The plagiarism charge / Desire of Ages Project

djconklin · Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2003 8:17 am Post subject:

I forgot one! My clip holding the studies together are too big!

Page 10: Midnight was already passed as they hurried Him, from the moonlit shadows of green Gethsemane, through the hushed streets of the sleeping city, to the palace of the High Priest.

Now I see that you already covered it--Thanks!

dedication · Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2003 8:01 pm Post subject:

Continuing with the next paragraph (page 461) in Farrar's book ( end of last paragraph was…“grace of Roman Procurator, was the titular High Priest“)

QUOTE:
{page 461}
Caiaphas, like his father-in-law, was a Sadducee--equally astute and unscrupulous with Annas, but endowed with less force of character and will. In his house took place the second private and irregular stage of the trail. (Matt. xxvi. 59-68; Mark xiv. 55-65) There--for though the poor Apostles could not watch for one hour in the sympathetic prayer, these nefarious plotters could watch all night in their deadly malice--a few of the most desperate enemies of Jesus among the Priests and Sadducees were met. To form a session of the Sanhedrin there must at least have been twenty-three members present. And we may perhaps be allowed to conjecture that this particular body before which Christ was now convened was mainly composed of Priests. There were in fact three Sanhedrins., or as we should rather call them, committees of the Sanhedrin, which ordinarily met at different places--in the Lishcat Haggazzith, or paved hall; in the Beth Mirach, or Chamber by the Parition of the Temple; and near the Gate of the Temple Mount. Such being the case, it is no unreasonable supposition that these committees were composed of different elements and that one of them may have been mainly sacerdotal in its constitution. If so, it would have been the most likely of them all, at the present crises, to embrace the most violent measures against One whose teaching now seemed to endanger the very existence of priestly rule.
{page 462}
But, what ever may have been the nature of the tribunal over which Caiaphas was now presiding, it is clear that the Priests were forced to change their tactics. Instead of trying, as Hanan had done, to overawe and entangle Jesus with insidious questions, and so to involve Him in a charge of secret apostasy, they now tried to brand Him with the crime of public error. In point of fact their own bitter divisions and controversies made the task of convicting Him a very difficult one. If they dwelt on any supposed opposition to civil authority, that would rather enlist the sympathies of the Pharisees in His favor; if they dwelt on supposed Sabbath violations or neglect of traditional observances, that would accord with the views of the Sadducees. The Sadducees dared not complain of His cleansing of the Temple; the Pharisees, or those who represented them, found it useless to advert to His denunciations of tradition. But Jesus, infinitely nobler than His own noblest Apostle, would not foment these latent animosities, or evoke for His own deliverance a contest of these slumbering prejudices. He did not disturb the temporary compromise which united them in a common hatred against Himself. Since, therefore, they had nothing else to go upon the Chief Priests and the entire Sanhedrin “sought false witness” such is the terribly simple expression of the Evangelists--”sought false witness against Jesus to put Him to death.” Many men, with a greedy, unnatural depravity, seek false witness--mostly of the petty, ignoble, malignant sort; and the powers of evil usually supply it to them. The Talmud seems to insinuate that the custom, which they pretend was the general one, had been followed in the case of Christ, and that two witnesses had been placed in concealment, while a treacherous disciple--ostensibly Judas Iscariot-- had obtained from His own lips an avowal of Hi claims. This however, is no less false than the utterly absurd and unchronological assertion of the tract Sanhedrin, that Jesus had been excommunicated by Joshua Ben Perachiah, and that though for forty days a herald had proclaimed that he had brought magic from Egypt and seduced the people, no single witness came forward in His favor. Settling aside these absurd inventions, we learn from the Gospels that though the agents of these priests were eager to lie, yet their testimony was so false, so shadowy, {page 463}so self-contradictory, that it all melted to nothing, and even those unjust and bitter judges could not with any decency accept it. But at last two came forward whose false witness looked more promising. They had heard Him say something about destroying the Temple, and rebuilding it in three days. According to one version His expression had been, “I can destroy this Temple;” according to another, “I will destroy this Temple” The fact was the He had said neither, but “Destroy this Temple” and the imperative had but been addressed, hypothetically, to them. They were to be the destroyers; He had but promised to rebuild. It was just one of those perjuries which was all the more perjured because it bore some distant semblance to the truth; and by just giving a different nuance to His actual words they had, with the ingenuity of slander, reversed their meaning, and hoped to found upon them a charge of constructive blasphemy. But even this semblable perjury utterly broke down, and Jesus listened in silence while His disunited enemies hopelessly confuted each other’s testimony., Guilt often breaks into excuses where perfect innocence is dumb. He simply suffered His false accusers and their false listeners to entangle themselves in the hideous coil of their own malignant lies, and the silence of the innocent Jesus atoned for the excuse of the guilty Adam.

