200 LIEUT. -COL. G. MACKINLAY_, ON SOME LUCAN PEOBLEMS. 



than either of the others, its actual length in verses is almost as 

 long as the longest. It seems as if the Evangelist hesitates to 

 hurry on to the narrative of the great tragedy, and so he lingers 

 over the recital of Our Lord's teaching in many of the gracious 

 Parables which are special to his gospel. 



Summary. 



We briefly summarize the explanations of these Lucan 

 Problems under the ordinary, and under the new supposition of 

 the construction of the Gospel of St. Luke. 



Sir John Hawkins himself generously criticizes the possible 

 explanations which he has suggested for the great Insertion, 

 calling them conjectures which may be harmful if made too 

 much of. He does not bring forward any reason for the use of 

 the lesser one. "With regard to the great Omission, he makes 

 objections to each of the three explanations which he has 

 suggested as follows — he considers the first only a bare 

 possibility, the second will not be accepted by some, and parts 

 of his third explanation are supported by arguments on which 

 he warns us not to lay very much stress. 



If we assume the existence of the three narratives, Luke (A), 

 Luke (B), and Luke (C), and that the Evangelist wished to give 

 (a) Some distinctive feature to each, and (b) Some general 

 resemblances or interdependence of arrangement between them, 

 the following explanations suggest themselves for the employ- 

 ment of the two Insertions, and of the great Omission. 



(a) The great Insertion materially helps to enable a different 

 source to predominate in each narrative, for it annuls the 

 Marcan source in whole or in great part in both Luke (B) and 

 Luke (C), and thus it allows the Matthaean or (Q) source to 

 prevail in the former, and the special Lucan one in the latter, 

 the usual Marcan source predominating in Luke (A). 



(h) The lesser Insertion, by forsaking the ordinary Marcan 

 source, allows Luke (A) to begin with quotations from tlie 

 Sermon on the Mount, and thus it resembles Luke (B). 



The great Omission which occurs in Luke (A) evidently 

 corresponds to and resembles the greater Omission in Luke (B). 

 Each of them cuts its narrative into two parts, the second part 

 of each resembling the whole of Luke (C). The great Omission 

 therefore plays an important part in causing a general resem- 

 blance in the construction of the three narratives. 



By the use of the great Omission in Luke (A) the Evangelist 

 says in effect, " Enough of this comparatively tranquil narrative, 



