[3] “And the angel of God who was sent to the same virgin at that time, brought her the good news, saying, ‘Behold thou shalt conceive of the Holy Ghost and shalt bear a son, and he shall be called the Son of the Highest, and thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.’” After a dozen lines, the last clause is repeated as follows: “Wherefore, too, the angel said to the virgin, ‘Thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.’” The last clause seems to have been transferred from Matthew by Justin. The Protevangelium (c. 11) reads as follows: “And she hearing, reasoned with herself, saying: Shall I conceive by the Lord, the living God? And shall I bring forth, as every woman brings forth? And the angel of the Lord said: Not so, Mary; for the power of the Lord shall overshadow thee; wherefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of the Most High. And thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins. And Mary said: Behold the servant of the Lord before his face; let it be unto me according to thy word. And she made the purple and the scarlet and took them to the priest,” etc. The account is preceded by the story that it had fallen to her lot to spin purple and scarlet for the veil of the temple, and that when the angel spake to her she was going with a pitcher to fill it with water. It is not easy to believe that Justin’s simple narrative came from such a source. [4] The Land and the Book, by W. M. Thompson, D.D., twenty-five years a missionary of the A. B. C. F. M., in Syria and Palestine, Vol. II, p. 503. [5] The first part contains a graphic account of the trial and crucifixion. At the trial witnesses are represented as appearing before Pilate and narrating different miracles which had been performed. Judge Waite devotes considerable space in comparing these accounts with the Gospel narratives. He argues that the Apocryphal account must have been the earlier one, _because_ of its brevity, and because it does not include _all_ the miracles. This is as if one should infer that the plea of the advocate, or the charge of the judge, preceded the testimony, or the compendium, the history. [6] Matt. ix. 27; xii. 23; xv. 22; Mark x. 47; xii. 35-7; Luke xx. 30-1; xl. 6; xviii. 38-9; John vii. 42; Acts xiii. 23; Ro. i. 3. [7] Protevangelium, p. 17; vol. 16, Ante-Nicene Christian Library, pp. 18-19.