But that majestic silence trouble, thwarted, confounded, maddened them. It weighted them down for the moment with an incubus of intolerable self-condemnation. They felt, before that silence, as if they were the culprits, He the judge. And as every poisoned arrow of their carefully provided perjuries fell harmless at His feet, as though blunted on the diamond shield of His white innocence, they began to fear lest, after all, their thirst for His blood would go unslaked, and their whole plot fail. Were they thus to be conquered b the feebleness of their own weapons, without His stirring a finger or uttering a word? Was this Prophet of Nazareth to prevail against them, merely for lack of a few consistent lies? Was His life charmed even against calumny confirmed by oaths? It was intolerable.

END QUOTE from Farrer pages 461-463
-----------------
-----------------

EGW-- Desire of Ages

DA.703.002
But first of all, an accusation was to be found. They had gained nothing as yet. Annas ordered Jesus to be taken to Caiaphas. Caiaphas belonged to the Sadducees, some of whom were now the most desperate enemies of Jesus. He himself, though wanting in force of character, was fully as severe, heartless, and unscrupulous as was Annas. He would leave no means untried to destroy Jesus. It was now early morning, and very dark; by the light of torches and lanterns the armed band with their prisoner proceeded to the high priest's palace. Here, while the members of the Sanhedrin were coming together, Annas and Caiaphas again questioned Jesus, but without success.
DA.703.003
When the council had assembled in the judgment hall, Caiaphas took his seat as presiding officer. On either side were the judges, and those specially interested in the trial. The Roman soldiers were stationed on the platform below the throne. At the foot of the throne stood Jesus. Upon Him the gaze of the whole multitude was fixed. The excitement was intense. Of all the throng He alone was calm and serene. The very atmosphere surrounding Him seemed pervaded by a holy influence.
DA.704.001
Caiaphas had regarded Jesus as his rival. The eagerness of the people to hear the Saviour, and their apparent readiness to accept His teachings, had aroused the bitter jealousy of the high priest. But as Caiaphas now looked upon the prisoner, he was struck with admiration for His noble and dignified bearing. A conviction came over him that this Man was akin to God. The next instant he scornfully banished the thought. Immediately his voice was heard in sneering, haughty tones demanding that Jesus work one of His mighty miracles before them. But his words fell upon the Saviour's ears as though He heard them not. The people compared the excited and malignant deportment of Annas and Caiaphas with the calm, majestic bearing of Jesus. Even in the minds of that hardened multitude arose the question, Is this man of godlike presence to be condemned as a criminal? DA.705.001
Caiaphas, perceiving the influence that was obtaining, hastened the trial. The enemies of Jesus were in great perplexity. They were bent on securing His condemnation, but how to accomplish this they knew not. The members of the council were divided between the Pharisees and the Sadducees. There was bitter animosity and controversy between them; certain disputed points they dared not approach for fear of a quarrel. With a few words Jesus could have excited their prejudices against each other, and thus have averted their wrath from Himself. Caiaphas knew this, and he wished to avoid stirring up a contention. There were plenty of witnesses to prove that Christ had denounced the priests and scribes, that He had called them hypocrites and murderers; but this testimony it was not expedient to bring forward. The Sadducees in their sharp contentions with the Pharisees had used to them similar language. And such testimony would have no weight with the Romans, who were themselves disgusted with the pretensions of the Pharisees. There was abundant evidence that Jesus had disregarded the traditions of the Jews, and had spoken irreverently of many of their ordinances; but in regard to tradition the Pharisees and Sadducees were at swords' points; and this evidence also would have no weight with the Romans. Christ's enemies dared not accuse Him of Sabbathbreaking, lest an examination should reveal the character of His work. If His miracles of healing were brought to light, the very object of the priests would be defeated.
DA.705.002
False witnesses had been bribed to accuse Jesus of inciting rebellion and seeking to establish a separate government. But their testimony proved to be vague and contradictory. Under examination they falsified their own statements.
DA.705.003
Early in His ministry Christ had said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." In the figurative language of prophecy, He had thus foretold His own death and resurrection. "He spake of the temple of His body." John 2:19, 21. These words the Jews had understood in a literal sense, as referring to the temple at Jerusalem. Of all that Christ had said, the priests could find nothing to use against Him save this. By misstating these words they hoped to gain an advantage. The Romans had engaged in rebuilding and embellishing the temple, and they took great pride in it; any contempt shown to it would be sure to excite their indignation. Here Romans and Jews, Pharisees and Sadducees, could meet; for all held the temple in great veneration. On this point two witnesses were found whose testimony was not so contradictory as that of the others had been. One of them, who had been bribed to accuse Jesus, declared, "This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days." Thus Christ's words were misstated. If they had been reported exactly as He spoke them, they would not have secured His condemnation even by the Sanhedrin. Had Jesus been a mere man, as the Jews claimed, His declaration would only have indicated an unreasonable, boastful spirit, but could not have been construed into blasphemy. Even as misrepresented by the false witnesses, His words contained nothing which would be regarded by the Romans as a crime worthy of death.
DA.706.001
Patiently Jesus listened to the conflicting testimonies. No word did He utter in self-defense. At last His accusers were entangled, confused, and maddened. The trial was making no headway; it seemed that their plottings were to fail. Caiaphas was desperate. .....

