VIII AGNOSTICISM : A REJOINDER 273 



all three contain, as their foundation, versions, to 

 a large extent verbally identical, of one and the 

 same tradition ; or two of them are thus closely 

 dependent on the third ; and the opinion of the 

 majority of the best critics has of late years more 

 and more converged towards the conviction that 

 our canonical second gospel (the so-called "Mark's" 

 Gospel) is that which most closely represents the 

 primitive groundwork of the three. 1 That I take 

 to be one of the most valuable results of New 

 Testament criticism, of immeasurably greater im- 

 portance than the discussion about dates and 

 authorship. 



But if, as I believe to be the case, beyond any 

 rational doubt or dispute, the second gospel is the 

 nearest extant representative of the oldest tradi- 

 tion, whether written or oral, how comes it that it 



supposition of an Ur-Marcus (p. 367). That a "theologian of 

 repute " should confound an indisputable fact with one of the 

 modes of explaining that fact is not so singular as those who are 

 unaccustomed to the ways of theologians might imagine. 



1 Any examiner whose duty it has been to examine into a case 

 of "copying" will be particularly well prepared to appreciate 

 the force of the case stated in that most excellent little book, 

 The Common Tradition of the Synoptic Gospels, by Dr. Abbott 

 and Mr. Rushbrooke (Macmillan, 1884). To those who have not 

 passed through such painful experiences I may recommend the 

 brief discussion of the genuineness of the " Casket Letters " in my 

 friend Mr. Skelton's interesting book, Maitland of Lethington. 

 The second edition of Holtzmann's Lehrbuch, published in 1886, 

 gives a remarkably fair and full account of the present results of 

 .criticism. At p. 366 he writes that the present burning question 

 is whether the "relatively primitive narrative and the root of 

 the other synoptic texts is contained in Matthew or in Mark. 

 It is only on this point that properly-informed (sachkundige) 

 critics differ," and he decides in favour of Mark. 



