trust than others, as to the testimony of the Gospel, brought to him their books, wishing to learn from him what was his opinion about them. And he commended those, who had written for their truth, but said that a few things had been passed over by them, and almost all instruction as to the wonders that were most necessary to be read. Then also he said that it was needful that there should be those who told of the appearing of Christ in the flesh, but that the doctrines of his Divinity ought not to be passed by,' etc. Jerome also speaks of the historical design of writing a supplement to the other evangelists. Similarly Storr, Hug, Feilmoser. A conscious contrast between the fourth gospel as being more spiritual, and the Synoptic Gospels, certainly belongs only to later times, which look upon the character of the different documents from their own point of view. What Herder says would probably express the view of the apostle himself- It may be called a Gospel of the Spirit-be it so, but the other Gospels are not of the flesh, they also contain living words of Christ, and are built on the same foundation of faith.' The design also of completing the three gospels, which were already in existence, cannot in this definite manner be received. That this cannot have been the chief end is shown by the uniformity of its character: "This gospel is not simply a piece of patchwork,' says Hase; nor can it even be regarded as a definite secondary object always before the mind of the evangelist. Opposed to this view are the following circumstances, that so much is related in the fourth Gospel, which is found also in the three first: that not a few at least apparent discrepancies appear which would have to be reconciled; that, on the other hand, discrepancies of the synoptic Gospels themselves are not removed; that we might certainly have expected that this object should have been mentioned in ch. xx. 30; and finally, that whoever maintains strictly, that this is the object, is compelled to think of an editorial arrangement of a more modern kind. Moreover, the churches at that time were certainly acquainted with the history of our Lord, less from the three written evangelical records than from oral tradition. Nevertheless, some truth lies at the foundation of this view. If John imparted much in his instruction which went beyond the circle of ordinary oral tradition, and therefore also beyond the synoptic Gospels that flowed from that source, one cannot but think that he awakened amongst his friends the desire of possessing also a history of the Lord according to his representation. If he yielded to this desire his gospel must of itself acquire a supplemental character, and only in this way can it be

y Catal. de vir. illust. c. 9.

z Vom Gottessohn nach Johannes, p. 34.

explained

a

explained that many important matters of fact are passed over, such as the baptism of Jesus by John, the account of the temptation, and of the transfiguration, the institution of the Lord's supper, the agony in Gethsemane; that his readers were acquainted with the circle of ordinary tradition is plainly presupposed (ch. iii. 24; xi. 2; also i. 32; to these we may add xiii. 27; xviii. 2, where the agreement of Judas with the council is presupposed; xviii. 19, where the chief point in the examination before Caiaphas is passed over; xix. 7; xxi. 15). That he has nevertheless communicated larger sections, such as the history of the passion and resurrection, is not at all surprising, since without these no Gospel could be written, and besides John is in these sections peculiar; moreover, ch. vi. 1-21, and xii. 1 are the only passages which agree with the synoptic Gospels. The historical section, ch. vi., is connected with the discourse that follows, although it may have been given on account also of the miracle; the narrative, ch. xii., 1, sq., might be given because of its furnishing a trait in the character of Judas, whose black deed John is anxious to represent fully. This view of the origin of the gospel, natural as it is in itself, is also confirmed by ecclesiastical tradition; the account given above from Clement is indeed by himself referred to the tradition of earlier elders (véxadev TрEOBUTEρo). The expression of the apostle himself (ch. xxi. 30, 31) serves at least to show that he made a selection out of the mass of materials before him with a definite object; what that object was, he does not say.

Since he has formed a selection, the question is, whether he intended simply to supply other matter, or whether this additional matter is itself placed in a definite point of view. Earlier times have scarcely at all reflected on the literary character of the Gospels; recent criticism, especially the school of Dr. Baur and his followers, have carried this tendency to the extreme. Since Strauss, critics find in this Gospel especially, which they consider to be pseudonymous, the most conscious intention throughout, definite schemes and categories according to which the discourses and histories are presented, the following out of a definite object even in the most insignificant details. The result of this is natural -in proportion as conscious design is assumed on the part of the pseudonymous writer, in that same proportion there is less of historical truth. Bruno Bauer, above all, proceeds arbitrarily and unreasonably. When one comes back from the study of this latest critic one fears to read the Evangelist with a clouded eye, as Lücke says (Comm. i. p. 183), 'to make him more full of meaning than he really is.' This criticism has directed attention especially

a See Hug's Einleitung, ii. § 53.