dedication · Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2003 10:01 pm Post subject:

Continuing with the next paragraph (page 464) in Farrar's book: The Life of Christ, chapter "Jesus before the Priests and the Sanhedrin"
( end of last paragraph was…“Was His life charmed even against calumny confirmed by oaths? It was intolerable.“)

QUOTE
{bottom of page 463}
Then Caiphas was overcome with a paroxysm of fear and anger. Starting up from his judgment-seat and striding into the midst--with what a voice, with what an attitude {page 464} we may well imagine! “Answerest Thou NOTHING?” he exclaimed. “What is it that these witness against Thee?” Had not Jesus been aware that these His judges were wilfully feeding on ashes, and seeking lies, He might have answered; but now His awful silence remained unbroken.
Then, reduced to utter despair and fury, this false high Priest--with marvellous inconsistency, with disgraceful illegality--still standing as it were with a threatening attitude over his prisoner, exclaimed, “I adjure Thee by the living God to tell us” what? Whether thou art a malefactor? Whether Thou hast secretly taught sedition? Whether thou hast openly uttered blasphemy? --no, but (and surely the question showed the dread misgiving which lay under all their deadly conspiracy against Him)
“WHETHER THOU ART THE CHRIST, THE SON OF GOD?”

Strange question to a bound, defenceless, condemned criminal; and strange question from such a questioner--a High Priest of His people! Strange question from the judge who was hounding on his false witnesses against the prisoner! Yet so adjured, and to such a question, Jesus could not be silent; on such a point the could not leave Himself open to misinterpretation. In the days of his happier ministry, when they would have taken Him by force to make Him a King--in the days when to claim the Messiahship in their sense would have been to meet all their passionate prejudices half way, and to place Himself upon the topmost pinnacle of their adoring homage--in those days He had kept His title of Messiah utterly in the background: but now, at this awful decisive moment, when death was near--when, humanly speaking, nothing could be gained, everything must be lost, by the avowal--that Eternity, which is the synchronism of all the future, and all the present, and all the past--the solemn answer-- “I AM; and ye shall see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming with the clouds of heaven,” In that answer the thunder rolled--a thunder louder than at Sinai, though the ears of the cynic and the Sadducee heard it not then, nor hear it now. In overacted and ill-omened horror, the unjust judge who had thus supplemented the failure of the perjuries which he had vainly {page 465}sought--the false High Priest rending his linen robes before the True--demanded of the assembly His instant condemnation.

“BLASPHEMY!” he exclaimed; “what further need have we of witnesses? See, now ye heard his blasphemy! What is your decision?” And with the confused tumultuous cry, “He is ish marveth” “A man of death,” “Guilty of death,” the dark conclave was broken up, and the second stage of the trial of Jesus was over.

End of Chapter (Jesus Before the Priests and the Sanhedrin)
END QUOTE FROM FARRAR pages 463-465

