THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER O F the FOURTH GOSPEL the HISTORICAL CHARACTER
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER o f THE FOURTH GOSPEL THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER o f THE FOURTH GOSPEL Joseph Carter Swaim B.A.,S.T.B.,S.T.M. Candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology UNIVERSITY OP EDINBURGH 1931 To ¥. F. K. in profoundest admiration THE HISTORICAL CHARACTER of THE FOURTH G0SEEL Preface. ...............••*••«•• i« Outline and Table of Contents. ......•••••• ii» Chapter One. ................•••.* !• Introductory: The Problism Chapter Two. ..................... 35. Some Characteristics of the Fourth Gospel Chapter Three. .................... 63. The Fourth Gospel and the Worldlin Which it was Written Chapter Four ..................... 99. The Leading Ideas of the Gospel Chapter Five .................... .126. The Fourth Evangelist's Method Chapter Six. ........ ............ .153. The Fourth Evangelist's Method (Continued) Chapter Seven. ... .......... ....... 182. A Spiritual Gospel Chapter Eight. ................... .211. The Fourth Evangelist f s Philosophy of History Bibliography .................... .237. Preface. The problem of the historical character of the Fourth Gospel is one of the most fascinating problems of ITew Testament studyf it arises frfcra the fact that in certain important respects the Fourth Evangelist ! s account of the life and teachings of Je sus of Nazareth differs from the Synoptic account. It is -not that the Johannine and Synoptic versions dif fer essentially in their conception of what Jesus was. The first word of the earliest Gospel is, "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God" (Mark l:l), and the last word of the latest Gospel is, "these [i.e., cr^^^to* J are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God..." (John 20:31). Nor do they differ essentially in their representation of what Je sus in the depths of his own soul considered himself to be. A study of the self-consciousness of Jesus either in the Synoptic tradition or in the Johannine Gospel reveals in him "unclouded fellow3hip and ethical solidarity with the Father"; no claim of Jesus as recorded in the Fourth Gospel exceeds, for example, this passage from the Synoptics: "All things have been delivered unto me of my Father: and no one knoweth the Son, save the Father; nei ther doth any know the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son willeth to reveal him" (Matthew 11:27). From the point of view of the self-consciousness of Je sus, then, all we could say of the historical character of the Fourth Gospel is that there is nothing to indicate that its vari ous events might not have happened just as they are reported to have done. If Jesus was conscious of unique fellowship with God, as even the Synoptics indicate, there is no reason why he should not have said, "I and the Father are one", "I am the Vine", etc. But we should still have unanswered the question of why the Fourth Gospel lays such stress upon this "Christological egotism", or why the situations in which the Fourth Evangelist pictures Jesus as using such language are so different from the situations recorded "by Matthew and Mark and Luke. It is granted that Jesus was con scious of unique relationship to God. But why do the Synoptics mention it so infrequently, the Fourth Gospel so constantly? St. Paul tells us that "when the fulness of tiie time came, God sent forth his Son" (Galatians 4;4). The work of Jesus was, in the Providence of God, historically conditioned. He lived at a certain time and in a certain place. The works recorded in the Synoptic Gospels were dependent upon Jesus' contacts with the people of his own day. The writing down of them was also histor ically conditioned. Eyewitnesses were passing away; there was danger that men would forget the earthly life of Jesus and the re ality of his human contacts. To prevent this, and in response to the needs of their own day, men wrote down what they had personal ly known about him and what eyewitnesses reported concerning him. It is fair to assume that the Fourth Gospel too was historically conditioned, that God also sent it forth "when the fUldess of the time came". It is generally agreed that the Fourth Gospel was written a generation later than the Three. Accepting that result of New Testament criticism, I have in this disserta tion sought to show the historical character of the .Fourth G-os- pel as it is revealed in a comparison with the older tradition and as its peculiar emphasis was called forth "by the time and place in which it was written. The Fourth Evangelist