rhe o Beet + eee ip ate attire: . or ah te 2926= # oy 2 *)%) wait pete) jane hy ae ta pt bbe eee 5) Heed! stn roe =e < : ce eres Sore: <737 a et eet at - pars aaiee es eee ~-a5 — Bere hy seme eer eet wr ece ote tency S rere STE seis! SaSeree aot Mee omy eee! slaigtererese! ale vere ee oo Sats . wale eRe tatbtersie paeee ans 4 obs es a petacsleyetibinig a title theltie ele e eerie v pes : See tee t ; - = S eleieie bere! othe * vee i ; . ; slajhesee : roa ht Of Stat Mt Re eed eiete Tatare ele gie: et be elet bel aa tate $ et tata st wea Be tale eters Sieiotere wrerre sterors. plac it te Sest esi) Poet seer erat hie tr) Pe bee Beret ‘ t Bee rece esécalbaereiets ee are rete! aivibleltetsteseressts > oe oe seater Ret ed Paes eevee ne eee eee STEM ae ets Fore rer heat ay Bf od ee ae ; bPSt ot obs beat ot et as rave eetee! i Toe Oe Bee Reon | ~~ : Pare Batt avagesSiegeset tee bees ‘ anes % oiet let take gts . elysuy wee eles . epee i tot f fa) ate ie Bar . . Pore iors cere ere ree ae eee pire lt (tle + angele ai pees retars ane wen tEY77 ee eee eceree e aaee aly Selele a ee ers site ea gee aces eater ced ae ease bee eaat ates aaiievt hee J hisers : aes alelete nee Teele tatate asa vers pe leleiecacs + ebb este tee : : ase ae: aay ; ‘ . ee i art | gre tasers H acres ; The person charging this material is re- sponsible for its return to the library from which it was withdrawn on or before the Latest Date stamped below. Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons for disciplinary action and may result in dismissal from the University. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN APR 0 8 1994 L161— 0-1096 Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2021 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign https://archive.org/details/gospelofjohnhandOOrobi THE GOSPEL OF JOHN THE MACMILLAN COMPANY NEW YORK + BOSTON + CHICAGO - DALLAS ATLANTA * SAN FRANCISCO MACMILLAN & CO., Limrrep LONDON + BOMBAY - CALCUTTA MELBOURNE THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, Lap. TORONTO The Gospel of John A Handbook for Christian Leaders BY BENJAMIN W. ROBINSON PROFESSOR OF NEW TESTAMENT INTERPRETATION CHICAGO THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY jQew Bork THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 1925 All rights reserved Copyricut, 1925, By THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. Set up and electrotyped. Published May, 1925. PRINTED | Ns steal a = <= — —_ PREFACE Intensive and prolonged study has been applied to the Gospel of John since the appearance of Westcott’s com- mentary over forty years ago, as well as to the general early Christian history of which it was a part. The results of this study are distributed through many vol- umes dealing with many separate phases of the subject But no single comprehensive, critical commentary embody- ing these results has appeared either in England or America in all these years. The aim of the following pages is to give, under successive chapter and verse headings, illus- trations of how this recent scholarly work is calculated to accentuate the marvelously vital and far-reaching popular power of this Gospel. Every Christian leader in these days should study to present his religion in a modern and forceful manner. The humanizing of knowledge, says James Harvey Robin- son, ‘‘is the supreme problem of our age’’ (Humanizing of Knowledge, p. 74). It is the purpose of this volume to aid in this task. To that end technical discussions are avoided as far as possible. There are scholars who ‘‘always write more or less unconsciously for one another.’’ ‘‘The specter haunts them, not of a puzzled and frustrated reader, but of a tart reviewer, likely to accuse them of superficiality or inaccuracy’’ (p. 101). ‘‘What a considerable and benefi- cent revolution would take place in teaching and writing if a teacher should’’ in writing a practical handbook ‘‘con- fine himself . . . to telling only such facts as play so impor- tant a part in his own everyday thinking that he could recall them without looking them up’’ (p. 106). 5 V8912h 6 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN An extreme example of following this ideal may be found in the discussion of the Prologue of John in this volume, for the words ‘‘probably’’ and ‘‘uncertain’’ are largely avoided and ‘‘hypostatization’’ is noticeable by its absence. In reproducing sections of the text of the Gospel only as much is incorporated as is necessary for convenience in understanding the comments. In making the transla- tion used I have felt free to adopt any suggestions which came to me from previous translations, the Twentieth Cen- tury New Testament, Goodspeed’s New Testament and others. For supplementing the fragmentary sections of the text printed in this volume the reader will do well to keep one of these translations, preferably Goodspeed’s, at his elbow. References to modern literature are usually given by author only. A list of titles will be found in the Bibli- ography at the close of the volume. My indebtedness to others will be apparent on every page. To Professor Adolf Deissmann I owe much, not only on the subject of authorship, but on many other topics. To my friend Professor Ernst T. Krueger for helpful criticism of the manuscript, to my colleague Dr. Harold R. Willoughby for many suggestions, to my wife for tireless assistance with manuscript and index, to The Macmillan Company for efficient editorial co-operation, I desire to express here again my appreciation and thanks. BENJAMIN WILLARD ROBINSON. Chicago Theological Seminary, March 1, 1925. CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE RE OR nike ianls 5) Cah iaketh Wied ile PIA aya. Mk poAEMT SVK edaea 5 Pee tae CTO DE THE: GOSPET) oleic etila se eae ti ele a We dek Pi eRABACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL) ors Oe ie el seu ae fio Lar POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL | (5 cos oars LAO Dee PROLOGUE.) SOUT T3118 i ha lar esl en's AOE V. JOHN THE BAPTIST AND JESUS. John 1:19-51 . . . 66 VI. THE WEDDING ANDTHE WINE. Johnir.....: 8&1 Vie Be DIRE ROM UAROVES DL JONM TT Yo Ai Bee Miele are WATER OF LiRR. OMB TV: oes bi iy ae ah onl SL IX. HEALING OF THE MAN AT THE Poot. Johny. . . 126 ee st SrA OFAN RA OO VE ite eto Oe heey alo) THE LIGHT oF THE WorRLD. Jobn yi tom . . . >. 154 gee Con A000. SUEPHERD. | (JODIE) fy ven ed A LTE Danae ATE ANT uA) POU XTC .8 3 ee ee ee BAERS XIV. THE ANOINTING AND THE Foot WASHING. John XII CEL OT aU AL a OLA AE ieee A ROL I ACIP e's 6 XV. JESUS’ RELATION To His Discretes. John xiv to xvi 215 Vemeianet SOURS. POUND XVII GX Ky o5 cia asia” i SS SEEM MEEN CE LiTBRARY )\ GeO Va Lah oe a ime aes ooh ea URE aN 6 oC ESS ELS FO STi) ea A RP aI ORE NN aI RN 6109 TNDEX ‘OF SORIPTURE. PASSAGES) yee eo ie Oe ee BBO OO CEL eee t vi i : a an er y ae an r . Mods v1 us Ne ai, Sh f Ue. : a eh DS * FOStany an ’ | ee ir muy - rh SRS RA ie a Gt ah Go ay e A ‘a fol & Pal Pe, By . yal Gas ? ¢ ’ i i f 4 id : i , y Ae ‘ a | A Ps PA 5 ' ye f : 1 ‘a a p Veet : nee ey book roy eae : > | AE ee ea Wi hd | ea “aah evn a RE ved Pa ES i ath ioc é . bd ne is “ a et ae viii 7 ait . seid Nae . , iin aye ¥) i . f lik ' iY ed ; Vv. Like § Yee di = Ve . ’ yA" Ab r At r? ; Me, - P 4 at's WPM iid.) teva sitsade heen ae | r one OG Le bis Be 0 A : Bite | wae ib oeta itt Asta ‘é 5 te 1 ¥ i” ' fl * ¢ rit - ‘ i” ha | } rf ' . il Bo ee M ? i? ; ar digenes WG J Nu ; pt Lad ci ia Oe RS hy) a rer ; me ie 4) iin’ mM ite Rar a yy mesic (ers wie Pree ee ey | sient, . a! THE GOSPEL OF JOHN wick 1 Mire 4 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN CHAPTER I THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL John xxi, 20. Peter turning around sees the disciple whom Jesus loved following, the one who leaned back on his breast at the supper and said, Master, who is it that is going to betray you? 21. Peter seeing him says to Jesus, Master, what about this man? 22. Jesus says to him, If I wish him to tarry till I come, what is that to you? You are to follow me. 23. So the saying went forth among the brethren that that disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die; but said, If I wish him to tarry till I come, what is that to you? 24. This is the disciple who bears witness to these things and wrote these things. And we know that his testimony is true. 1. Tradition ascribes the Fourth Gospel to the Apostle John. The only statement in the Gospel itself which has a direct bearing upon the authorship is found in xxi, 24. ‘‘This is the disciple who. . . wrote these things; and we know that his testimony is true.’’ Evidently this statement is the note of one who declares not only that he knows who the author was, but knows also that the author’s testimony is trustworthy. We cannot tell whether the ‘‘we’’ is edi- torial, indicating one person, or whether several persons vouch for the trustworthiness of the author. Further study of chapter xxi makes it clear that the g hk 12 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN chapter is an appendix added to the main body of the Gos- pel. The last verses of chapter xx are in form a conclusion. ‘‘Many other signs Jesus showed which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.’’ One purpose sought to be accomplished by adding chapter xxi is easily apparent. It stands out prominently. There was current among Christians at the time the Gospel was written a belief that Jesus had promised the disciple whom he loved (20) that he ‘‘would not die’’ (23). The author of the appendix admits that Jesus said something which might have been so under- stood, but denies that Jesus made this promise. ‘‘Jesus did not say that he would not die; but, If I wish him to tarry till I come, what is that to you?”’ The circumstances that led to the writing of such an explanation are not hard to imagine. ‘‘The disciple whom Jesus loved’’ had now lived on so many years that he had become the sole living witness who could say that he had personally known Jesus. The fact that he had grown so old had caused the report to spread that Jesus had prom- ised him that he would live till the inauguration of the Messianic kingdom at the Second Coming (Note esp. Luk. ix, 27). Finally, however, the veteran leader had died. His death caused some to lose faith in Jesus’ promises, and gave to others a pretext for criticism of the Christian religion. An explanation was necessary and imperative. The passage in chapter xxi is that explanation. Three facts are thus suggested as a working basis for further study. First, that the author is identified by xxl, 24, with ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ Second, that this disciple had continued his Christian labors among his people to an advanced old age. Third, this Gospel was published in its completed form, like Virgil’s Aeneid, after the death of its veteran author. 2. Until recent years John, the Apostle, the son of Zebedee, was widely supposed to be this disciple. But this Tur AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 13 is nowhere stated either in the New Testament or in any other Christian writing of New Testament times. Support for such an opinion has been found in Irenaeus near the end of the second century. It now seems doubtful, never- theless, whether even Irenaeus held this opinion.’ In the third century and later, however, it came to be assumed by Eusebius and others that the disciple ‘‘whom Jesus loved’’ must be one of the three favored Apostles, Peter, James, or John. John xxi, 7, pictures the loved disciple in conversation with Peter. Therefore Peter could not have been the one. Acts xii, 2, narrates the early death of James. Therefore James could not have been the vet- eran who was expected never to die. This process of elim- ination made it possible for Church fathers to argue that the aged disciple who wrote these things was John, the son of Zebedee. Westcott follows the same line of argument. The title of the Gospel, ‘‘ According to John,’’ which may date back to the second century, seemed to corroborate this conclusion, although there are many Johns mentioned both in the New Testament and in other early Christian writ- ings. The earliest known reference to this Gospel as the Gospel of ‘‘John’’ is found in Theophilus of Antioch (181 a.p.). In recent years much refractory evidence has come to light which makes it difficult to hold that the son of Zebedee was the one who reached an advanced old age and became the author of this Gospel. Papias writing about 140 ap. records that the Apostle John suffered a martyr’s death at the hands of the Jews. The Jews ceased to be a state before the year 70. Furthermore, the way in which Papias speaks in the same sentence of the martyrdom of James and John implies that John was killed early, like James (Acts xii, 2). John was alive in the year 48 (Gal. ii, 9). Formerly, the only authority for this statement of Papias was a quotation by George Hamartolos, which was long regarded as not sufficiently authenticated. But the dis- +Garvie, p. 252; Burney, pp. 138-142. 