EGW Desire of Ages

DA.706.001
Caiaphas was desperate. One last resort remained; Christ must be forced to condemn Himself. The high priest started from the judgment seat, his face contorted with passion, his voice and demeanor plainly indicating that were it in his power he would strike down the prisoner before him. "Answerest Thou nothing?" he exclaimed; "what is it which these witness against Thee?" DA.706.002
Jesus held His peace. "He was oppressed, and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth: He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so He openeth not His mouth." Isaiah 53:7.
DA.706.003
At last, Caiaphas, raising his right hand toward heaven, addressed Jesus in the form of a solemn oath: "I adjure Thee by the living God, that Thou tell us whether Thou be the Christ, the Son of God."
DA.706.004
To this appeal Christ could not remain silent. There was a time to be silent, and a time to speak. He had not spoken until directly questioned. He knew that to answer now would make His death certain. But the appeal was made by the highest acknowledged authority of the nation, and in the name of the Most High. Christ would not fail to show proper respect for the law. More than this, His own relation to the Father was called in question. He must plainly declare His character and mission. Jesus had said to His disciples, "Whosoever therefore shall confess Me before men, him will I confess also before My Father which is in heaven." Matt. 10:32. Now by His own example He repeated the lesson.
DA.707.001
Every ear was bent to listen, and every eye was fixed on His face as He answered, "Thou hast said." A heavenly light seemed to illuminate His pale countenance as He added, "Nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven."
DA.707.002
For a moment the divinity of Christ flashed through His guise of humanity. The high priest quailed before the penetrating eyes of the Saviour. That look seemed to read his hidden thoughts, and burn into his heart. Never in afterlife did he forget that searching glance of the persecuted Son of God.
DA.707.003
"Hereafter," said Jesus, "shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." In these words Christ presented the reverse of the scene then taking place. He, the Lord of life and glory, would be seated at God's right hand. He would be the judge of all the earth, and from His decision there could be no appeal. Then every secret thing would be set in the light of God's countenance, and judgment be passed upon every man according to his deeds.
DA.708.001
The words of Christ startled the high priest. The thought that there was to be a resurrection of the dead, when all would stand at the bar of God, to be rewarded according to their works, was a thought of terror to Caiaphas. He did not wish to believe that in future he would receive sentence according to his works. There rushed before his mind as a panorama the scenes of the final judgment. For a moment he saw the fearful spectacle of the graves giving up their dead, with the secrets he had hoped were forever hidden. For a moment he felt as if standing before the eternal Judge, whose eye, which sees all things, was reading his soul, bringing to light mysteries supposed to be hidden with the dead.
DA.708.002
The scene passed from the priest's vision. Christ's words cut him, the Sadducee, to the quick. Caiaphas had denied the doctrine of the resurrection, the judgment, and a future life. Now he was maddened by satanic fury. Was this man, a prisoner before him, to assail his most cherished theories? Rending his robe, that the people might see his pretended horror, he demanded that without further preliminaries the prisoner be condemned for blasphemy. "What further need have we of witnesses?" he said; "behold, now ye have heard His blasphemy. What think ye?" And they all condemned Him.
DA.708.003
Conviction mingled with passion led Caiaphas to do as he did. He was furious with himself for believing Christ's words, and instead of rending his heart under a deep sense of truth, and confessing that Jesus was the Messiah, he rent his priestly robes in determined resistance. This act was deeply significant. Little did Caiaphas realize its meaning. In this act, done to influence the judges and secure Christ's condemnation, the high priest had condemned himself. By the law of God he was disqualified for the priesthood. He had pronounced upon himself the death sentence.
DA.708.004
A high priest was not to rend his garments. By the Levitical law, this was prohibited under sentence of death. Under no circumstances, on no occasion, was the priest to rend his robe. It was the custom among the Jews for the garments to be rent at the death of friends, but this custom the priests were not to observe. Express command had been given by Christ to Moses concerning this. Lev. 10:6.
DA.709.001
Everything worn by the priest was to be whole and without blemish. By those beautiful official garments was represented the character of the great antitype, Jesus Christ. Nothing but perfection, in dress and attitude, in word and spirit, could be acceptable to God. He is holy, and His glory and perfection must be represented by the earthly service. Nothing but perfection could properly represent the sacredness of the heavenly service. Finite man might rend his own heart by showing a contrite and humble spirit. This God would discern. But no rent must be made in the priestly robes, for this would mar the representation of heavenly things. The high priest who dared to appear in holy office, and engage in the service of the sanctuary, with a rent robe, was looked upon as having severed himself from God. By rending his garment he cut himself off from being a representative character. He was no longer accepted by God as an officiating priest. This course of action, as exhibited by Caiaphas, showed human passion, human imperfection.
DA.709.002
By rending his garments, Caiaphas made of no effect the law of God, to follow the tradition of men. A man-made law provided that in case of blasphemy a priest might rend his garments in horror at the sin, and be guiltless. Thus the law of God was made void by the laws of men.
DA.709.003
Each action of the high priest was watched with interest by the people; and Caiaphas thought for effect to display his piety. But in this act, designed as an accusation against Christ, he was reviling the One of whom God had said, "My name is in Him." Ex. 23:21. He himself was committing blasphemy. Standing under the condemnation of God, he pronounced sentence upon Christ as a blasphemer.
DA.709.004
When Caiaphas rent his garment, his act was significant of the place that the Jewish nation as a nation would thereafter occupy toward God. The once favored people of God were separating themselves from Him, and were fast becoming a people disowned by Jehovah. When Christ upon the cross cried out, "It is finished" (John 19:30), and the veil of the temple was rent in twain, the Holy Watcher declared that the Jewish people had rejected Him who was the antitype of all their types, the substance of all their shadows. Israel was divorced from God. Well might Caiaphas then rend his official robes, which signified that he claimed to be a representative of the great High Priest; for no longer had they any meaning for him or for the people. Well might the high priest rend his robes in horror for himself and for the nation.

dedication · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 12:56 am Post subject:

Just noticed something pecular:

I just read through William Hanna's chapter "Trial before the Sanhedrim" pages 476-485 and there are similarities not only with EGW but with FARRAR!

