by Luke. Scholars are agreed from internal evidence that
it could not have been written until long after the fall of Jerusalem
in 70 A.D. The author of Luke was acquainted with the _Antiquities_ of
Josephus and this shows that he must have made his compilation and free
reworking of traditions in the second century.

{78}

If, then, our gospels were not written by eye-witnesses, and represent
the beliefs and traditions of at least the next half-century after the
death of Jesus, to what can we give credence? What is myth and legend
and what is historic fact? Can we find a clew to guide us?

It is a canon among historical critics to regard those passages as the
oldest which conflict most with the outlook of the later centuries. We
can understand why they happen to be there but there would be no good
reason for their later creation and insertion. Let us try to determine
whither this canon will lead us.

All scholars agree that the birth stories are a later addition. They
are a product of Hellenistic beliefs, perhaps even of Hindoo
influences. The Virgin-Mother myth was very common in ancient times
and the whole machinery of the story was undoubtedly absorbed from
tales widely current in those days. For instance, the father of Plato,
the Greek philosopher, was warned in a dream by Apollo so that Plato
was virgin-born. What can we think of the intellectual state of
Churches which excommunicate ministers who have the decency to inform
their congregation what disinterested scholarship has determined? So
far as there is intellectual dishonesty or incompetence here, it will
bring its own punishment in the attitude adopted by sincere men toward
the Churches. The best we can say, then, is that there is no very good
reason to doubt that Jesus was the son of a carpenter, by the name of
Joseph, and his wife, Mary. He was not the only child, for Mark
represents his fellow townsmen as saying: "Is not this the carpenter,
the son of Mary, and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon?
And are not his sisters {79} here with us?" Quite a goodly family, you
see. The Ebionite Christians, who were the Christians of Palestine and
probably had the safest traditions on this point, believed that Jesus
"was the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary course of
human generation." His kinsmen were the leaders of the Christian
community for several generations. But there is little use in laboring
a point which is so