14 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN covery of the De Boor fragment, first published in 1888, as Moffat says, ‘‘removes all doubts’’ that ‘‘Papias really wrote something to this effect.’’* That Papias spoke of the martyrdom of the Apostle John along with that of James is an established conclusion of modern research. Jesus prophesied that James and John would both like himself drink the cup of martyrdom (Mar. x, 39). This prophecy would not naturally have been recorded so prom- inently in Mark and Matthew if John was already ap- proaching old age at the time. ‘‘The cup that I drink . you shall drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized shall you be baptized’? (Contrast John xxi, 22). Furthermore, in the lists of martyrs in the Syriae eal- endar the note for December 27th reads ‘‘ John and James, the apostles in Jerusalem,’’ just as the martyrdom of Stephen is noted on December 26th, and of Paul and Peter on December 28th. The mention of “‘Jerusalem’’ indicates the martyrdom occurred before 70 a.p. for Jerusalem was then destroyed. Aphrahat writing about 344 adds his bit to the evidence. He writes: ‘‘Great and excellent is the martyrdom of Jesus... and after him was the faithful martyr Stephen. . .. simon also and Paul were perfect martyrs. And James and John walked in the footsteps of Christ their master.’’ In the list of those who escaped martyrdom, given by Herakleon, the early Gnostic commentator quoted by Clement of Alexandria, are named Matthew, Philip, Thomas, Levi, but no John. Further items of evidence on this point may be found in the works of Schwartz, Bacon and Moffatt. Aside from the evidence for the martyr death of the Apostle John there are other reasons for doubting that the Gospel was written by the son of Zebedee. The Gospel is written in Greek, while the son of Zebedee was an Aramaic speaking fisherman of Galilee. Not only is the language a pure and simple Greek, showing very little Semitic influ- * Moffat, Literature of the New Testament, p. 604. Tur AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 15 ence, but its ideas and presuppositions are distinctly Hel- lenistic. Moreover, the son of Zebedee does not fit the part played by the Beloved Disciple. There are several passages in the synoptic gospels throwing light on the character of the son of Zebedee. In Mark x he is deseribed as demanding along with James one of the chief seats in the kingdom. In another passage (Mar. iii, 17) James and John are surnamed ‘‘sons of thunder.’’ In a third passage (Luk. ix, 51-56), telling how Jesus in going through Samaria en- countered a hostile attitude on the part of native villagers, James and John said, ‘‘ Master, do you wish that we bid fire to come down from heaven and consume them?’’ Mark ix, 38, is similar in tone. These narratives portray John, the son of Zebedee, as a very different man from the ‘‘beloved disciple’’ of the Fourth Gospel who leaned on Jesus’ breast at the supper. The reasons for holding that the author was not the son of Zebedee are thus at least five in number. (a) The Gospel makes no claim to have been written by the Apostle. Even the appendix does not state that the author was the Apostle John or son of Zebedee. (b) Outside the Gospel there is no hint of such authorship until the third century. (c) A large amount of historical evidence now indicates the early martyr death of John, the son of Zebedee. (d) The Gospel is Greek in language and thought. (e) The character of the son of Zebedee does not harmonize with the Johannine picture of the ‘‘beloved disciple.’’ 3. Continued search after the author thus leads inevi- tably to a more detailed study of the question: Who was the Beloved Disciple? There are three passages which mention this ‘‘disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ In the third of these passages (xx, 2) the word ‘‘loved”’ is a different word in Greek, but the form used is the same noticeable imperfect tense and undoubtedly denotes the same disciple. The mention in the appendix (John xxi) already discussed is not included in the three passages. These passages con- 16 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN tain all the data known directly concerning the Beloved Disciple. His first appearance is in xiii, 23. It is the scene of the last supper. Jesus has conversed with the disciples, has girded himself and washed their feet and has spoken the word, ‘‘One of you will betray me.’’ Verse 23 then states: ‘‘There was at the table.’’ It is a phrase possibly indicating that the one about to be described has not yet been mentioned. The exact order and flavor of the Greek words are hard to reproduce in English. But it is a form of expression which would be quite lacking in force if the one of the twelve it served to introduce was generally known as the Beloved Disciple. In that case instead of ‘‘There was reclining at the table one of his disciples, on Jesus’ bosom’’ we would expect some such words as, ‘‘Now that disciple whom Jesus loved was reclining on his bosom.’’ It is to be noted that John does not say that there were just twelve at the supper (contrast vi, 67; xx, 24). Mark says, ‘‘He comes with the twelve’? (Mar. xiv, 17), but when Jesus says ‘‘One of you shall betray me,’’ Jesus adds, ‘‘It is one of the twelve’’ (Mar. xiv, 20) as though some one outside the Twelve might be present. Jesus, of course, had many disciples outside the number of the Twelve. The picture drawn in John’s verses is of one outside the number. Such a one could more appropriately ask the question, ‘‘Lord, who is it?’’ Moreover, it is rather difficult to imagine Jesus eating the last supper in a private home without the presence of the host or of some one representing the household. Fur- thermore, some young man of Jerusalem for whom Jesus had conceived a particular affection might very well be the one who reclined at Jesus’ right at table and is pic- tured as ‘‘leaning back as he was on Jesus’ breast.’’ This would relieve the embarrassment of ascribing to Jesus such an exhibition of affectionate partiality toward one of the Twelve. Bacon holds that the disciple thus described is an ideal THe AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 17 figure who represents better understanding of Jesus than that of any of the Twelve, a type of the Christian who through mystic communion comes close to the heart of Jesus. The form of the statement, ‘‘There was at the table,’’ and the situation as described, seem to point to one of these two alternatives, either to Bacon’s that the Beloved Disciple is a purely imaginary figure, or else to the view that he was one of the real disciples but not of the Twelve. Moffatt, Burkitt, Bousset, Deissmann, Gardner, Garvie, Burney, Stanton, Jackson, and most others agree that the Beloved Disciple was a real person, either the son of Zebe- dee or a Jerusalem disciple. No other Christian character in this Gospel can be shown to be imaginary. To Moffatt the chief objection against his being an ‘‘imaginary’’ figure is ‘‘the psychological difficulty of conceiving how an ab- stract figure could be put side by side with the other disciples’’ (p. 567). The other and simpler theory that the Beloved Disciple was a youth living in Jerusalem who became Jesus’ disciple in the last days, and was loved by him with a fatherly affection, ‘‘has considerable plausibility.’’* Such a dis- ciple might well be a Greek or Hellenist who could later write a gospel in Greek. John has informed us that there were ‘‘Greeks’’ ‘‘at the feast’’ who came and said, ‘‘We would see Jesus’’ (xii, 20-21). The Beloved Disciple must have been such a young man as could outlive all other personal disciples of Jesus in order to fit the description given in the appendix of the Gospel (xxi, 20-24). That would also make possible the dating of the Gospel near the end of the first century, a date which seems to be de- manded by the point of view and general character of the book. The second appearance of the Beloved Disciple is in xix, 26, in the scene at the cross. ‘‘ When Jesus sees his mother, and the disciple whom he loved standing by, he says to * Bacon, Fourth Gospel, pp. 301-331. "Moffatt, p. 567. 18 Tuer GosPEL oF JOHN his mother, There is your son! Then he says to the the disciple, There is your mother! And from that hour the disciple took her into his own home.’’ If the Beloved Disciple were a Galilean, he could hardly have taken the mother from Jerusalem to his home in that same ‘‘hour.’’ If the passage is to be taken literally at all it is further evidence that the disciple to whom Jesus entrusts his mother who is without a home of her own in Jerusalem is one who does have a home there. The third and only other appearance of the Beloved Disciple is in chapter xx. Peter and the ‘‘disciple whom Jesus loved’’ were on their way to the empty tomb. ‘‘And they both ran together: and the other disciple outran Peter and came first to the tomb.’’ It is the picture of a youth going as a companion with Peter to the tomb, who breaks into a run, and then as Peter also starts to run, outstrips Peter and comes first to the tomb. ‘‘Yet he did not enter in,’’ again suggests a youth who though arriving first defers to Peter and allows him to enter first. 4. Could a disciple outside the company of the Twelve be known as ‘‘the Beloved Disciple’’? The word ‘‘beloved’’ is, of course, a later word. The phrase of the Gospel is always ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ What is the exact meaning of the verb ‘‘loved’’? Investigation of the usage of the word soon reveals the fact that the same verb is used regarding some disciples not included among the Twelve. In fact, a somewhat different verb is used regarding the Twelve. In xiii, 1, John says that Jesus ‘‘loved’’ his own unto the end. The reference is probably to Jesus’ devotion to his circle of twelve disciples. In this passage the word ‘‘loved’’ is the aorist tense and is not the same form used later in the same chapter in the expression ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ In the latter phrase the form used is the imperfect tense. A parallel to this peculiar use of the imperfect tense may be found in xi, 5, in the story of Jesus’ visit at the home of Lazarus. ‘‘Now Jesus loved Martha, and her sis- THe AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 19 ter and Lazarus.’’ The word used to express Jesus’ rela- tion to Martha and Mary and Lazarus is precisely the same word in form and tense and spelling as the word used to express Jesus’ relation to the disciple in question. The meaning was in all probability the same. Whatever we understand the phrase ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved’’ to mean must be understood of the words expressing Jesus’ love for Lazarus and his family. In both cases it was not the love that conferred precedence and preference and authority but that form of affectionate regard manifested in occasional and repeated visits—a domestic rather than an official partiality. Certainly there ean be no valid objection to the view that the disciple whom Jesus loved in this sense might easily have been one who was not a member of the Twelve. Long years afterward the usage became a popular one and we may imagine the pleasure with which various groups of Christians might call their local veteran leader ‘‘the disciple whom Jesus loved.’’ The word ‘‘the’’ sig- nified that there was no other survivor present in a com- munity ‘‘whom Jesus loved.’’ All the others whom Jesus had loved had passed on or were living elsewhere. Turning once more to the appendix we notice that the disciple whom Jesus loved (xxi, 7) is one of a company composed of Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee, ‘f‘and two other’’ of his disciples (xxi, 2). The older assumption used to be that the Beloved Disciple would be of the inner circle and that he could not be Thomas, nor Nathanael, nor one of the two unnamed ‘‘disciples,’’ but must be one of the sons of Zebedee. But now, on the con- trary, it seems altogether natural to regard him as one of the two ‘‘disciples.’’ In fact the use of the same word ‘*disciple’’ repeated in verse 7 from verse 2 would seem to be additional indication that he was one of these two disciples rather than a son of Zebedee. 