Just a quick example-- they both use those "foriegn" words

Hanna p. 477
"Annas and Caiaphas, both reckoned as High Priests, the one being such de jure, the other de facto.

Farrar p. 456
"to treat Annas, if they wished to do so, as their High Priest de jure, if not de facto

djconklin · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 7:40 am Post subject:

Yes! I noticed that too yesterday. It's the use of the "odd" or unusual words that tip one off to how the writers of that day and age used each other (altho' sparingly) and were never thought the worst for it--sort of a compliment to the original source.

djconklin · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 10:03 am Post subject:

Two questions about the material from Farrar:

1) where is the page breaks between page 460 and 461 and then 462-4?

2) In this quote:

"Caiaphas, like his father-in-law, was a Sadducee--equally astute and unscrupulous with Annas, but endowed with less force of character and will. In his house took place the second private and irregular stage of the trail. (Matt. xxvi. 59-68; Mark xiv. 55-65) There--for though the poor Apostles could not watch for one hour in the sympathetic prayer, these nefarious plotters could watch all night in their deadly malice--a few of the most desperate enemies of Jesus among the Priests and Sadducees were met. To form a session of the Sanhedrin there must at least have been twenty-three members present. And we may perhaps be allowed to conjecture that this particular body before which Christ was now convened was mainly composed of Priests. There were in fact three Sanhedrins., or as we should rather call them, committees of the Sanhedrin, which ordinarily met at different places…...... Such being the case, it is no unreasonable supposition that these committees were composed of different elements and that one of them may have been mainly sacerdotal in its constitution. If so, it would have been the most likely of them all, at the present crises, to embrace the most violent measures against One whose teaching now seemed to endanger the very existence of priestly rule."

What was ellipsed, if anything?

dedication · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 11:44 am Post subject:

dedication · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 11:51 am Post subject:

djconklin · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 12:24 pm Post subject:

[quote="dedication"]

dedication · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 12:47 pm Post subject:

No dots, I went back and edited that too-- no more ellipses. It's now posted in full.

djconklin · Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2003 1:14 pm Post subject:

Thanks! I figured that's what you meant.

dedication · Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2003 12:06 pm Post subject:

Frederic Farrar
THE LIFE OF CHRIST
(pages 465-469)

CHAPTER LIX
The interval Between the Trials

Page 465
And this was how the Jews at last received their promised Messiah--longed for with passionate hopes during two thousand years; since then regretted in bitter agony for well-nigh two thousand more! From this moment He was regarded by all the apparitors of the Jewish Court as a heretic, liable to death by stoning; and was only remanded into custody to be kept till break of day, because by daylight only, and in the Lishcat haggazzith, or hall of Judgment, and only by a full session of the entire Sanhedrin, could He be legally condemned. And since now they looked upon Him as a “fit person to be insulted with impunity, He was hauled through the court-yard to the guard-room with blows and curses, in which it may be that not only the attendant menials, but even the cold but now infuriated Sadducees took their share. It was now long past midnight, and the spring air was then most chilly. In the center of the court the servants of the priests were warming themselves under the frosty starlight as they stood round a fire of coals, And as he was led past that fire He heard--what was to Him a more deadly bitterness than any which His brutal persecutors could pour into His cup of anguish--He heard His boldest Apostle denying him with oaths.

