art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?"^143 A similar inference from another passage,
where the Jews speak of the "forty-six years" since the temple of Herod began to be constructed,
while Christ spoke of the, temple his body (John 2:20), is of course still less conclusive.
IV. Duration of Christ’s Public Ministry.—It began with the baptism by John and ended
with the crucifixion. About the length of the intervening time there are (besides the isolated and
decidedly erroneous view of Irenaeus) three theories, allowing respectively one, two, or three years
and a few months, and designated as the bipaschal, tripaschal, and quadripaschal schemes, according
to the number of Passovers. The Synoptists mention only the last Passover during the public ministry
of our Lord, at which he was crucified, but they intimate that he was in Judaea more than once.^144
John certainly mentions three Passovers, two of which (the first and the last) Christ did attend,^145
and perhaps a fourth, which he also attended.^146
(1) The bipaschal scheme confines the public ministry to one year and a few weeks or
months. This was first held by the Gnostic sect of the Valentinians (who connected it with their
fancy about thirty aeons), and by several fathers, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian) and perhaps
by Origen and Augustine (who express themselves doubtfully). The chief argument of the fathers
and those harmonists who follow them, is derived from the prophecy of "the acceptable year of the
Lord," as quoted by Christ,^147 and from the typical meaning of the paschal lamb, which must be of
"one year" and without blemish.^148 Far more important is the argument drawn by some modern
critics from the silence of the synoptical Gospels concerning the other Passovers.^149 But this silence
is not in itself conclusive, and must yield to the positive testimony of John, which cannot be
conformed to the bipaschal scheme.^150 Moreover, it is simply impossible to crowd the events of
Christ’s life, the training of the Twelve, and the development of the hostility of the Jews, into one
short year.
(2) The choice therefore lies between the tripaschal and the quadripaschal schemes. The
decision depends chiefly on the interpretation of the unnamed "feast of the Jews," John 5:1, whether
it was a Passover, or another feast; and this again depends much (though not exclusively) on a
difference of reading (the feast, or a feast).^151 The parable of the barren fig-tree, which represents(^143) John 8:57. Irenaeus reasons that the Jews made the nearest approach to the real age, either from mere observation or from
knowledge of the public records, and thus concludes: "Christ did not therefore preach only for one year, nor did he suffer in the
twelfth month of the year; for the period included between the thirtieth and the fiftieth year can never be regarded as one year,
unless indeed, among their aeons [he speaks of the Gnostics] there be such long years assigned to those who sit in their ranks
with Bythos in thePleroma."
(^144) Comp. Matt. 4:12; 23:37; Mark 1:14; Luke 4:14; 10:38; 13:34.
(^145) John 2:13, 23; 6:4; 11:55; 12:1; 13:1. The Passover mentioned 6:4 Christ did not attend, because the Jews sought to kill
him (7:1; comp. 5:18).
(^146) John 5:1 if we read the article ἠ before ἑορτὴ τῶν Ἰουδίων. See below.
(^147) Isa. 61:2; comp. Luke 4:14.
(^148) Exod. 12:5.
(^149) Keim, I. 130.
(^150) Henry Browne who, in his Ordo Saeclorum (pp.80 sqq.), likewise defends the one year’s ministry, in part by astronomical
calculations, is constrained to eliminate without any MSS. authority το ̀πάσχα from John 6:4, and to make the ἑορτή there
mentioned to be the same as that in 7:2, so that John would give the feasts of one year only, in regular chronological order,
namely, the Passover 2:13 in March, the Pentecost 5:1 in May, the Feast of Tabernacles 6:4; 7:2 in September, the Feast of
Dedication 10:22 in December, the Passover of the Crucifixion in March.
(^151) The definite article before "feast, (ἡ ἑορτή ) which is supported by the Sinaitic MS. and adopted by Tischendorf (ed. viii.),
favors the view that the feast was the Passover,the great feast of the Jews. The reading without the article, which has the weight
of the more critical Vatican Ms, and is preferred by Lachmann, Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, and by the Revision of the E. V.,
A.D. 1-100.