5. Is there any early Christian leader outside the circle of the Twelve who is known by name and who may be 20 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN identified as this disciple whom Jesus loved? That ques- tion naturally resolves itself into two others. Where was this Gospel written? Was there living in that place any outstanding figure who had been a personal disciple of Jesus? That the Fourth Gospel was written in Ephesus is at- tested both by external tradition and by the internal evi- dence. Moffatt’s statement is as follows: ‘‘The Ephesian locus of the Fourth Gospel in its present form is indi- eated, not only by the external evidence of tradition, but by converging lines of internal evidence, e.g., the fact that it springs from the same circle or school as the apocalypse (itself an undoubtedly Asiatic document), the presence of the Ephesian Logos ideas, and of the controversy with the Baptist’s followers’’ (p. 618). Was there living in Ephesus any leader who had been a personal disciple of Jesus? At once the historian answers that in Ephesus there was a disciple of Jesus named John, known as ‘‘the veteran’’ preacher because of his advancing years. Papias’ words (140 a.p.) are very clear. He says that there were two Johns, both disciples of the Lord; that the Galilean Apostle was one and the other was the ‘“veteran’’ or ‘‘presbyter’’ John. In the days of Eusebius the tomb of John, was still to be seen at Ephesus.’ Papias’ words are as follows: ‘‘If then any one came who had been a follower of the elders, I questioned him in regard to the words of the elders—what Andrew or what Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the disciples of the Lord, and what things Aristion and the presbyter (elder) John, the disciples of the Lord, say.’’ ° Papias applies the word ‘‘disciple’’ to the second John exactly the same as in the ease of the first John. But he uses the past tense ‘‘said’’ of the Apostle John, indicating that he had died before Papias’ day (Papias was born a ®Ch. Hist. IIT, 39:6. ‘Hus. Ch. Hist. III, 39:4. THe AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 21 little after 70) ; whereas he uses the present tense, ‘‘say,’’ of the presbyter John, thus indicating that in Papias’ youth this disciple was probably still living. Irenaeus also writes that Papias ‘‘was a hearer of John,’’ and means that he was a hearer of a John who had heard Jesus.. After referring to this statement of Irenaeus, Eusebius proceeds to show at great length that the John whom Papias heard was not the Apostle John but the other John (III 39:1-7). Abbott * cited by Moffatt (p. 600) does not question that the phrase ‘‘disciple of the Lord’’ in the quotation from Papias must mean one who had been with Jesus personally. However, he sees a chronological obstacle to supposing that a disciple who had been with Jesus was alive in Papias’ day and concludes there must be an error in the text. But this chronological difficulty is overcome if we agree that the disciple was a mere youth when Jesus died and that Papias knows him only in his old age as the elder or veteran. This veteran John of Ephesus is undoubtedly the John with whom Polycarp says that he had talked and who had ‘‘seen the Lord.’’*® Polyearp was martyred in 155 at the age of eighty-five and so he must have been born about the year 70 a.p. John the Apostle was martyred before that date in all probability. Three passages in Eusebius tend to support the position that Polycarp knew a John who had seen Jesus. In III, 36:1, Eusebius states that Polyearp was entrusted with the episcopate of the church at Smyrna by those ‘‘who had seen and heard the Lord.’’ Again in IV, 14:3, Eusebius says among the instructors of Polyearp were ones ‘‘who had seen Christ.’’ Again in V, 20:6, in the statement that Irenaeus had heard Polycarp say he had talked with those who had ‘‘seen the Lord,”’ *Hus. Ch. Hist. III, 39:1. § Fine. Bibl. 1815. ®*Hus. Ch. Hist. V, 20:6. 22 Tuer GOSPEL OF JOHN John is the only one of these latter mentioned by name. It is significant that Irenaeus does not ascribe to Polyearp a statement that he had heard the Apostle John, but that he had heard a John who had seen Jesus. Since the early death of John the Apostle can now be regarded as well established, there can be little or no doubt that these statements of Papias, and Polyearp, and Ire- naeus, and Eusebius indicate that there lived at Ephesus a Christian preacher and leader known as the presbyter John, who had been a disciple of Jesus. He fits into the framework of all the facts discovered in the search for the author of the Gospel. He may have fled to Ephesus at the time of the approaching destruction of Jerusalem (70 A.D.) or he may have become a resident earlier. He shows himself to be more of a Greek than a Jew, and in any case his had been a long ministry in Ephesus before the writing of the Gospel. If he lived to a very advanced age—eighty-five years or more (xxi, 23), his death would not have occurred earlier than the year 100, which may be regarded as the date of the publication of the Gospel. 6. In connection with the search for the author the question finally arises: Does this Gospel betray the fact that it was written by an eye-witness? Are there traces in it of a character that make it clear it was written by one who had known Jesus personally? Fortunately, a beau- tiful parallel example exists in Greek literature—Plato’s portrayal of Socrates. Though it differs radically from that of Xenophon, it by no means proves that Plato had never known Socrates. Any one who has difficulty in understanding John’s way of presenting Jesus should read the Phaedo and then some of the later Dialogues of Plato. The way in which Plato has portrayed his master and his teaching led Phillips Brooks and others to refer to Plato as the Beloved Disciple of Socrates. Recently, a large amount of new information regarding the environment of John’s Gospel has come to light; and the question of eye-witness authorship has as- THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 23 sumed new aspects. It used to be too readily assumed by scholars that the Fourth Gospel could not have been written by a personal disciple. Some of the facts involved in a reconsideration of the question are: (a) The recognition that the evidence is very slight for identifying the Beloved Disciple with John, the son of Zebedee, has disposed of the old alternative of Galilean authorship as against second century author- ship. (b) The abundant illustrations of the ‘‘I’’ style in religious instruction in the Hellenistic world have made the problem of the use of it in John’s report of Jesus’ words a very simple one. (c) The study of the mystery religions of the first century has made the attitude toward Jesus reflected in the Gospel natural and intelligible. (d) The revelation of their colloquial style and dialect in newly discovered papyri has clearly shown that the Fourth Gospel was not composed as a treatise on theology or Christology, but that it is really written in extremely simple language for popular use. (a) Was the author the fisherman of Galilee or was he a second-century theologian, was the old alternative regard- ing authorship. Traditionalists held the former, and stu- dents of historical theology leaned to the latter. No interest was taken in a middle ground. The alternative is well stated by Bacon.” Discussing the lack of geographical knowledge of Galilee shown by the author of the Gospel, he says: ‘‘The limitation of his .. . knowledge. .. and... the transfer from Galilee to Jerusalem of the center of gravity of Jesus’ work bespeak not the companion of Jesus’ walks about the villages of Galilee and Perea, but the pilgrim antiquary of a century after, whose starting point is Jerusalem.’’ It is generally admitted that the author had knowledge of Jerusalem topography. His limited knowledge of Galilee, and emphasis upon the Judean ministry, argue against au- thorship by the son of Zebedee, but have no weight against The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate, p. 389. 24 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN authorship by a Jerusalem disciple. It is quite generally admitted that the author’s information regarding the last week in some particulars surpasses that of the synoptic gospels. Those who held to second-century authorship sup- posed that this superiority was due to the sources which the author had at hand, composed by an earlier writer. Certain passages in the Gospel plainly suggest author- ship by an eye-witness. In xix, 35, in the scene at the cross it is possible to regard the words as based upon an earlier source, but in the light of other passages it is more natural to take them on the authority of the author of the Gospel: ‘‘He that has seen has born witness in order that you also may believe.’’ Other passages of this kind will be noted in the later chapters of this volume. ‘‘There are,’’ aS Scott says, ‘‘several historical questions of capital importance (e.g., the length of our Lord’s ministry, the procedure followed at the trial, the date of the Crucifixion) in which the evidence of the Fourth Gospel seems prefer- able to that of the other three.’’” Bacon (Chap. XV) believes that the author had been in Palestine. Moffatt (p. 547), who holds to second-century authorship, admits there are passages indicating the author had been in Jeru- salem before the year 70. Burton” concludes that the author’s knowledge of Jewish customs, and the Jewish eal- endar, and of the topography of Jerusalem indicate a prob- ability that he had resided in Palestine before the destruc- tion of Jerusalem. All seem to agree that the author had lived in or near Jerusalem for a shorter or longer time. In this connection the first Epistle of John adds its bit of evidence. It was probably written by the same author as the Gospel. Similarities in style are so numerous and striking as to make the probability almost conclusive. The evidence is well given by Brooke in the International Crit- ical Commentary, pp. i-xix. Take I John i, 1, 2, which states: ‘‘That which... we 4% Hist. and Rel. Value, pp. 18-14. 2 Short Introduction to the Gospels, pp. 105, 109. THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 755 have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we beheld, and our hands handled . . . we have seen and bear witness and declare unto you the life. . . which . . was manifested unto us.’’ These words, as Brooke says, ‘‘can only be interpreted naturally as a claim on the writer’s part to have been an actual eye-witness of the earthly life of Jesus Christ.’’ (b) Again, it has been commonly held that the author could not be a personal disciple of Jesus because of his use of what has now been named the ‘‘I’’ style of teaching. Evidence has now been published which shows that throw- ing the teaching and rank of the central figure of a religion into the first person by his leading followers was an accepted religious usage of the times. Examples are best given by Deissmann in his ‘‘ Light from the Ancient EKast’’ (II, 3, H.). They prove that the ‘‘I’’ style for religious use was as natural in Ephesus as are the Archaic English forms in use among us in worship today. This made it as easy for John in giving his Christian teaching to assume the ‘‘I’’ style as it is in modern times for any Church member to pick up the forms ‘‘Thee’’ and ‘‘ Thou’’ and ‘‘Art’’ and ‘‘Wast’’ when offering prayer. John could put his thought of Jesus into the forms ‘‘I am the door,’’ ‘‘I am the good shepherd,’’ where no living follower of Jesus today would think of saying anything but ‘‘He is the door,’’ ‘‘He is the good shepherd.’’ They represent the easy natural religious language of Ephesus, and do not presuppose a scholastic background or a theological atti- tude either on the part of John or of Jesus. This subject will be discussed at much greater length in later chapters, especially in the comments on John x. (c) A third difficulty with eye-witness authorship is usually stated thus: No one who had personally known Jesus could possibly think of him as the preéxistent. Logos and use the terms approaching deification of him found in this Gospel. Recent study of the mystery religions has given us a somewhat different basis from which to 26 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN view this situation. On coming to Ephesus, John would find that the Christian religion there, which had already developed into a cult of Jesus, had adopted many words and ideas from the Hellenistic religions. Naturally an Ephesus author of the Gospel would accept much of what he found. Even Paul, who had lived many years in Jeru- salem, and was a contemporary of Jesus, had in Hellenistic lands spoken of Jesus in terms implying his preéxistence and his divinity. What Paul did the ‘‘Beloved Disciple’’ may also do. John only follows a precedent which Paul had set. Paul’s three years in Ephesus preceded John’s coming by many years and it was along the lines of the teaching of Paul that the Ephesian church had developed. The author of this Gospel, as will be explained in the chap- ter on The Prologue, does not so much advance a theology original with himself as endeavor to translate his views of the Christian experience into the terms of the thought- world which he found in Ephesus. No obstacle to finding in the Gospel a view of Jesus entirely natural to one who had been his personal disciple remains if it is borne in mind from the outset that when John came to Ephesus he found the Cult of Jesus far advanced beyond the gospel as preached by Paul. See the section on Gnosticism in the next chapter; see also comments on John viii, 58. (d) A fourth consideration is the bearing of the popular style of the Gospel on the problem of its authorship. Until very recent years it was generally supposed that the lan- guage of the Gospel was a Semitic Greek, 7.e., the product that might be expected from the effort of a Jew to write in the Greek language. The ‘‘and...and...and”’ paratactic form of expression found throughout the Gos- pel was explained as a Hebraism. Thousands of private letters and other domestic documents which have been dis- covered and published in recent years have thrown a flood of light across the pages of this Gospel. It is now clear that the striking peculiarity of the style of the Fourth Gospel is the marked simplicity of its col- THE AUTHOR OF THE GOSPEL 26 loquial and narrative language and not its Semitic quality. The book is not written in the Greek of the philosopher or historian, but in the vernacular of the people. This discovery of its utterly informal character dispels much of the atmosphere of dogmatic theology which has been used as an argument against its eye-witness authorship. Rather it may now be said that the narratives of this Gospel en- deavor to give Paul’s spiritual Christ a body of flesh and to make concrete and popularly intelligible a Jesus who at Ephesus had become too abstract and theological. 7. The conclusions that may be said to have been reached in this survey are these. The Fourth Gospel nowhere names its author. It was written by a Greek-speaking Christian leader of Ephesus. If we cannot be content to let the author remain anonymous we ean reconstruct a possible identification of him as follows: There was a young man in Jerusalem, a Greek or Hellenist, whom Jesus ‘‘loved’’ as he ‘‘loved’’ Lazarus or Martha of Bethany. As Jesus ate a supper in the home of Lazarus, so in Jeru- salem he ate a supper at the home of this disciple there whom he loved. It was his last supper. At the eross Jesus, thoughtful of the future of his mother, asked him to take her to his home. This disciple was among the first to visit his tomb. He moved from Jerusalem before the destruction of the city in 70 and went to Ephesus. There he found a Christian church which had developed along the lines of Paul’s teaching. He labored many years among these people, ballasting their devotion to the in- visible Christ by an emphasis on the reality of Jesus’ earthly life and on the beauty of personal discipleship to him. During the passage of years he became known as the ‘‘veteran’’ or ‘‘presbyter,’’ and may be the presbyter John mentioned by Papias and Eusebius. Toward the close of a long ministry he gathered and put together the materials of his Gospel, which was published soon after the death of its author. Any one who desires to better his acquaintance with 28 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN the personality of the author may do so by reading the Epistles of John, which seem to be written by the same hand. The letter called II John indicates that he was, in his mature years, no such sentimental, mild-faced man as he is usually painted by the old masters. The picture there is of a vigorous preacher, a ‘‘veteran’’ leader. ‘‘Many de- ceivers are gone forth.. .. This is the deceiver and anti- Christ... . Give him no greeting.’’ Again in III John we have similar testimony. Here he has an opponent whom he faces squarely. ‘‘Diotrephes, who loves to have the preéminence among them, receives us not. Therefore if I come I will bring to remembrance his works which he does, prating against us with wicked words.’’ His capacity for large-hearted joy is reflected in II John, 4. Noticeable in I John is the way affection is combined with strength of character in his fatherly habit of saying ‘‘Beloved’’ and ‘‘Little children’? (I John, ii, 7, 18). Many traits in the character of the veteran leader have been grasped and well portrayed by Robert Browning in his poem, ‘‘A Death in the Desert,’’ which gives a poet’s conception of the last hours of John’s life: We had him bedded on a camel-skin And waited for his dying all the while. Then the boy sprang up from his knees And spoke, as ’twere his mouth proclaiming first, “T am the Resurrection and the Life.” Whereat he opened his eyes wide at once And sat up of himself, and looked at us. “Nay, do not give me wine, for I am strong, “But place my gospel where I put my hands. “For if there be a further woe “Wherein my brothers struggling need a hand, “So long as any pulse is left in mine, “May I be absent even longer yet, “Plucking the blind ones back from the abyss, “Though I should tarry a new hundred years.” CHAPTER II CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL The Gospel of John has many peculiar characteristics which affect its whole structure. They are as recognizable as traits of character in a man or woman. The Gospel is a vital part of the life, in fact, of the man who wrote it, and is a reflection and index in considerable measure for that reason of his personality. Scott in reading the char- acter of the author from the pages of the Gospel says that he “‘is not primarily a theologian, but a man of profound religious feeling. Ideas flow in upon him from various sources—from primitive Christian tradition, Paulinism, Alexandrian speculation ; and he does not attempt to reason them out, or to codrdinate them into a system.... As long as he responds to them with some side of his religious nature, he is willing to accept them. He tests them, not by any logical eriterion, but by an inward tact and sym- pathy.’’* Let us go on to name and describe some of these peculiar characteristics: 1. In the first place, the author carries on a constant partisan controversy with the Jews. At the time he is composing his Gospel Christianity is severing the ties of its origin with Judaism even more radically than in Paul’s day. Jews far outnumbered Christians in the Empire, but in Ephesus it would seem that the race between them was close. Although the Jews were making proselytes, the Christian church had a chance, with vigorous preaching, to outstrip its rival. Our author felt keenly on the sub- 1Fourth Gospel, pp. 14-15. 29 30 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN ject of the imperfection and inferiority of some features of the Jewish religion. Although Jesus and all the Apostles were Jews, the striking fact which confronts the reader of John’s Gospel is that in Ephesus, nevertheless, the mere phrase, ‘‘the Jews,’’ without qualification, seems sufficient to reveal the identity of the opponents of Christianity. It occupies the same place as ‘‘hypocrites’’ or ‘‘seribes and Pharisees’’ occupy in the synoptic gospels. The hostility in John’s Gospel toward the Jews has usually been laid solely to the rivalry between the Jewish synagogue and the Christian church in Ephesus. A second consideration, however, should enter into it. As will be explained in our next chapter, John had a preference for the conversational style of presentation. A definite dra- matic clash must be led up to in his succession of question and answer because the purpose of such dialogue always is to bring out more clearly the author’s views of its spir- itual significance. A party of the second part who should play the part of the objector or of the spiritually obtuse is necessary to the discussion as he conducts it. The author uses ‘‘the Jews’’ for this purpose throughout the Gospel. ‘Certain of the Jews,’’ or ‘‘certain dull-minded persons,’’ would have answered, but ‘‘the Jews’’ was shorter and simpler. Gardner says concerning chapter vi of the Gospel (p. 207-8): ‘‘It may seem a violent interpretation, when the Evangelist says ‘the Jews,’ to interpret him as mean- ing any literalist, whether Jew or Gentile, but it is clear that he uses the word in this sense in passage after passage. At any rate, ‘the Jews’ are opponents of the truth, and not convineed adherents. The stupidity and materialism of the auditors is used as a foil to bring out the noble spirituality of the teaching.’’ 2. A second characteristic of the Gospel is a polemic attitude toward the sect of John the Baptist. Much has been learned in recent years about this sect. The religion of John the Baptist seems to have been a thriving one, for traces of it are found down into the third century. It CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL $i will help greatly to understand the Fourth Gospel if we think that a church of the sect of John the Baptist was probably located a short distance from the Christian church in which our author was preaching in Ephesus. Jesus said that before his coming there was none greater than the Baptist, but in the Fourth Gospel his insignificance is em- phasized. He becomes merely a ‘‘witness’”’ to Jesus and when that is given, his part is played. The heart of the preaching of the Baptist was the pic- ture of a coming terrible Day of Judgment. His followers in Ephesus probably preached a similar gospel of waiting for a judgment. This would be in sharp contrast to one who defined judgment in the words of John iii, 19, and who preached a joy of abundance of life in Jesus. The polemic against the sect of the Baptist may be read in every mention of the Forerunner in the Gospel. The ehurch of the Baptist in Ephesus is described in Acts xviil, 24 to xix, 7. This subject will be presented more in detail in the comments on John i, 19-28. 3. A third characteristic is the nature of the author’s purpose, which is religious rather than historical or theo- logical. Not by any mental acceptance of the presentation of the way of salvation through Christ by some apostle did Paul become a Christian. Paul had found Jesus by spiritual contact with him personally. That had emanci- pated him from slavery to Jewish ceremonialism and legal- ism. In like manner John bases his religion upon the power of Jesus personally manifested in his own life and in the lives of other Christians. Although unfortunately we have no such knowledge of the author’s conversion as we have of Paul’s, it is less necessary because universal Christian experience is his starting point. John always puts religion first. His Gospel is in no sense intended to be a mere compendium of historical facts concerning Jesus. It advocates a living and many sided reincarnation in Ephesus of the life of Jesus. Luke’s statement of the purpose of his Gospel makes an interest- 32 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN ing contrast with John’s statement of his purpose. Luke’s purpose was ‘‘to write to you in explicit order, most excellent Theophilus, so that you might know the certainty concerning the things in which you were instructed.’’ John states his purpose in xx, 31, ‘‘These things are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that, through believing, you may have life in his name.’’ Where there are two parallel members of a statement in John, the emphasis is upon the second (cf. iii, 5). His purpose, therefore, in his Gospel is that men and women may attain the higher ‘‘life.’