For during these two sad hours of His commencing tragedy, as he stood in the Halls of Annas and of Caiaphas, another moral tragedy, which he had already prophesied, had been taking place in the other court. (466)As far as we can infer from the various narratives, the palace in Jerusalem, conjointly occupied by Annas the real, and Caiaphas the titular High Priest, seems to have been built round a square court, and entered by an arched passage or vestibule; and on the further side of it, probably up a short flight of steps, was the hall in which the committee of the Sanhedrin had met. Timidly, and at a distance, two only of the apostles had so far recovered from their first panic as to follow far in the rear of the melancholy procession. One of these--the beloved disciple--known perhaps to the High Priest’s household as a young fisherman of the lake of Galilee--had found ready admittance, with no attempt to conceal his sympathies or his identity. Not so the other. Unknown, and Galilean, he had been stopped a the door by the youthful portress. Better, far better, had his exclusion been final. For it was a night of tumult, of terror, of suspicion; and Peter was weak, and his intense love was mixed with fear, and yet he was venturing into the very thick of his most dangerous enemies. But John, regretting that he should be debarred from entrance, and judging perhaps of his friend’s firmness by his own, exerted his influence to obtain admission for him. With bold imprudence, and concealing the better motives which had brought him thither, Peter, warned though he had been , but warned in vain, walked into the court-yard, and sat down in the very middle of the servants of the very men before whom at that moment his Lord was being arraigned on a charge of death. The portress, after the admission of those concerned in the capture, seems to have been relieved (as was only natural at that late hour) by another maid, and advancing to the group of her fellow-servants, she fixed a curiousand earnest gaze on the dubious stranger as he sat full in the red glare of the firelight, and then, with a flash of recognition, she exclaimed, “Why, you, as well as the other, were with Jesus of Galilee.” Peter was off his guard. At this period of life his easy impressionable nature was ever liable to be molded by the influence of the moment, and he passed readily into passionate extremes. Long, long afterward, we find a wholly unexpected confirmation of the probability of this sad episode of his life, in the readiness with which he lent himself to the views of the Apostle of the Gentiles (467) and the equal facility with which a false shame, and a fear of “them which were of the circumcision,” made him swerve into the wrong and narrow properties of “certain which came from James,” And thus it was that the mere curious question of an inquisitive young girl startled him by its very suddenness into a quick denial of his Lord. Doubtless, at the moment, it presented itself to him as a mere prudent evasion of needless danger. But did he hope to stop there? Alas, “once denied” is always “thrice denied;” and the sudden “manslaughter upon truth” always and rapidly, develops into its utter and deliberate murder; and a lie is like a stone set rolling upon a mountain-side, which is instantly beyond its utterer’s control.

For a moment, perhaps, his denial was accepted, for it had been very public and very emphatic. But it warned him of his danger. Guiltily he slinks away again from the glowing brazier to the arched entrance of the court, as the crowing of cock smote, not quite unheeded, on his guilty ear. His respite was very short. The portress--part of whose duty it was to draw attention to dubious strangers--had evidently gossiped about him to the servant who had relieved her in charge of the door. Some other idlers were standing about, and this second maid pointed him out to them as having certainly been with Jesus of Nazareth. A lie seemed more than ever necessary now, and to secure himself from all further molestation he even confirmed it with an oath. But now flight seemed impossible, for it would only confirm suspicious; so with desperate gloomy resolution he once more--with feelings which can barely be imagined--joined the unfriendly and suspicious group who were standing round the fire.

A whole hour passed: for him it must have been a fearful hour, and one never to be forgotten. The temperament of Peter was far too nervous and vehement to suffer him to feel at ease under this new complication of ingratitude and falsehood. If he remain silent among these priestly servitors, he is betrayed, by the restless self-consciousness of an evil secret which tries in vain to simulate indifference; if he brazen it out with careless talk, he is fatally betrayed by his Galilean burr. It is evident that, in spite of denial and of oath, they wholly distrust and (468) despise him; and at last one of the High Priest’s servants -- a kinsman of the wounded Malchus--once more strongly and confidently charged him with having been with Jesus in the garden, taunting him, in proof of it, with the misplaced gutturals of his provincial dialect. The others joined in the accusation. Unless he persisted, all was lost which might seem to have been gained. Perhaps one more effort would set him quite free from these troublesome charges, and enable him to wait and see the end. Pressed closer and closer by the sneering, threatening band of idle servitors--sinking deeper and deeper into the more of faithlessness and fear-- “then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man,” And at that fatal moment of guilt, which might well have been for him the moment of an apostasy as fatal and final as had been that of brother apostle--at that fatal moment, while those shameless curses still quivered on the air--first the cock crew in the cold gray dusk, and at the same moment, catching the last accents of those perjured oaths, either through the open portal of the judgment-hall, or as he was led past the group at the fireside through the open court, with rude pushing and ribald jeers and blows and spitting-- the Lord--the Lord in the agony of His humiliation, in the majesty of his silence--”the Lord turned and looked upon Peter.” Blessed are those on whom, when He looks in sorrow, the Lord looks also with love! It was enough. Like an arrow through his inmost soul shot the mute, eloquent anguish of that reproachful glance. As the sunbeam smites the last hold of snow upon the rock, ere it rushes in avalanche down the tormented hill, so the false self of the fallen Apostle slipped away. It was enough” “he saw no more enemies, he know no more danger, he feared no more death,.” Flinging the fold of his mantle over his head, he too, like Judas, rushed forth into the night. Into the night, but not as Judas; into the unsunned outer darkness of miserable self-condemnation, but not into the midnight of remorse and of despair; into the night, but, as has been beautifully said, it was “to meet the morning dawn.” If the angel of Innocence had left him, the angel of Repentance took him gently by the hand. Sternly, yet tenderly, the spirit of grace led up this broken-hearted penitent before the tribunal of his (469) own conscience, and there his old life, his old shame, his old weakness, his old self, was doomed to that death of godly sorrow which was to issue in a new and nobler birth.