to

to the fact that this Evangelist has made it his business to represent Jesus going forth into conflict with the Jewish rulers. Since this has been brought into view, those who acknowledge the genuineness of John have also gained a new insight into the composition of the Gospel as Lücke in his third edition (compare De Wette). We might even say that the theme which this Gospel pursues from its very beginning is, the eternal conflict between the divine light and the corruption of man, represented in the opposition of the hostile Jewish party to the manifestation of the Son of God, and carried onward to the triumph of the light. As the opening strain of a musical composition expresses the idea which runs throughout it, so does the prologue of the Gospel express this theme, inasmuch as it tells of the opposition of the world to the Logos not yet become flesh; and as the theme of the Epistle to the Romans lies in ch. i. 17, so the thought which runs through the Gospel of John is contained in ch. i. 11-13. Two principal sections are clearly discoverable. The first extends to ch. xii. It comprehends the public ministry of Jesus, and concludes with a résumé of the same (xii. 44-50). Preparation is made for the second section which contains the history of the passion and resurrection of Jesus, by his discourse in ch. xii. 23-32. The groundthought of this discourse is, the humiliation is necessary, since only thus can the exaltation follow. The history of the passion commences with ch. xiii., and even at the beginning, ver. 3, it points the disciples to the final glory. The exclamation of Thomas, 'My Lord and my God,' the highest acknowledgment of the risen Saviour, closes the second part, and, by means of the words 'Happy are they who see not and yet believe,' forms the connecting link with the conclusion, 'This is written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Son of God.' In the first part the gradual rise of the opposition of the Jewish rulers is set forth up to the decisive act of the raising of Lazarus and the open outbreak of their hatred which followed it. This account closes with the official determination of Caiaphas, ch. xi. 50, and this decree is an involuntary prediction of the meaning of the death of Christ. Former writers have remarked the practical religion (den religiösen Pragmatismus) of the Gospel, how John throughout looks at the divine arrangement and sometimes refers to the now delaying, now hurrying course of Providence (vii. 30, viii. 20, xiii. 1). According to our view of the plan of the work these intimations appear not simply as incidental expressions of religious feeling, but as serving the purpose which the writer had in view. Nevertheless it is our

distinct conviction that the history has presented itself to the mind of the Evangelist according to this plan in writing it down, and not from previous reflection. Had such a plan previously stood

before

before the mind of the Apostle as a distinct scheme, would it not have been expressed in the concluding formula, ch. xx. 31, when the Evangelist had arrived at the termination of his history?

V. Contents and form of the Gospel of John in relation to the three first Gospels.

In its contents and form this Gospel is throughout peculiar, and in this peculiarity there is a charm and a power of attraction, in consequence of which it has not only been preferred to the other Gospels, but by many has been placed above all the other books of the Bible. All the leaders of the Church are full of its praise. Chrysostom writes thus: If those who are spectators of the athletes and those who are both spectators and hearers of rhetoricians and flute-players sit with such readiness, how much eagerness and readiness ought ye to afford us, when it is not some flute-player or sophist who now comes into the arena, but a man speaking from heaven and uttering a voice louder than thunder, for he occupies and seizes the whole world and fills it with his cry, not by shouting aloud but by moving his tongue with divine grace. And this truly is wonderful, that though the cry is so great it is not at all harsh or unpleasing, but sweeter than any harmony of music, and more to be desired and more soothing: and in addition to all this, it is most holy and most awful, full of such secrets, and bringing such blessings as that those who receive and keep them with diligence and readiness cannot longer be men nor continue on the earth, but are raised above all the things of this life, and changing their condition to that of angels they live on the earth as though they lived in heaven.' In like manner Augustin says: In the four Gospels or rather in the four books of the one Gospel, the holy apostle John, compared not unsuitably in respect to spiritual understanding to an eagle, has elevated his preaching to a loftier and more sublime height than the other three, and in his elevation he desires to raise our hearts also. For the other three Evangelists, as though they were walking with the Lord as a