? Life in John always means a new and different life not to be found elsewhere that begins at the time of entering into fellow- ship with Jesus. The statement that John places religion above history is sometimes misunderstood to mean that he has no par- ticular interest in the Jesus of history, but is mainly con- cerned with a theological system. Exactly the reverse is true. The author uses history as a basis of his religion. It was his conscious task and his supreme accomplishment to combine the two. 4. Emphasis upon the historical Jesus as the source and foundation of the Christian religion is a distinet charac- teristic of the Gospel. The Christian religion which the author found there on coming to Ephesus had been devel- oped out of the teaching of Paul. Paul had had practi- eally nothing to say concerning the ministry of Jesus. His teaching centered around the death and resurrection. The prevailing mystery religions of the first century that af- ford a very clear idea of the nature of the cult which had developed in Ephesus will be described in connection with our comments on John xi. Finding in Ephesus a mystery cult of Jesus tending toward speculation, asceticism, mysticism and Gnosticism, John conceived it to be his chief duty to subject it to the modifications sure to follow upon a personal acquaintance with the earthly Jesus. He felt that the power of the CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 33 Spirit and the ‘‘Gifts of the Spirit’’ (cf., I Cor. xii-xiv) must not continue unrelated among them to Jesus of Nazareth. The example and inspiration which Jesus had been to his personal followers, through their intimate ac- quaintance with him, John felt could still be maintained after Jesus was gone. Not in forgetting the earthly Jesus, as Pauline Christians were doing, would Christians live best, but by holding to the facts of his life as the basis of communion with that invisible Lord who dwells spiritually among his followers. Why should they miss the undying inspiration enshrined in the story of the simple compan- ionship of the first disciples with Jesus in Galilee? For this purpose he wrote of Jesus as he himself had known him in order to intertwine that Jesus with the exalted Jesus that was being worshiped in Ephesus. His Gospel injected into the Ephesian worship a vivid sense of the historic Jesus. The powerful appeal of the Hellenistic mystery religions lay in their promise of a fullness of life. Jewish Christianity rested its cause upon the example in Jesus of brotherly self-sacrificing love. Hellenistic Chris- tianity by combining the two became a world-religion. It was John who did the work of combination. In his Chris- tianity the fullness of life in the Gifts of the Spirit min- gled and was mixed with a personal discipleship to ‘‘ Jesus of Nazareth.’’ 5. The means employed by John to effect the combina- tion was the use of symbolism. An Ephesian significance was given to the opening of the eyes of a blind man by Jesus in Galilee or Jerusalem by making the story a symbol of the standing miracle of the giving of light to darkened or blinded souls constantly taking place before their eyes in Ephesus. Light was one of the largest words of the mystery religions, but as it figured in those re- ligions, light was largely impersonal. A bond with Pales- tine for the high place given to light in the religion of Ephesus was provided in John’s Gospel by making Jesus himself (John ix) the ‘‘Light of the World.’’ Not only 34 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN the work of opening the eyes of the blind which Jesus began in Palestine was Jesus continuing in Ephesus, but he continued to feed the ‘‘hungry’’ in Ephesus (John vi) as he had also fed the ‘‘hungry’’ multitude in Palestine. John similarly carried out his use of symbolism into many other phases of daily life. Marriage, birth, water, bread, illness, death—all appear both as incidents in the min- istry of Jesus and as symbols of spiritual events in Ephesus. Thus the author did his work of combining the earthly life of Jesus and the language and life and Christian re- ligion current in the Greek city of Ephesus, where he had made his home. 6. The resemblance of the Gospel of John to the teach- ing of Paul is a close one. The usual way of putting it is to say that Paul is the mediating link between John and the earlier gospels. This is likely to be understood to mean that together the three form a straight line of devel- opment. Possibly it would be better to say that John brought the Pauline religion back from its later wander- ings toward a realization of the historic Jesus, from which it had strayed too far. In any ease the Gospel of John eannot be perfectly understood without an acquaintance with Paul and his gospel. Emphasis upon the power of the Spirit as the regenerating agency of God is fundamental both for Paul and for John. Drawing a sharp contrast between the non-Christian and the Christian life is also fundamental for both. It has sometimes been said that the Fourth Gospel is such a gospel as Paul would have composed if he had attempted to write one. Paul set such store by the regenerating influence of the Spirit and felt that a knowledge of the Palestinian career of the his- toric Jesus was so relatively unimportant that he never thought of writing a gospel. In the days between the death of Paul and the days of John’s Gospel, however, the ‘‘spirit’’ had led different men in opposite paths. Some had gone the road to abso- lute asceticism and to mystic contemplation which quite CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 35 ignored ‘‘obedience’’ (John iii, 36; xiv, 15) to Jesus’ commandments to serve others. On the other hand, an- other group, led by the ‘‘spirit’’ to an opposite pole, allowed themselves all sorts of personal indulgence, point- ing in justification to Paul’s teaching that for the Christian there is no law (Gal. v, 18). While John felt that there was room in the Church for wide divergence of opinion, he saw the need was general of forming the acquaintance of the historic Jesus and his ‘‘new’’ commandment as a corrective influence. We may expect to find, then, a large amount of Pauline thought in the Gospel of John and of developments of Pauline thought along the lines of the mystery religions and Gnostic philosophy; but we shall also find John skillfully introducing a generous meas- ure of salient incidents in his earthly life in order to plead for a personal loyalty to Jesus and his ‘‘new’’ command- ment as the safest basis of the new ‘‘life.’’ 7. A seventh characteristic is its hostility toward Gnos- ticism. Gnosticism or Gnostic Christianity laid an empha- sis upon the deity of Christ that took all the reality out of his life and death. The humanity of Jesus dropped out of sight in the theological teaching of the relation that he was said to sustain to God. Later Gnostics, of whom Marcion is a good example, held that the Son of God born in Nazareth was not a babe really, but a full-grown man descended from heaven, and that he felt no real pain upon the cross because his humanity from the day of his birth was only an appearance. Gnosticism was an atmosphere rather than a separate in- stitution in Ephesus. Many of its elements were indigenous in Greek civilization. Some of these were fundamental to the Greek way of thinking and could not be changed. The author’s purpose was not to combat or destroy Gnos- ticism, but to modify and enrich it by inducing it to take up into itself a powerful realization of the humanity of Jesus and of the actuality of his suffering. In reading the Gospel, it is well not to be misled by the author’s tacit 36 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN acceptance of teachings that were indispensable to Greek thinking which have no bearing on his main purpose. As the author is himself a Hellenist it is natural to find him adopting the dualistic conception of the relation of God and man, adopting also the sharp contrast between the earthly man and the spiritual, between the children of darkness and the children of light. These ideas he shared with Gnosticism. On the other hand, John’s Gospel is full of passages which reflect and assert the full hu- manity of Jesus. The force of these passages can be fully understood only when the Gnostics among the au- thor’s audience are kept in mind. John insists that Jesus was of Nazareth, of the family of Joseph (i, 45), a state- ment that would be anathema to a Gnostic. He narrates that ‘‘ Jesus wept’’ (John xi, 35). More than once he says that Jesus ‘‘groaned in his spirit’’ (xi, 33) or that his ‘soul was troubled’’ (xii, 27; xiii, 21). 8. The author’s attitude toward apocalyptic ideas of the second coming of Jesus is worthy of careful study. No Christian leader ever used more tact or showed a wiser spirit in handling this subject than John. As in the case of Gnosticism, so here he was waging no polemic. He never explicitly denies any feature of the current Apoca- lypticism. It is evident that many in his audience put their faith in literal fulfillment of Jewish Messianic prophe- cies. Others who were more Greek in thought found diffi- eulty with these prophecies. The author makes no claim to know the future. What he does is to try to induce them all to take up into their apocalyptic ideas of the second coming a spiritual meaning immediately useful and usable. ‘To those who insist that there is a terrible Day of Judgment coming when the wicked on the earth shall be destroyed by the ‘‘wrath of God’’ (ili, 36), he says, ‘‘ This is the judgment, that light has come into the world, and men have loved darkness rather than the light’’ (iii, 19). Again when he says, ‘‘The hour is coming, and that hour is already here, when the dead shall hear the voice of the CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 37 Son of God (v, 25), he means the spiritually dead. He who believes ‘‘has passed out of death into life’’ (v, 24). 9. John’s idea of the Church is peculiar to his Gospel. The confusion of religions and philosophies in Ephesus led its adopted citizen to see the need of a unified Christianity. John wished, as we have said before, to inject into the situation the ballast and steadying power that he was sure would accompany a realization of the historic Jesus. His peculiar idea of the Church is in line with this purpose. Jesus had surrounded himself with a group of disciples who helped him in his work. John felt that the true Church was a company of disciples who continue to keep that same fellowship with each other in Jesus alive in the world. All Jesus asked of his disciples was that they should take up his eross and help him bear the burden of establishing the Kingdom of God in the hearts of men. In contrast to the loosely knit and largely unorganized groups of disciples who formed the communities of Paul’s converts waiting for the Coming of the Lord, John gave to Christianity a conception of Church fellowship that made the early Christian communities the admiration and the envy of the pagan world. In the Gospel of John the Church is not a company made up of those who all hold the same beliefs. It is a company made up of those who keep Jesus’ ‘‘command- ments’’ (xv, 10) and are thus related to him as the branches to the vine. This group of disciples are sharply distinguishable from the rest of the world. For they have responded lavishly to his message to love one another. This close linking of Christians to one another in loyal dis- cipleship to their historic master gave Christianity great superiority in prestige over Judaism and the mystery re- ligions and Stoic philosophies, which also taught a higher life that they were unable to objectify for lack of the per- sonal loyalty to Jesus which gave to John’s Christians their peculiar consciousness of solidarity and unity. 10. The prominence of the three words, Light, Life 38 Tue GOSPEL OF JOHN and Belief in him, or Loyalty, constitutes another feature of the Gospel of John. ‘‘Light’’ was a word with a long history and many associations, particularly in Gnosticism and other Hellenistic philosophies. It was in common use as a symbol signifying knowledge, particularly knowl- edge of God. Besides a simpler there was also a more philosophic use of the term. In the more philosophic sense the light of knowledge was conceived as an actual presence and active influence at work in the world dis- pelling darkness of mind and illuminating the lives of men. Scott says: ‘‘To the Greek mind the highest good was identified with perfect knowledge; and for more than five centuries the great philosophers had been striving after that knowledge. It was assumed that the ‘wise man’ —the man who rightly apprehended the nature of God— would raise himself above earthly circumstances, and become, in some measure, like God.’’