And it was this crime, committed against Him by the man who had first proclaimed Him as the Christ-- who had come to Him over the storm water--who had affirmed so indignantly that he would die with him rather than deny Him--it was this denial, confirmed by curses, that Jesus heard immediately after he had been condemned to death, and at the very commencement of His first terrible derision. For, in the guard-room to which he was remanded to await the break of day, all the ignorant malice of religious hatred, all the narrow vulgarity of brutal spite, all the cold innate cruelty which lurks under the abjectness of Oriental servility, was let loose against Him. His very meekness, His very silence, his very majesty-- the very stainlessness of His innocence, the very grandeur of His fame--every divine circumstance and quality which raised him to a height so infinitely immeasurable above His persecutor-- all these made him an all the more welcome victim for their low and devilish ferocity. They spat in His face; they smote Him with rods; they struck Him with their closed fists and with their open palms, in the fertility of their furious and hateful insolence, they invented against Him a sort of game. Blindfolding His eye, they hit Him again and again, with the repeated question, “prophesy to us, O Messiah, who it is that smote thee.” So they whiled away the dark cold hours till the morning, revenging themselves upon His impassive innocence for their own present vileness and previous terror’ and there, in the midst of that save and wanton varletry, the Son of God, bound and blindfold, stood in his long and silent agony, defenceless and alone,. It was His first derision--His derision as the Christ, the Judge attainted, the holy One a criminal, the Deliverer in bonds.

At last the miserable lingering hours were over............( Farrar --continued in post above)
-----------
----------
END QUOTE