· Εἰ δὲ ῥητορικῶν αὐλητικῶν τε καὶ ἀθλητικῶν ἀνδρῶν, τῶν μὲν θεαταί, τῶν δὲ ὁμοῦ θεωρηταὶ καὶ ἀκροαταὶ μετὰ τοσαύτης κάθηνται τῆς προθυμίας, πόσην ἡμῖν καὶ σπουδὴν καὶ προθυμίαν ἂν εἴητε δίκαιοι παρασχεῖν, οὐκ αὐλητικοῦ τινος, οὐδὲ σοφιστικοῦ νῦν εἰς ἀγῶνα καθιέντος, ἀλλ ̓ ἀνδρὸς ἀπὸ τῶν οὐρανῶν φθεγγομένου, καὶ βροντῆς λαμπροτέραν ἀφιέντος φωνήν; πᾶσαν γὰρ τήν οἰκουμένην ἐπέσχε καὶ κατέλαβε, καὶ ἐνέπλησε τῇ βοῇ, οὐ τῷ μέγα ἀνακραγεῖν, ἀλλὰ τῷ μετὰ τῆς θείας χάριτος κινῆσαι τὴν γλῶτταν. καὶ τὸ δὴ θαυμαστὸν, ὅτι οὕτω μεγάλη οὖσα ἡ βοὴ οὐκ ἔστι τραχεῖά τις, οὐδὲ ἀηδὴς, ἀλλὰ πάσης μουσικῆς ἁρμονίας ἡδίων καὶ ποθεινοτέρα καὶ θέλξαι ἐπισταμένη πλέον· καὶ πρὸς τούτοις ἅπασιν ἁγιωτάτη καὶ φρικωδεστάτη, καὶ τοσούτων γέμουσα ἀποῤῥήτων, καὶ τοσαῦτα κομίζουσα ἀγαθά, ἃ τοὺς μετὰ ἀκριβείας καὶ προθυμίας λαβόντας καὶ διαφυλάττοντας οὐκ ἔνι λοιπὸν ἀνθρώπους εἶναι, οὐδὲ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς μένειν, ἀλλ ̓ ἀνωτέρω πάντων ἑστάναι τῶν βιωτικῶν, καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἀγγελικὴν μεθαρμοσαμένους λῆξιν, καθάπερ τὸν οὐρανόν, οὕτω τὴν γῆν οἰκεῖν.—Chrysostom Proæm. in Homm. in Joh.

man

man on the earth, have said little about his divinity; but he, as if it grieved him to walk on the earth, has, by his utterance at the very beginning of his discourse, raised himself not only above the earth and all the circle of the air and sky, but also above all the host of angels and the whole constitution of invisible powers, and has come to him by whom all things were made saying, In the beginning was the word, &c. The rest of his preaching was in accordance with the sublimity of such a beginning, and he has spoken of the divinity of the Lord as no one else has. This he gave forth as he had drunk it in. For it is not without reason that it is related of him in this same gospel that at supper he leaned upon the breast of the Lord. the breast of the Lord. From that breast he drank in secret, and what he drank in secret he gave forth openly.'c And Origen says-'We are bold to say, therefore, that of all the Scriptures the Gospels are the chief, and that of the Gospels that according to John is chief, whose spirit no one could have received who had not leaned upon the breast of Jesus.. and such must he become who will be another John, just as John appeared to be Jesus from Jesus.' (Origen means that the interpreter must so enter into the spirit of John that John filled with the spirit of Jesus should appear as another Jesus.) The pious Ernesti called this Gospel the Heart of Christ. Herder exclaims 'The hand of an angel has written it.'

This impression is as much the result of the form which the writer has adopted as of the contents. As regards the contents they are more free from special Judaic references than is the case with the other Gospels, and they appeal in a more lively manner to the feelings than the teaching of the synoptic Gospels does, which is directed to action; the superhuman in Christ, the necessity of faith in him, the new birth, the mystical union of believers

In quatuor evangeliis 'seu potius in quatuor libris unius evangelii sanctus Johannes apostolus, non immerito secundum intelligentiam spiritalem aquila comparatus, altius multoque sublimius aliis tribus erexit prædictionem suam, et in ejus erectione etiam corda nostra erigi voluit. Nam cæteri tres evangelistæ tanquam cum homine domino in terra ambulabant, de divinitate ejus pauca dixerunt, ipsum autem quasi piguerit in terra ambulare, sicut ipso exordio sui sermonis intonuit, erexit se non solum super terram et super omnem ambitum aeris et cœli, sed super omnem etiam exercitum angelorum, omnemque constitutionem invisibilium potestatum, et pervenit ad eum, per quem facta sunt omnia, dicendo: In principio erat verbum, etc. Huic tantæ sublimitati principii etiam cætera congrua prædicavit, et de Domini divinitate quomodo nullus alius est locutus. Hoc ructabat, quod biberat. Non enim sine causa de isto in illo ipso evangelio narratur, quia et in convivio super pectus Domini discumbebat. De illo ergo pectore in secreto bibebat, sed quod in secreto bibit, in manifesto eructavit.-Augustinus, Tract. 36 in Joh.

d τολμητέον τοίνυν εἰπεῖν ἀπαρχὴν μὲν πασῶν γραφῶν εἶναι τὰ εὐαγγέλια, τῶν δὲ εὐαγγελίων ἀπαρχὴν τὸ κατὰ Ἰωάννην· οὗ τὸν νοῦν οὐδεὶς δύναται λαβεῖν μὴ ἀναπεσὼν ἐπὶ τὸ στῆθος Ἰησοῦ ...... καὶ τηλικοῦτον δὲ γενέσθαι δεῖ τὸν ἐσόμενον ἄλλον Ἰωάννην, ὥστε οἱονεὶ τὸν Ἰωάννην δειχθῆναι ὄντα Ἰησοῦν ἀπὸ Ἰησοῦ.—Origen. Comm. p. 6, ed. Huet.

VOL. II.-NO. III.

C

with