? John finds both the simpler and the more philosophic use suited to his purpose of conveying to his audience the significance of the historical Jesus. Jesus is ‘‘the Light of the World’’ (viii, 12; ix, 5). In the simpler Pales- tinian sense Jesus enlightens us by adding to our store of the knowledge of God and God’s purpose in the world. John had seen the presence of God in the beauty of Jesus’ life of love and beneficence. But the word is also used in John’s Gospel in the more philosophic Greek sense of ‘‘light’’ as a higher, living influence, powerful enough to elevate men’s lives and fortunes. John knew this more philosophic idea was in everyday use among his people. He put Jesus into their thought-world by making the bold claim that in Jesus we see the incarnation of this cosmic light whose mission is to ennoble the lives of men and guide their destinies. How this more philosophic Greek idea of the function of light works out might be paraphrased in modern terms somewhat thus: The light of knowledge is diffused through 2 Hist. and Rel. Value, p. 46. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 39 humanity and works on human nature in as direct and definite a way as the rays of the sun work upon plant life. A plant cannot grow and blossom without light. A sick person is benefited by sunshine. The human spirit is sick and dwarfed until it submits itself to the life-giving, health-giving rays of the light of true knowledge. The light of knowledge has been in the world from the ‘‘begin- ning’’ lighting ‘‘every man’’ (John i, 2,9). But in Jesus the light came close to men, focussed with such brillianey and radiating its power and vitality with such force as to make him the Savior of the world. The significance of John’s identification of the infectious quality of the personal life of Jesus with the Greek cosmic light principle is that the combination resulted in a gospel which met the approval and won the allegiance both of simple people and of the philosophically or scientifically minded. It universalized and internationalized the life of Jesus as triumphantly as did Paul, but, unlike Paul, it preserved the conerete example of his earthly life and emphasized its office. Jesus’ life became crammed with meaning as a revelation of what the life-giving, health- giving rays of the light of true knowledge when given full right of way could do in, and for, and with our human nature. 11. The second of the three vital words of John’s Gospel is ‘‘Life.’’ ‘‘Life’’ almost never means to Jéhn mere physical life, but is practically always used in a larger sense; and in this larger sense, as in the case of the word ‘‘light,’’ it always has two distinct aspects, a simpler, Pal- estinian and a more scientific or philosophic, Greek one. The purpose of John’s Gospel, as stated in xx, 31, is that through believing men may have “‘life.’’ The simpler use of the term is based directly upon the Palestinian point of view of Jesus as master and his dis- ciples as students. In Jesus’ day the Jews had concen- trated their dreams of God’s highest blessings in the thought of the Messianic Age to come. The life of the 40 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN ‘age to come,’’ 2.4. ‘‘eternal life,’’ was the greatest hope of every individual (Mar. x, 17, 30). John drops the Jewish conception of a coming Kingdom largely, but retains ‘‘eternal life’’ and energizes it by bringing it down to earth from the clouds. He will have it that the new store of knowledge of God which his students gain from Jesus puts the possession of ‘‘eternal life’’ here and now within their grasp. Here again Paul supplies the missing link between the simpler, Palestinian and the developed philosophic, Greek use of the term ‘‘life.’’ Paul put great emphasis upon the power of the Spirit in regenerating believers. He felt that the indwelling Spirit was a token and ‘‘first install- ment’’ of that future life of the Kingdom (II Cor., i, 22; v, 5; Eph., i, 14). John goes a step farther and says that the present life in the Spirit is life at its highest, and that the future life is no more than a consequence and natural prolongation of it. ‘‘Life,’’ then, for John means a, life lived in accordance with the principles of the King- dom laid down by Jesus, and might be described as the life of the Kingdom lived in the present. This becomes for John the bond with Palestine for the other more philosophic significance of the word current in Greek thought. The Greeks thought of the material as base, and entanglement in it a eaptivity. Parallel with the world of material is the principle of energy or life which animates all things. God is the supreme influence above all material things. The supreme good is attained by putting oneself into spiritual contact with the Source of all life. A man thus receives the ‘‘fullness’’ of life which rescues him from all the petty entanglements of physical existence. He enters into a sort of divine life in union with the divine Spirit. Such idealistic communion with God was extremely diffi- cult, John says, until Christ came. But he makes easier the establishment of this contact with the Life that is above life. In him we have the essence of God in fleshly form, CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 41 so that in discipleship to him we enter, as it were, through an open ‘‘door’’ (x, 7) into the divine life. His life is an object lesson to us in the way to let the divine life infiltrate into human existence. Men now “‘have no excuse’’ (xv, 22). Any man or woman for all time can enter into close communion with God and receive the power to live the life eternal. This Greek contribution to the term ‘‘Life’’ might per- haps be paraphrased in modern ideas as follows: Any one who looks at magnificent mountain scenery feels a cer- tain response in his nature. A man who on a clear summer night gazes long and earnestly into the heavens and tries to lose himself among the stars feels a certain sense of uplift which helps him bear the burden of the day. This is because man’s soul tends upward. If freed for a while from its physical prison it rejoices and gains new strength. This is the explanation of the power of Jesus. In the midst of most limiting circumstances his spirit rejoiced in a freedom and fullness of life. All men know that the natural man goes \through life teased, tormented and more or less depressed all the time by a prisoner-like sense that his life thus far has been a helpless captivity. The longing to escape is eating out his heart. The sort of divine life that would result from union with the divine Spirit is the only way out for us from our entanglement in the material, said the Greek, but how to find it we do not seem to know, for few of us do. In Jesus, John said to them, I will show you the way out. He and God were never far apart. He was the incarnation of this free and full life. By entering into communion with him any man or woman of you may appropriate and assimilate this spirit of freedom and of victory and make it your own. John’s contribution to the spread of Christianity through the world consisted in thus linking together a Palestinian and a Greek way of stating the Christian way of salvation or emancipation from the material so as to express with double power the significance of Jesus. It gave the Chris- 42 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN tian gospel a cosmic and scientific basis in present life. It universalized its appeal. Every one wishes life, more abundant life. It is the great consuming desire of human- ity. John proclaims to every one: In him is Life. 12. The third of the three great Johannine words is ‘‘Believe on (in) him.’’ ‘‘To believe in’’ Jesus is the high road to the new way of Life. ‘‘To believe in’’ him in the Gospel of John means to let down the bars that stand between us and close personal fellowship with him, in particular to open our hearts to receive his spirit and to obey his commands. Here again the word is used in two ways. Here again John splices the importance of direct. discipleship to Jesus with the speculative Christianity of Ephesus. In the simpler sense John appeals for the same kind of belief in Jesus as was shown by his first disciples. Belief in him closed the circuit between them and influences by which their lives were transformed; for his spirit entered into them and enabled them to become imitators of him. Their fellowship with him was the source of their Life. John preaches to the natural man everywhere that the way out of his helpless captivity is this same fellowship to which belief in Jesus leads. By dwelling on his deeds and meditating on his words and communion with his spirit, any man may “‘believe on him’’ and reap the same harvest of life which blessed the first disciples. On the other hand, this relationship may be thought of in another way as one which was very natural to the people of Ephesus. For centuries the Greeks had been accustomed to think that a divine spirit or power actually enters into human beings under certain conditions, causing some to dance sacred dances, others to utter oracles, others to reveal divine truths. This general notion had sobered down in the religions of the first century into a practice of performing certain rites and ceremonies to encourage the entrance of a, or the, divine spirit into the hearts of communicants. But this indwelling force or spiritual es- CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GOSPEL 43 sence was still conceived as in a very realistic sense giving its possessor the victory. With this background to work from it was not hard for John to explain what followed the entrance of the Christian Spirit into the hearts of believers. The Spirit changes, cleanses, ennobles, regenerates. The Spirit makes us children of God, not merely by an act of God in our birth, but by an act of our own. It is only a matter of opening the door of the soul, but the Spirit cannot enter while that door remains shut. This is what it means to ‘‘bhelieve in’’ Jesus. It is to put ourselves into touch with influences powerful enough to overcome all the obstacles to loyalty to Jesus, through ‘‘knowing’’ him personally and through obedience to his ‘‘commandments.’’ This more concrete and workable view of the union of Christ and the believer might be paraphrased in modern terms with the loss of only a small part of its realism, as follows: By personal contact with Jesus his immediate disciples were played upon by invisible forces which im- parted to them his higher life. They, in turn, persuaded others who received the same new power of life. We are a part of the unbroken succession. We all receive life and nourishment from him as truly as the branches of a grape- vine receive their vitality from the stalk to which they are joined (xv, 1). It is impossible to remain in close contact with him long without being affected by it. Any one who has a note or chord of mysticism in his nature will find this beautifully expressed in Emerson’s essay on ‘The Oversoul.’’ The relation of the three ideas of Light, Life and Belief in him may be expressed by saying that Jesus is the Sun (Mal. iv, 2) whose rays bring Life and Health to those who come out of the dark into his light. He is the Light, in whom we have Life, through loyalty to him. All these twelve characteristics combine to show that John sought to universalize the principle that power unto salvation is only to be found in the fellowship of Jesus. 44 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN He linked up Christianity more closely with the ministry of Jesus than any other religion has ever been linked to the career of its founder. He set forth the life of Jesus of Galilee in terms of lasting significance. He was one of the last men in the world able to do this because he wrote just at the time the Christian religion was entering an era in which there would be no one to say that he had known Jesus. John made it forever impossible for a specu- lative Christianity which left those days in Palestine en- tirely out like the one he found active in Ephesus, to live again anywhere in the world. He could not make the lan- cuage of the Galilean gospel with its Messiah and Messi- anie Kingdom and Apocalyptic Coming understood in his non-Jewish environment. John, therefore, made the term Messiah mean Son of God. He made the Kingdom a pres- ent spiritual brotherhood, he interpreted apocalyptic imagery so that it had a present meaning. His re-statement of the Christian gospel appealed to every class and race and type. He proclaimed that the opportunity for life eternal which was given to men through Jesus was not given once for all, but is a continuous gift, open from age to age to any man anywhere who will believe in him. CHAPTER III THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 1. The key to the literary style of the Gospel of John has been secured in recent years from the study of papyrus documents of the same general period. Hundreds upon hundreds of ancient documents have been discovered, in- eluding large numbers of private letters of common folks of the first century which reveal to us the colloquial lan- guage of the people of the time. The New Testament and, in particular, the Gospel of John are full of peculiarities of style not found in classical or in any distinctly literary Greek. This peculiar Greek of John’s Gospel used to be accounted for as the result of the attempt of a Jew (John) to write the Greek language. But probability now leans decidedly in the direction of recognizing as colloquial most of the expressions which used to be explained as Hebraistic. An outstanding example of what we mean is the fre- quent use of the paratactic form of sentence with its con- stant repetition of the word ‘‘and.’’ In every part of the Gospel we find this frequent use of ‘‘And...and... and,’’ familiar to us, also in our own American colloquial style of narrative. Who of us tells a story orally without using the word ‘‘and’’ more times than he would use it in writing the same story? Deissmann gives us many examples of this ‘‘and’’ style from the papyri. A complaint to a judge (originally oral) reads as follows: ‘‘Yesterday as we were returning at dawn from Theadelphia two bandits fell on us and bound us and the watchman and struck us several times and wounded Pasion and took a pig from us and stole Pasion’s 1Light from the Amcient East, chap. II, 3, EB. 45 46 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN coat and. ..’’ Another example is taken from one of several healing accounts found on a marble tablet in Rome. We can almost hear the man telling of his cure: ‘‘To Valerius Aper a blind soldier the god gave direction to go and take blood from a white rooster mixed with honey and to mix a salve and to anoint his eyes for three days and he could see again and came and gave thanks publicly to the god.’’ Compare the repetiton of ‘‘and’’ in John ix, 11. ‘‘He answered, The man who is ealled Jesus made clay and anointed my eyes and said to me, Go to Siloam and wash: When I went and washed I received sight. And . . .’’ Com- pare also the preceding verses, John ix, 6, 7. This ‘‘and”’ style appears in every chapter of the Gospel. Even in the prologue, sometimes considered formal and philosoph- ical, we find the same usage: ‘‘In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And light shines in the dark- ness; and the darkness has never overcome it’’ (i, 4, 5). The impression that the contents of this Gospel were spoken before being published, and were written down pretty much as spoken, is strengthened by many other observations. There are numerous usages of single words shown by the papyri to belong to popular dialect but not found in literary Greek, which are employed by John in his Gospel. One such usage is represented by the expression ‘‘full’’ in i, 14. This word is in the nominative or subjective case, where literary syntax would call for the objective case. But in the colloquial style the word is treated as inde- clinable just as John has it.” Another usage is repre- sented by the example, ‘‘own’’ in i, 41. This is a perfect instance of colloquial tautology. John meant no such em- phasis upon the word ‘‘own’’ as all the older commen- tators felt must be present. The usage has been clearly shown to be a bit of popular dialect (See comments on the passage in this volume). *Deissmann, chap. II 3, D. THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 47 Again, the frequent and rapid change of tense in narra- tive, together with the constant use of the historical pres- ent, is another indication of informal spoken presentation as distinguished from literary exactness: ‘‘It was about noon. There comes a woman of Samaria’’ (iv. 6, 7). In the sections of text given in this volume the alternation of tenses is preserved at the expense of smoothness, in order to give the right impression of the author’s graphic style. 2. In addition to the popular style in word and syntax there is the conversational form of the narrative. There is no other book of the New Testament where question and answer follow each other so extensively as in the scene of Nicodemus talking with Jesus at night, in the narrative of the woman at the well, and in the discussion concerning the bread of life. Many a modern book reader turns the pages of a new book to see how much of dialogue the pages contain. This conversation-style at times in John takes an almost dramatic turn. Always playing the part of objectors, ‘‘the Jews’’ appear at opportune moments when the author wishes to explain to his audience more in detail the significance of a saying or deed of Jesus. When Jesus says (vi, 41) I am the bread that has come down out of heaven, the ‘‘Jews’’ object (42), Is he not Joseph’s son? Again a few verses later the ‘‘Jews’’ ask, How can he give us his flesh to eat (52)? The author thus avoids implying that his audience is dull and at the same time he ean introduce explanations suited to even the most simple-minded. (See remarks concerning ‘‘the Jews’’ in our preceding chapter.) The Gospel, in other words, is the work of a public speaker making a popular appeal. 3. In line with the interest of the author in the dra- matic is his fondness for contrasts. There is little twilight in the Gospel. But there is much light, and there is much darkness. There is life, and there is death. There are love and hate, truth and falsehood. There are the children of God and the children of the Devil (viii, 44). There 48 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN is the spirit over against the flesh. There are righteous- ness and sin, the old commandment and the new command- ment, and many other alternatives, which show how fond the author is of sharp-cut, vigorous, popular description and appeal. Moreover, these contrasts all find a place in the daily life of the people. The author uses no recondite categories, for every man or woman is sensible of the terror of darkness and the joy of light, of the beauty of love and the meanness of hate, of the coldness of death and of the glow of abundant vitality. 4. One of the chief problems of the Gospel is what has come to be named the ‘‘I’’ style. Deissmann describes this at considerable length as one of the main features deter- minative of the literary character of the Gospel. He gives examples, some of which will be noted in our comments on the tenth chapter of the Gospel. Suffice it to say here that a peculiar use of the pronoun ‘‘I’’ in religious papyri and inscriptions was widespread and popular. When John represents Jesus as saying, ‘‘I am the good shepherd,”’ the ‘‘I’’ form he uses is as much in line with the natural religious language of the people whom he is addressing as the ‘‘he’’ form would be for a preacher today who would say in a similar connection, ‘‘He is the good shepherd.’’ Yet the interesting fact is that in Ephesus the people would hot understand John as claiming that Jesus spoke Greek or that he had ever said these exact words concerning himself which John was saying concerning him. Take a modern example of an audience listening to Shakespeare’s presentation of Julius Cesar. Cesar is represented as speaking certain words in his own person. The audience understands the dramatic atmosphere and is not misled into taking them to be a historical report. This does not give an accurate idea, however, of John’s situation; for when John puts the words, ‘‘I am the good shepherd,’’ into the mouth of Jesus, it is a direct con- fession or declaration of faith on the part of speaker and listeners that to and for them, he zs the good shepherd. THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 49 This is the correct interpretation of the use of the ‘‘I’’ style in popular language in Ephesus. A very close religious parallel in modern times is our specialized use of ‘‘thee’’ and ‘‘thou.’’ The use of these archaic forms does not mean that the user has studied old English. It is a popular, religious custom. Any Church officer or Christian leader is able to drop naturally into the use of ‘‘thee’’ and ‘‘thou,’’ and when the listeners hear these words they instinctively know that a prayer has begun. So in Ephesus, when they heard John use the pronoun ‘‘I’’ in statements concerning Jesus, like, ‘‘I am the good shepherd,’’ his listeners knew that his words rep- resented a confession of his own personal faith. To repro- duce a part of the ancient effect it is only necessary to substitute ‘‘Thou art’’ for ‘‘I am’’ in a reverent tone in the modern reading at every occurrence of the words. Examples of this substitution are given in our comments on John x. This employment of a usage shown to be in line with popular, religious custom in Ephesus is another evidence of the popular character of the Gospel. 5. Other evidences of a popular style are translations, repetitions and cross references. Translations of Hebrew and Aramaic terms are frequent. If this Gospel were a theological treatise it would seem strange to find the author pausing to translate such simple words as Rabbi (i, 38) and Messiah (i, 41) and Cephas (i, 42). Such aid to the reader points to the presence of a general audi- ence. Such solicitude on the part of the author indicates an almost affectionate, personal approach and not the for- malities of a technical theological discussion. Repetitions are numerous. The assertion that John the Baptist was ‘‘not the Christ’’ occurs in i, 20; 1, 25 (cf., i, 8) and again in iii, 28. That Jesus is “‘the Light of the World”’ is stated in vili, 12, again in ix, 5. Often they occur in rapid succession within a few verses as in vi, 53-58, or serve merely to recall another narrative, as in the case of ‘‘the Lamb of God’’ (i, 29, and i, 836). Such repetitions 50 Tur GOSPEL OF JOHN would be out of place anywhere else than in rather simple and direct appeal. . Cross references also show the author’s close relation to his audience. ‘‘John was not yet cast into prison’”’ (ii, 24). The statement is of the nature of an aside only possible where author and audience are on a particularly close and friendly footing. Where the Gospel facts were familiar to all parties concerned, such a remark strengthens an author’s sympathetic mental and spiritual contact with his hearers. How grateful the ordinary reader is for such a compliment to his intelligence as in xix, 39, ‘‘ And there came also Nicodemus, he who at the first came to him by night.’’? The Gospel is full of such cross references which have no necessary place that emphasize the popular style and point of view. They have all helped to make this Gospel the most readable and probably the most loved of all the Gospels. 6. The attitude of the Gospel toward theology and doc- trine ought not to be hard now to discover. It has been customary to say that we must understand the author as ‘‘writing as he does with an express theological intention,’’ or that the supreme purpose of the Fourth Gospel was the re-statement of the ‘‘complete system’’ of Christian doc- trine in terms of Hellenistic philosophy. There is a grain of truth in these, as in most statements. The Fourth Gospel has its theology; and the author is a Hellenist. It does not follow, however, that the Gospel is a treatise on Hellenistic theology. The author of the Fourth Gospel was under the control, like Jesus, his master, of an immediate, practical purpose. His purpose was that his hearers might ‘‘have life’’ (xx, 31). He has little patience with teachers who do not understand the power of the Spirit. Satire against learn- ing of a certain sort crops out here and there. ‘‘Are you teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?’’ (iii, 10.) ‘‘How does this man have such learning when he has never studied?’’ (vii, 15.) We may imagine THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 51 John in full sympathy with Paul in his saying that the gospel may be foolishness to philosophers but to those who are saved by it, it is the power of God unto life (I Cor. 115-21). Indeed, there is warrant for the statement that John refused to have anything to do with doctrine as doctrine. His supreme purpose is to bring men and women within the scope of the influences that will make them disciples of Jesus, and by entrance into fellowship with him experi- ence the joy and power of the new Life. Was Jesus human or divine? John’s answer might be said to be that he was both. If the emphasis is to be put on either side, the need just then in Ephesus in his judgment is to put it upon the reality of Jesus’ earthly career. We have noted in the previous chapter the anti-Gnostie and anti-Docetic quality of the Gospel. Again, if John were to be asked ‘‘Is God a person or spirit?’’ his answer would be that God is Spirit (iv, 24; i, 18), but that through Jesus we may enter into personal relationship with him (xiv, 9-10; x, 30). Or, if John were asked whether he regarded the miracles as the basis of belief in Jesus, he would answer that as symbols of eternal spiritual truths of Christian experience, the miracles are ‘‘signs’’ of his power as Savior. Again, concerning the question of the second coming and the judgment day, John’s interest is not in any dog- matic statement pertaining to a more or less distant future, but in a present enrichment of life to which they may contribute through an awakening and exaltation of be- lievers. See comments on v, 24-25; ii, 19. We can imag- ine Paul and James confronting John and asking, ‘‘Is sal- vation by faith or by works?’’ (Gal. iii, 6-9; ef. James ii, 21, 24.) John’s answer is that ‘‘belief in him’’ puts a man in touch with the divine aid that enables him in loyalty to Jesus to do his commandments; so that the two become practically identical. It is through knowledge gained in personal discipleship that we attain the life which is sal- 52 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN vation. Is salvation, then, present or future? John’s answer is that we enter now into eternal life and begin at once a heavenly existence that is never to end (v. 24). To say that the Gospel of John is theological in purpose and point of view is not the whole truth. It is hardly a half truth. It should be supplemented by an emphatic statement that the author was far more consumed with zeal for the saving of the souls of the men and women of Ephesus, than for the construction of an elaborate and precise theology. Direct appeals to Christian living, ap- peals stated not in terms of any ‘‘theology,’’ but in the simple words of their own daily thinking and living, reveal his heart’s desire. 7. John thus preferred to express his message in con- erete terms taken from the life of Ephesus and from the familiar parts of the Old Testament. His message, as stated before, was that ‘‘belief in him’’ obtains for any man the Light of true knowledge which enables him to live the Life more abundant. These are words of every- day living, Light, Life, Belief in him. In bringing home this message to his people John used simple illustrations. He describes a wedding scene (John 11) and a birth (John ii); he talks about the best kind of water for drinking (John iv), the best food for eating (John vi), the cure for blindness (John ix). His use of these as symbols of spiritual truth was even more readily understood in those days than in modern times. An American monthly magazine, near the top of the list in number of copies sold, which never mentions religion or has any religious or moral interest, constantly addresses talks to its readers like the following: ‘‘Many of the readers of this publication have written us, after having put into practice some of our principles, that their experi- ence was like being born again. They were actually born into a new life, physically and mentally everything was different. They became broader, more capable, more stable. They had come out of a narrowed existence into the full- THE POPULAR QUALITY OF THE GOSPEL 53 ness of life... . There are various degrees of life. Many people are practically dead, many years before they reach their last resting place.... If you have been living the old life, hampered by the conventional principles, come out into the sunshine... then life will mean something. It will be full to the very brim every day. You will be spurred on to do your best work. You will be stimulated at times almost to the point of intoxication.... If you would be born again into this new life, give our principles a trial.... Try it and be convinced.’’ Birth, new life, fullness of life, death, resting place, tomb, sunshine, light, intoxication are all words of popular daily experience. They are all used directly or indirectly by John. ‘‘Try it and be convinced’’ parallels John’s repeated ‘‘Come and see’’ (i, 39, and elsewhere). 8. The catacombs of Rome show the extent of the pop- ularity of John’s pictures. A book by C. D. Lamberton entitled ‘‘Themes from St. John’s Gospel in Early Roman Catacomb Painting’’ divides the themes treated into three classes. The first list, which is made up of the pictures based upon narratives found only in John’s Gospel, in- cludes the Raising of Lazarus, which heads the whole list; second, the Woman of Samaria; third, the Marriage at Cana. The second classification is made up of pictures which are found both in John and elsewhere in Scripture. Among these are the Healing of the Paralytic, the Lamb of God, the Breakfast by the Sea. Certain details in these pictures, however, show that John has been followed rather than other Scripture. In a third classification is a con- siderable list of pictures ‘‘characteristically Johannine,’’ The Eucharist (in connection with the Feeding of the Multitude), the Baptism, the Vine and Branches, the Good Shepherd, the Living Water, and others. ‘‘St. John’s Gospel,’’ says Lamberton, ‘‘was the leading factor in the entire field of catacomb symbolism’’ (p. 101). 9. Another bit of evidence to show that the Gospel of John is thus composed of religious appeals expressed in 54 THE GOSPEL OF JOHN popular language and illustration is the fact they may be called and have been called ‘‘sermons’’ (Burton, Short Introduction to the Gospels, p. 128). Each chapter in the first part of the Gospel is suggestive of a separate sermon. The chapters do not form logical parts of a single discussion, but stand related to each other only as a series of religious talks might be related. The order of the sermons is determined by the nature of their sub- jects rather than by chronological sequence of citation from Jesus’ ministry. To read one of these religious ap- peals understandingly it 1s necessary to imagine that you are hearing it preached to an Ephesian audience, and that the main message of the talk is all that you can expect to capture and retain. For it is quite apparent that we do not have the sermons complete. As it takes only three to five minutes to read the words, they can form no more than the framework of an entire discourse. It is perhaps too venturesome to try to understand the exact relation of the written Gospel to the oral addresses. Yet, as a working basis, each chapter may be treated as the set of notes which the author pre- pared in advance of the delivery of the talk. Taken even as notes they are extremely abbreviated, the bare sugges- tions of the symbols and explanations which the author in speaking would give at considerable length. 4.) laser ad etic hy Gite Mae Ne Se OMe 3 sls) 1. eal eee WP ay Baile au, ox Ler ee Mi oe oreo APTOS LOPE ic, gly ey (AOS ey A ete RPA aes VET 1099s HAs gs HA LO 10 Pat deh soe ks ee 20-2980n) eialSlito 150 ute SOM ees 4) ih 81847. Se eas Spe ees yo Je aa ae OS alata ISS Meee hohe 96,99; 172 Eero. es «= 505100; 172 eee ee on kt PNP 100 praia)... 0101, 144) 208 Gemoeey eS. 1 01f 148 Pemeiees te Oy ha HOLOA EE. Pepe ee) eS, 1008105 aenigee oe i 69965104 PRUE oon las cs, £106 ise ek 105, 107) 112 iii, 19 . 31,36,51,105, 135,173 Ie ee eure 5) 1088112 ~~ ~ ~ “ . 7 y - ~~ ~~ a Cas See Se shy Ee bale A PR, 181 pe 0: al! je. en X, 24-38 182 ff. x, 30 51 AE Lt Remy Ne fe 187 34-36) 0). er X, 37, 38 185 f., 187 o~ bd _ 32, 188 ff. , 223, 232 INDEX OF SCRIPTURE PASSAGES 273 ‘CHAPTER PAGE | CHAPTER PAGE John—(Continued) John—(Continued) eI a ivan PoC fo. TOG WN SIV, LG cs. es ey 6) el? GULLS eer ae) Pee hog Peter S04 te ae ee IRI eee We ks 18, LOG b MEW BOI OS inl ae CEST BPO RG CS al ONS ea 162 | xiv, 23 sei oh liege Oo eT a Bare at ly UAW SIV) 28-28 lh, We a aa ee Rete ol eh) os ADS TRI BE be OR a eso Re OM re) chr casey LOO) UESAWG OTe gis od ch ol Pe 110 Pk OY re 198 | xiv, 28... . .. 218,220,231 > te 161 f,, 190, 197) Ev H-28 lsu 8k ed (a eo ee op Bb eed EL as at) ag as eee. BG SOO SR 4-10) os) cu att eek aR ee nt Ga ats LO PERV SU, 1 Geek GL, ays ahs Lek te Ene TE a ace a SOM PRU OT ok 8. ehh ced ee ON ae x1, 39 SC GR EB Die nutes at Oe ie Fo Us nel om x1, 47- 53 Cee Sea OL SRM PS: a NS ba ligtn gk eee met Gene cher POS Hee IG 8, oe! ile y een eas en ee il ae Gee SOR ARM) LEV 4050/4 BT SAO ou i Raat Mtl CONST SING 21th +: rn ae” Riese ren et) ot 4 sty Re rn er rma es ao,.10 ... pa et, TE 48 ya g 1h 2, Seg 240 oe 79, 290 f. Be CSET NM Bi. 4 GV Peps: SMe Meer a 246 f. ry EAE IST aOR ARCS: 1.40 Ob. ae: OA ode a BR ee coy OER ORES RUE LUA 6.4 SU Bibs». chad (: Sl a ara i aaa Cua et & 274 THe GOSPEL OF JOHN CHAPTER PAGE John—(Continued) XIx, 26—xx, 29 247 ff. SIR SOP. Ey ee ve oko xix, 28. . 141, 234, 249 f. RS Oi", 141, 249 f. Sie 1 . 240 xIxp,eo a8 24, 250 xix, 38, 40. 252 LRT. OCA he del ty yells A SOOO Re OPP ay)! 5 vibe ip bs 251 Se OP ie bY oaN sh ET Golem e cre VEE vo Ay Lee ha gels eee MM, ae he dis 15, 18, 213, 251 f. MY 19s Ns Abs ck ste eee xx, 13,18. 252 Xx, 24 wile alae Xx, 29 . 251, 254 SEBO wh ls oe, 0196, 254 xx, 31. . .32,39,50,197, 254 NXIND I athe Whos Wise pLG On, wae REL PPh ay x glint MoABNe Caer eee SEH) oa sess abode 213 RIOAT debe aferelirers gers e.se pis elece estes oielelels sleass Tefete vee wre a tatele! Talelelelelerelarstylalelels ase apie eosin tetas 4 wea _ elelalecela, siete , steelers ceeedy aioe a 8 9 4.2 Ble Bite ge ae ae Siatesal prerese anes poe nas fons : aia a a a ee e's ® ete Pag Sit) +08 et 3 mee Pai erges fagetinn? elects eee ees preeee #452 Qieterceelee feb stetetelitateleieiecgias He RARREES: A alae f Resto ees : coeialetol letetet pibiaterzratetriest tate etetertieteriie aseis f siatetetatere alata stalelelatelelelelele'a! $19) £-9; 02290) 929.405 fstetate: $0, t iti fateserere tie Paperse hese tee We tee cde te ve eer Mttetelare tibet eels Caste Mes Tene Be See Te > PP bare eth sh rte sterbtotat, ¢ fe oe ee Ole ew pee a gaara ae faletele tifste ' Pees erty ot ete a atete rele gare , Steet tal aisicle a sett e flare bo erase o£ 8 Saas sepad tesese ae te br acerts Seo eie as beara pete be ted Petpet be eeae | re * Dt ee aeete t SPR ewe he ae Afareleisie: ipiossceleteiele -eseipielereiys SBA: aia o Sisteierticitela pip as 01m jaletsiateletate ate tle ec ese t ® lalelate : eilatatatelatelalete’s ; aletrledeleleietede Le winkeye fie tee r. fipie sais tie-2¢ creie @ eseis) ey ster? arity stafels Tete tatars: , pleteleteteletern: me aieleipinieleleie: ‘ af AL Geleles esc esses ft t ee ee ge eae ee et sie sh Se teas tee telatrletateletats Ee See T as eed heer es: : talaleletilelelelytelatete§ a‘sleleleleteie peleteleatalelelal tals stetelatelaleiees Hee eh Mneey aie? Jolie soteie. ese? ‘ sigieiere Heiner elerere.s gies eels ele eee glee vatetate sialetenstelerstetete Serergtriptatelatotsrsttrtectaseenrere Ts ; a arelete Piela ee 2 8 Fe 8 eletstete? Teietsieteeletsielalele’ ele! +t af aiatateatelt aletatetatetateraisterstsrararereger eee BIS Rie Rie Ole b araie ; ars ’ oe . PP tele ie es Ote Sce BF FR ehee® ptetera hratelatitareselarisl “ eters eis airtel elaletelelate : pete ene el ate ® alelrieie eae Stites etiet Heleletelete selaty tat; fet titsestane tetra tastes totatscgsite! ete * 210 2 f° + - oF. 4 ielelatare Brsecestsesritse, pratetatptetstal, ¢ 4h *en) ae . eerene felete e state ety aielatpatetarets: sgiaie sFitel Pop esot hs oa pest te geet ht Or Seat ce se OE os wate elelete alates wiate’s wetates + elena ~ ele " ' fee . tiieletetets " Teinie > . elglela® 4 Aipieldlstetes . Tele v1 sip isieiale poeta’ ieleag! sett Telefete ¢irtyialerelet erste? A a acainieiaseie “f t alele eebe yi ete el eveseinte H Stats i itinersreriester: sigieletelelelalelgieis Le Seae Es He Te et ea pesca ites Hs cat iptatetalalateteceg ret reetefetele Teoh @ gitiele > Tere tele: at st stat aes titate sai ere Bet Di geeisiecriaser gies? eitigiasere felptetalel eeigt pare “a aaletsiele Teta Tetar sie epee sereeeaes stsiste +. * tenant . {teleleteretatecerets Tet eTetetetelelpleleteis piecele ace : ese Fie e Fiel ele a Biel e gi ee ; wei alte yh eleie glee ‘ fete arate are tsete ve TEASE PSH Sagas Te eae girstestshcta-tstetots hr irletetoce 2 aPefoteletete testy : a eat thecelelelelalers Stethistsis eset ot et olelel’ pigtelarb pislerelereiele rets.e © oeeee: toboten stabetstels Sieits seererrie $2 eseseae Senet eee seae) Seleteieseres ereteierae 2 = iste} Perr ORT tes Piel ete lf ele ai rlptalaie etels wistele thaleipiete rletale ioe Sierute S525 wheter Se ee astetels sietel stelete Telate Tebelet ne ee tn eed tpene betes =