________
________

EGW

DA.710.002
But a keener anguish rent the heart of Jesus; the blow that inflicted the deepest pain no enemy's hand could have dealt. While He was undergoing the mockery of an examination before Caiaphas, Christ had been denied by one of His own disciples.
DA.710.003
After deserting their Master in the garden, two of the disciples had ventured to follow, at a distance, the mob that had Jesus in charge. These disciples were Peter and John. The priests recognized John as a well-known disciple of Jesus, and admitted him to the hall, hoping that as he witnessed the humiliation of his Leader, he would scorn the idea of such a one being the Son of God. John spoke in favor of Peter, and gained an entrance for him also. DA.710.004
In the court a fire had been kindled; for it was the coldest hour of the night, being just before the dawn. A company drew about the fire, and Peter presumptuously took his place with them. He did not wish to be recognized as a disciple of Jesus. By mingling carelessly with the crowd, he hoped to be taken for one of those who had brought Jesus to the hall.
DA.710.005
But as the light flashed upon Peter's face, the woman who kept the door cast a searching glance upon him. She had noticed that he came in with John, she marked the look of dejection on his face, and thought that he might be a disciple of Jesus. She was one of the servants of Caiaphas' household, and was curious to know. She said to Peter, "Art not thou also one of this Man's disciples?" Peter was startled and confused; the eyes of the company instantly fastened upon him. He pretended not to understand her; but she was persistent, and said to those around her that this man was with Jesus. Peter felt compelled to answer, and said angrily, "Woman, I know Him not." This was the first denial, and immediately the cock crew. O Peter, so soon ashamed of thy Master! so soon to deny thy Lord!
DA.711.001
The disciple John, upon entering the judgment hall, did not try to conceal the fact that he was a follower of Jesus. He did not mingle with the rough company who were reviling his Master. He was not questioned, for he did not assume a false character, and thus lay himself liable to suspicion. He sought a retired corner secure from the notice of the mob, but as near Jesus as it was possible for him to be. Here he could see and hear all that took place at the trial of his Lord.
DA.712.001
Peter had not designed that his real character should be known. In assuming an air of indifference he had placed himself on the enemy's ground, and he became an easy prey to temptation. If he had been called to fight for his Master, he would have been a courageous soldier; but when the finger of scorn was pointed at him, he proved himself a coward. Many who do not shrink from active warfare for their Lord are driven by ridicule to deny their faith. By associating with those whom they should avoid, they place themselves in the way of temptation. They invite the enemy to tempt them, and are led to say and do that of which under other circumstances they would never have been guilty. The disciple of Christ who in our day disguises his faith through dread of suffering or reproach denies his Lord as really as did Peter in the judgment hall.
DA.712.002
Peter tried to show no interest in the trial of his Master, but his heart was wrung with sorrow as he heard the cruel taunts, and saw the abuse He was suffering. More than this, he was surprised and angry that Jesus should humiliate Himself and His followers by submitting to such treatment. In order to conceal his true feelings, he endeavored to join with the persecutors of Jesus in their untimely jests. But his appearance was unnatural. He was acting a lie, and while seeking to talk unconcernedly he could not restrain expressions of indignation at the abuse heaped upon his Master.
DA.712.003
Attention was called to him the second time, and he was again charged with being a follower of Jesus. He now declared with an oath, "I do not know the Man." Still another opportunity was given him. An hour had passed, when one of the servants of the high priest, being a near kinsman of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, asked him, "Did not I see thee in the garden with Him?" "Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilean, and thy speech agreeth thereto." At this Peter flew into a rage. The disciples of Jesus were noted for the purity of their language, and in order fully to deceive his questioners, and justify his assumed character, Peter now denied his Master with cursing and swearing. Again the cock crew. Peter heard it then, and he remembered the words of Jesus, "Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny Me thrice." Mark 14:30.
DA.712.004
While the degrading oaths were fresh upon Peter's lips, and the shrill crowing of the cock was still ringing in his ears, the Saviour turned from the frowning judges, and looked full upon His poor disciple. At the same time Peter's eyes were drawn to his Master. In that gentle countenance he read deep pity and sorrow, but there was no anger there.
DA.713.001
The sight of that pale, suffering face, those quivering lips, that look of compassion and forgiveness, pierced his heart like an arrow. Conscience was aroused. Memory was active. Peter called to mind his promise of a few short hours before that he would go with his Lord to prison and to death. He remembered his grief when the Saviour told him in the upper chamber that he would deny his Lord thrice that same night. Peter had just declared that he knew not Jesus, but he now realized with bitter grief how well his Lord knew him, and how accurately He had read his heart, the falseness of which was unknown even to himself.
DA.713.002
A tide of memories rushed over him. The Saviour's tender mercy, His kindness and long-suffering, His gentleness and patience toward His erring disciples,--all was remembered. He recalled the caution, "Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not." Luke 22:31, 32. He reflected with horror upon his own ingratitude, his falsehood, his perjury. Once more he looked at his Master, and saw a sacrilegious hand raised to smite Him in the face. Unable longer to endure the scene, he rushed, heartbroken, from the hall.
DA.713.003
He pressed on in solitude and darkness, he knew not and cared not whither. At last he found himself in Gethsemane. The scene of a few hours before came vividly to his mind. The suffering face of his Lord, stained with bloody sweat and convulsed with anguish, rose before him. He remembered with bitter remorse that Jesus had wept and agonized in prayer alone, while those who should have united with Him in that trying hour were sleeping. He remembered His solemn charge, "Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation." Matt. 26:41. He witnessed again the scene in the judgment hall. It was torture to his bleeding heart to know that he had added the heaviest burden to the Saviour's humiliation and grief. On the very spot where Jesus had poured out His soul in agony to His Father, Peter fell upon his face, and wished that he might die.
DA.713.004
It was in sleeping when Jesus bade him watch and pray that Peter had prepared the way for his great sin. All the disciples, by sleeping in that critical hour, sustained a great loss. Christ knew the fiery ordeal through which they were to pass. He knew how Satan would work to paralyze their senses that they might be unready for the trial. Therefore it was that He gave them warning. Had those hours in the garden been spent in watching and prayer, Peter would not have been left to depend upon his own feeble strength. He would not have denied his Lord. Had the disciples watched with Christ in His agony, they would have been prepared to behold His suffering upon the cross. They would have understood in some degree the nature of His overpowering anguish. They would have been able to recall His words that foretold His sufferings, His death, and His resurrection. Amid the gloom of the most trying hour, some rays of hope would have lighted up the darkness and sustained their faith.

dedication · Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2003 12:45 pm Post subject:

They are definately writing about the same event but it doesn't look like plagerism to me. Different things are emphasized.

By the way, I noticed you have the entire chapter 13 on "Jesus at the Passover" by Frederic Farrar.
I didn't read EVERY word, but the first and last lines of each paragrah are identical to my copy of the book--
As far as I know my copy of "The Life of Christ" by Farrar is an exact replica of his original. I have another book by Farrar called "The Life of Lives" written in 1900, in it he says he wrote "The Life of Christ" 26 years earlier which would be 1874.

Just curious-- do you have the 6 volumn set of Hanna on "The Life of Our Lord" or his book "The Lord's Life on Earth". I only have the latter.

Over on egwhite.org they say EGW copied from William Hanna's "Life of Christ"., is this yet another book by him, or did they mix up with Farrar's book title?

djconklin · Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2003 9:27 pm Post subject:

There are a lot of books entitled Life of Christ. My one volume copy of Hanna is by that title.

BTW, two of the books I ordered just came: Ingraham's Prince of the House of David and Geikie's Life of Christ.

I don't understand what you mean by this: "I noticed you have the entire chapter 13 on "Jesus at the Passover" by Frederic Farrar."