has stamped his personality upon his Gospel as none of the other writers has. I have "begun by ex amining his characteristic emphases and expressions as they are revealed in any careful reading of his "book. Then I have placed side "by side the Synoptic and Joha.nnine versions of what are ob viously the same events, and have sought to learn what the compari son has to teach us about how and why they differ. In the light of the information gained from these two sources, I have examined those sections of the Fourth Gospel which have to do with incidents not mentioned in the Synoptics. I have then attempted to view the Gospel in relation to the age that called it forth, with the re sult that its distinctive features seem to be in response to the demands of the time. I have then indicated the permanent service the Fourth Evangelist has done us in enabling us to view the life of Jesus in its relation to all times and all places. So much for content. One or two matters of form require to be mentioned. Quotations from the English Bible are, unless otherwise indicated, from the American Standard Version. Where American spelling differs from British, the American has "been pre ferred, with Webster's New International Dictionary as authority. I have to thank Professors Curtis and Manson, of the faculty of the Post-Graduate School of Theology of the University of Edinburgh, for their kindness and help in conceiving, planning, and executing this work. My debt to them is larger than can be expressed in words. J • (j • O • 32 Brownell Street, Staten Island, New York, November 1, 1931. OUTLIHB AHD TABLE OF COUTBHTS ii. Chapter One: Introductory: The Problem I. Introduction, pages 1,2. A. The Fourth Gospel one of four sources for 'our knowledge of the life of Jesus, page 1. B. What is the nature of its contribution? page 1. II. Differences "between the Fourth Gospel and the Synoptics, pages 2-18. tw* *«*ta A. In the ^jw^i,0frAof Jesus' life, page 2. 1. Chronology differs, page 2. 2. Materials of the life are not the same, page 3. a. Omissions in the Fourth Gospel, page 3. b. Extra-Synoptic material in the Fourth Gos pel, page 4. B. In Jesus 1 method, page 4. 1. Parable vs. allegory, page 4. a. TTo.|>«-fto\^ , page 4. b. TT*.po<fu.ta* , page 5. 2. Summary of Jesus' Synoptic teaching, page 6. a. Parables of God's love, page 6. b. Parables of conduct of life, page 7. c. Parables of the Kingdom, page 8. i. Its growth, page 8* ii. Its value, page 8. iii. Its members, page 9. 3. Absence of parables in the Fourth Gospel, p. 9. C. In Jesus' attitude towards himself, page 10. 1. Reticence of Jesus in the Synoptics contrasted with openness of his claims in the Fourth Gos pel, page 10. 2. Meekness of Jesus in the Synoptics contrasted with boldness in the Fourth Gospel, page 12. 3. Jesus' claims for himself, page 13. a. Makes himself equal with God, page 14. b. Boasts of unique fellowship with God, p.15. c. Asserts his own sinlessness, page 16. d. Claims power of God, page 16. e. Accepts worship, page 16. f. Summary of claims, page 17. III. Solutions that have been offered, pages 18-30. A. Enumeration of them* 1. That the Fourth Evangelist is correcting the Synoptics, page 18. 2. That the Fourth Evangelist is supplementing the Synoptics, page 20. a. Multiplicity of incidents, page 21. b. Two modes of teaching, page 22. 3. That the Apostle's memory was at fault, p. 23. 4. Partition theories, page 24. a. Enumeration of them: OUTLINE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) i. Theory of Weisse, elaborated by Wendt, page 24. ii. Theory of Strachan, page 26. iii. Theory of garvie, page 26. b. Against the partition theories: i. Disagreement of its advocates,p.27. ii. Unity of the Gospel, page 23. iii. Possibility of accidental dislo cations, page 28. B. Their inadequacy, page 29. IV. The point of view from which we set out, pages 30-33. A. Locus, page 32. B. Date, page 32, C. Authorship, page 33. Chapter Two: Some Characteristics of the Fourth Gospel I. A certain mystical strain, pages 35-45. A. The lyiysticism of the Fourth Gospel defined, p. 35. 1. It is not ,a. A careful arrangement of the mystic way, page 36. i. Theory of Miss Underhill, page 37. ii. Against this, page 38. b. An effusion of sex imagery, page 39. 2. It is rather "the presence of God felt", p. 39. B. The Mysticism of the Fourth Gospel is characterized by: 1. A contemplative emphasis, page 40. a. "Practical" aspect of Synoptics, p. 41. b. "Practical" aspect of St. Paul, p. 42. c. Absence of this in the Fourth Gospel,p.43. 2. Confusion of tense as regards eternal life, p. 43. C. Appeal to the mystics, page 44. II. Presence N of formulae, pages 45-48.