING OF THE JEWS THE KING OF THE JEWS
This is Jesus of Nazareth
The entire inscription evidently was “This is Jesus of Naz areth the King of the Jews,” but we submit that the foregoing presents a reasonable argument for the differences in the records.
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker