-Y,&LE«¥]MI[VIlI&Sinnfe

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

GIFT OF
Professor Benjamin W„ Bacon

BOOKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR

35 cents

THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM

i6mo. Net,

THE GIFT OF TONGUES

i6mo. Net,

SO

cents

THE MOST BEAUTIFUL BOOK EVER WRITTEN

PAUL AND HIS EPISTLES

l2mo. Net, 75
Crown 8vo. Net,

cents
12.00

Biblical Introduction Series
JOHN AND HIS
WRITINGS

By
D. A. HAYES

Professor of New Testament Interpretation in the Graduate School of Theology
Garrett Biblical Institute

kTroi7fjridtTe Reference Ubrair.

THE METHODIST BOOK CONCERN
NEW YORK CINCINNATI

Copyright, 1917. by
D. A. HAYES

The Bible text used in this volume is taken from the American
Standard Edition of the Revised Bible, copyright, 1901, by
Thomas Nelson & Sons, and is used by permission.

First Edition Printed January, 1917
Reprinted, February, 1910

TO
WILLIAM DAVID SCHERMERHORN
MY FORMER PUPIL AND PRESENT ASSOCIATE
A MAN OF JOHANNINE EXPERIENCE AND LIFE

CONTENTS PAGE
Foreword  9
PART I. THE APOSTLE JOHN
I. John the Little Known  15
II. John the Unrecorded and Disregarded  22
III. John in the New Testament  26
IV. John in Tradition and Legend  34
V. John the Son of Thunder  44
VI. John the Saint and Seer  55
PART II. THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL: THE GOSPEL
ACCORDING TO JOHN
I. Some Remarkable Estimates  77
II. Some Remarkable Omissions  80
III. Some Remarkable New Features  89
IV. A Remarkable Work of Art  92
V. Other Remarkable Characteristics  97
VI. Occasion and Aim  no
VII. Contents  114
VIII. The Johannine Authorship Disputed  1 19""
IX. Discoveries Favorable to Authenticity  127
X. Was John an Early Martyr?  129
XI. Claims of John the Presbyter  136
XII. Evidence Favorable to Authenticity  142
• XIII. Opposition and Defense; Conclusion  151
PART III. THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN
I. What Shall We Call It?  159
II. Relation to the Fourth Gospel  163 -
III. Genuineness and Date  1 72
IV. Heresies Combated  173 -
V. A Final and Crowning Revelation  176
VI. The Epistle of Love  177 -
VII. The Epistle of Knowledge  180
VIII. The Epistle of the Incarnation  184
IX. The Epistle of the Atonement  186
X. The Epistle of Personal Experience  188
7

8 CONTENTS PAGB
XI. The Epistle of Fellowship  189
' XII. The Epistle of Purity  192
XIII. The Epistle of Victory  196
PART IV. THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN
I. General Character  205
II. The External Evidence  205
III. The Internal Evidence  207
IV. John the Elder  208
V. The Person Addressed in the Second Epistle  209
VI. Some Notes on the Second Epistle  211
VII. Notes on the Third Epistle  214
VIII. Value of These Epistles  216
PART V. THE APOCALYPSE
I. Relation to the Other Johannine Writings  223
II. The External Evidence  237
III. The Date  244
IV. General Characteristics of the Apocalyptical Lit
erature  247
V. The Jewish Apocalypses  252
VI. The Apocalypse of John and the Jewish Apocalypses 257
VII. A Mysterious Revelation  260
VIII. The Fourfold Assurance of the Beginning and the
Fearful Threat at the End  265
IX. Two Reasons Why the Inspiration of the Book has
Been Doubted  268
X. Some Curiosities of Exegesis  270
XL Best General Attitude toward the Book  276
XII. Different Schools of Interpretation  277
XIII. Best System of Interpretation  279
XIV. General Characteristics  285
XV. Salient Features of Its Teaching  303
XVI. How to Read the Apocalypse  307
XVII. A Fitting End of the Bible  310
Bibliography  315
Indexes  319

FOREWORD
At the close of our volume on Paul and His Epistles
we said that John was the greatest theologian of the
apostolic times ; and, while we recognized that the Pauline
influence had dominated the thought and life of the
church at large, and we believed that it ought to do so
until the missionary and evangelistic work of the church
was done, we prophesied that then the Johannine theology
would be the supreme influence in the days of the church's
edification and consummation in love. That prophecy indi
cates our estimate of the final position to be accorded the
apostle John. We believe that as the church grows in
grace and becomes more and more like its Lord it will more
and more agree with him that John is the disciple most
worthy of its love.
There is a disposition at the present time with a certain
class of writers to emphasize the dependence of John upon
Paul, and these writers try to make it appear that the
author of the Johannine books was a disciple of Paul even
more fully than he was a disciple of Jesus. We believe
that John always was a receptive soul and that he probably
learned much from Paul, as from every other strong per
sonality with whom he came into contact, but the supreme
influence in all his more mature life was that of the Master.
For the most part he was one of the quiet in the land, and
he stood nearest to the Master, and he saw deepest into the
Master's spirit and truth, and he meditated longest upon
these things, and in the end he formulated more fully than
any other the essentials of the new faith; and as far as he
went we believe that he has spoken the final word in this
field.

10 FOREWORD
Paul was taught by the Spirit, but John had had the
additional advantage of the three years of teaching by the
Incarnate Lord. After Pentecost the Spirit of Jesus led
him into all the truth. His personal experience and the
history of the church taught him "new significance and
fresh result" from many of his early memories of the
Master's teaching and life. At last he was prepared to
write the consummation of the New Testament revelation,
the final residuum of the first century's experience in the
origin and the development of Christian truth. After Peter
had been crucified and Paul had been beheaded, John was
left to carry on the work and to perfect the faith for an
other entire generation in the church. What Jesus had
taught in the first third of the century and what Peter and
Paul had preached in the second third of the century John
meditated upon through the last third of the century, and
in this period he wrote the epistles, the Apocalypse, and
the Gospel. They represent the highest reach of apostolic
inspiration. This book will be perfect anathema in the eyes of those
who are accustomed to treat the Johannine literature as
anonymous or pseudonymous, and to regard the contents
of these books as composed mainly of "such stuff as dreams
are made of." We believe that the church tradition is vera
cious and trustworthy which assigns the authorship of the
five Johannine books to the apostle John. We believe that
the fourth Gospel is no romance, to be interpreted either
allegorically or rationalistically. We believe in its historical
trustworthiness, and we follow the apostle John as our
supreme authority both as to fact and to faith.
There was the old parallel of the two pictures of Socrates
given us in the Memorabilia of Xenophon on the one hand
and the Dialogues of Plato on the other, with the two pic
tures of Jesus furnished us by the synoptic Gospels on
the one hand and the fourth Gospel on the other. It used
to be a commonplace of criticism to affirm that the former

FOREWORD u
picture in the two cases was the prosaic, historical, and
reliable one, while the latter was poetical, idealistic, and
imaginative. It is interesting to see that there is a tendency
at present among the classical scholars to revise that
opinion and to believe that Plato, after all, has given us
the truer picture of the great master; and we confidently
expect that the final judgment in the case of the Gospels
will be favorable to the greater value of that presentation
of the Master's life and teaching which belongs to the one
who loved him most and served him longest upon the earth.
As his Gospel is better than any one of the synoptics, so
we regard his first epistle as better than any one of the
epistles of Paul. The difference in their writings marks
the difference in the men. Paul is the greatest of the
scribes, learned in the law ; John is the greatest of the seers,
learned in love. Paul deals with syllogisms; John deals
with intuitions. Paul argues and convinces ; John sees and
declares. Paul is an advocate; John is a prophet. Paul
proves with inevitable logic ; John proclaims with irrefuta
ble insight. Paul's proofs press upon each other like waves
dashing over fortifications of sand on the beach. John's
thought moves calmly and majestically like the ripples
which spread outward in ever-widening circles till they are
lost to sight, when you drop a pebble into the dimpling
surface of the sleeping lake.
Paul's epistles are treatises, arguing from premises to
conclusions in logical order and formal structure. John's
epistles are serenely unconscious of system and superior
to formal argument. John makes confident affirmation of
truth which he is sure will be self-attesting. He only has
to utter it and let it stand. His sentences are like the
Sequoia of the Pacific Coast, every one a giant which
stands alone. Great spiritual intuitions are expressed with
uttermost simplicity in giant sublimity of strength. The
genius of John is most in evidence in the ease with which
he unites the historical with the ideal, grasps the meaning

12 FOREWORD
of all phenomena, and sees the ultimate truth behind the
surface event in the Apocalypse, the epistle, and the Gospel.
Paul wrote thirteen of the New Testament books ; John
wrote only five. Paul confined himself to the writing of
epistles; John in his five books has given us three distinct
types of literature. Our New Testament divides into his
torical, epistolary, and apocalyptical books; and in each of
the two former divisions John represents the highest type,
while in the latter he furnishes the only example. Each
of these writings seems well-nigh perfect in its kind, and
yet they all supplement and complement each other most
wonderfully. In the Gospel, John shows us Jesus in the flesh, in the
epistles he pictures Christ in the heart, and in the Apoca
lypse he reveals Jesus the Christ as the Lord of heaven.
In the Gospel we find the historical Jesus, in the epistles
the Jesus of Christian experience, and in the Apocalypse
Jesus the Lord of all and the King of glory. In the Gospel
we have the fundamentals of the Christian's faith, in the
epistles the fundamentals of the Christian's life and love,
while in the Apocalypse we find the foundation of the
Christian's undying hope. In the Gospel John is a his
torian, in the epistles a pastor, in the Apocalypse a seer—
and in all his writings a Christian prophet and theologian
beyond compare. Others may have been dominant in the
past. Others may rule in the present. The future belongs
to John. He increasingly will come to his own.

PART I
THE APOSTLE JOHN

PART I
THE APOSTLE JOHN
I. John the Little Known
We know very little about the apostle John. To most
people it is a matter of surprise to discover how meager
our information is concerning so important a member of
the apostolic band.
Ask the average New Testament student whether we
know much about the apostle John, and in all probability
he will reply: "O, yes, the pages of the Gospels are full
of information concerning him. He wrote five of the books
of our New Testament, almost a fifth of the whole number
and filling about one fifth of the volume in space." Then
we turn to the Gospels and we find to our surprise that
John's name occurs in them only twenty times in all, and
that in more than half of these occurrences there is the
mere mention of the name and little or no information is
given us concerning the man.
" Ask the average student of the New Testament whether
we know more about John the Baptist or John the apostle,
and in all probability he will reply: "We know very little
about John the Baptist, except that he was the forerunner of
Jesus and that he was beheaded early in the Lord's minis
try; but John the apostle was one of the first disciples of
Jesus, and became his most intimate friend through all his
ministry, and then outlived all the other apostles. He had
a long and most influential career, and we know much
more about him than we do about John the Baptist."
Then we turn to the Gospels to find if this is true, and
we discover that in the Gospel according to Matthew, John
15

16 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
the Baptist is mentioned twenty-three times and John the
Apostle only three times. In each of these three times
Matthew mentions John simply as the brother of James,
and he tells us seven times as much about John the Baptist
as he does about the brother of James. In the Gospel
according to Mark, John the Baptist is mentioned sixteen
times and John the apostle only ten times. In the Gospel
according to Luke the Baptist is mentioned twenty-
four times and the apostle only seven times. In the fourth
Gospel John the Baptist is mentioned twenty times and
the name of John the apostle is not found in the book from
beginning to end.
Even when we pass over into the Book of the Acts,
written about events occurring long years after the death
of John the Baptist and while John the apostle was still
living and active in the building up of the church, and in
which, therefore, we might expect John the Baptist to
fall entirely out of notice while John the apostle would
become prominent and predominant in the affairs recorded,
we find to our surprise that John the Baptist is mentioned
by name nine times in the book and John the apostle only
the same number of times. It would seem, then, that in the
minds of the writers of the historical books of our New
Testament John the Baptist was a far more important
personality than the apostle John. The Gospels mention
the Baptist more than four times as often as they men
tion the apostle; and if we include the Book of Acts we
find that all the historical books of the New Testament
make John the Baptist more than three times as prominent
as the apostle John.
We know much more about Peter and we know much
more about Paul than we know about John. Peter and
Paul are great talkers, both of them; and they are both
capable of considerable self-advertisement upon occasion.
They tell us a great deal about themselves. They could
have written very readable and interesting autobiographies,

THE APOSTLE JOHN 17
and both of them would have thoroughly enjoyed the task.
John would not have enjoyed it. He was a man of another
type. He talked little about anything and not at all about
himself. If anybody else were present to do the talking,
he kept still. He liked to associate with Peter for that
reason, as well as for other things. Peter was perfectly
willing to keep the conversation going at any length and
at any time. If anything needed to be said on any occasion
when Peter was present, he always felt sure that he v/as
the providentially designated individual to say it, and John
always was ready to allow Peter to assume all responsibility
along that line. Peter was garrulous to the limit; John
was reticent to a fault.
If Peter's wife's mother lay sick with a fever and you
called at his home, Peter would tell you all about it, all
the preliminary symptoms and all the progress of the
disease, all the remedies which had been tried and all which
the neighbors had suggested, all that the doctor had said
about the case and all that Peter himself thought about it.
He would take it for granted that you were as concerned
in his mother-in-law as he himself was, and that the thinj
which was uppermost in his interest at that moment would
be equally interesting to you; and people always liked
Peter, and they usually enjoyed hearing him talk. On the
other hand, if John's mother, Salome, lay sick with a fever
and you knew nothing about it when you called at their
home, John would receive you and talk with you about
other matters and allow you to make your call and go
away again without saying a word to you about his mother's
illness; and when you heard of it through the neighbors
afterward you would be likely to think that John was a
queer fellow and unduly close-mouthed, and that he had
been a little less than cordial in not telling you, an old
friend of the family, something at least about it.
That was the sort of man John was. We learn from the
other evangelists that his mother Salome was one of the

18 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
women who accompanied Jesus in his itinerant ministry
and that as he ministered to others she ministered to him
and his followers from her own substance. The other
evangelists tell us that she was present at the crucifixion
and again at the resurrection; and we learn from their
narratives that she was one of the most faithful and
devoted among the women disciples of Jesus. John writes
a whole Gospel, setting forth the life of our Lord, and he
never once mentions Salome's name. That is characteristic
of him. He will not talk about himself or his family.
After the crucifixion Mary the mother of Jesus became a
member of the family of John and probably for that reason
her name never is mentioned in the fourth Gospel. Mark
mentions her name once and Matthew five times and Luke
thirteen times, but in the fourth Gospel she is called "his
mother" and once only "the mother of Jesus," but her name
is not found in the narrative from beginning to end. John
makes her share in the anonymity of his entire family.
Suppose we had gone to the apostle Paul and told him
that some of his enemies had called him a liar, what would
Paul have answered us? In all probability he would have
said : "They say that I am a weakling and a liar, do they ?
Well, who are they? I appeal to my record and my repu
tation and I challenge comparison with theirs." "Are they
Hebrews ? So am I. Are they Israelites ? So am I. Are
they the seed of Abraham? So am I. Are they ministers
of Christ? (I speak as one beside himself) I more; in
labors more abundantly, in prisons more abundantly, in
stripes above measure, in deaths oft. Of the Jews five
times received I forty stripes save one. Thrice was I
beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered ship
wreck, a night and a day have I been in the deep ; in jour-
neyings often, in perils of rivers, in perils of robbers, in
perils from my countrymen, in perils from the Gentiles, in
perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the
sea, in perils among false brethren; in labor and travail,

THE APOSTLE JOHN 19
in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often,
in cold and nakedness. Beside those things that are with
out, there is that which presseth upon me daily, anxiety for
all the churches. Who is weak, and I am not weak? who
is caused to stumble, and I burn not? If I must needs
glory, I will glory of the things that concern my weakness.
The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, he who is blessed
forevermore, knoweth that I lie not."1 We are almost
glad that somebody called the apostle Paul a liar, for in
answer he has poured forth a whole paragraph of auto
biography, giving many facts of which we would have had
no knowledge if it had not been for this provocation.
Now suppose we go to the apostle John and tell him
that his enemies declare that he is a liar and that his Gospel
is not the gospel of truth. What will we hear in answer?
Will he pour forth a torrent of self-vindication in para
graph after paragraph of autobiography? No, that would
not be characteristic of John. He will not condescend to
defend himself. He will not even condescend to defend
the truth. He simply will state it again and call it the
truth and assert that such it self -evidently is; and he will
remark quietly that those enemies we have been quoting
to him are children of the devil and Antichrists and liars
themselves. In characterizing them he may be more out
spoken than the apostle Paul ; but he will say never a word
about himself.
Probably he would say something like this, "I have not
written unto you because ye know not the truth, but be
cause ye know it, and because no lie is of the truth. Who
is the liar, but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ?
This is the antichrist, even he who denieth the Father
and the Son.2 In this the children of God are manifest,
and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not right
eousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his
'See 2 Cor. 11. 22-31.
2 1 John 2. 21, 22.

20 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
brother."3 The only satisfaction we would get from tell
ing John that his enemies declared that his Gospel was a
lie would be the hearing of the repetition of his gospel
truth. We would hear nothing about himself. On that
subject his lips would be tightly sealed.
John has written five books of our New Testament, but
in those five books his own name occurs only five times;
and all of these occurrences of his name are in the book
of Revelation, and they tell us very little about the man
beyond the fact that the visions there recorded were
granted to him. Here, then, is one good reason why we
know so little about the apostle John. Though he had
abundant opportunity to tell us about himself, he absolutely
refuses to do it. He is as reticent in all matters of auto
biographical detail as was the Master himself. Like the
Master, he belonged to the quiet in the land. He never
sounded his own trumpet. His voice was not heard in the
streets. However, though the Master never wrote anything about
himself, we know very much about him, because others
thought it worth while to preserve a record of his doings
and sayings. Why do not the other Gospel writers tell us
more about the apostle John ? It would be safe to say that
the New Testament tells us five times as much about Peter
as it does about John. Why is this? Because all of the
New Testament writers liked Peter with all of his faults.
The Gospel according to Mark was written by one who
was Peter's constant companion and friend in much of his
ministry and one who looked upon Peter as his spiritual
father in the gospel. We naturally would expect a Gospel
narrative written by such a man to make Peter especially
prominent. We find the same prominence given to Peter
in the other synoptic Gospels and in the book of Acts ; and
Peter is mentioned oftener in the fourth Gospel than
' i John 3. 10.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 21
John is mentioned in the four Gospels put together. The
fact of the case is that Mark and Matthew and Luke and
John all admired and loved the impetuous and faulty but
loyal-hearted Peter, while neither Matthew nor Mark nor
Luke admired or loved John in the same degree.
It would be safe to say that in the book of Acts Paul's
name is mentioned ten times as often as the name of John,
and the reason is not far to seek. The book of Acts was
written by a man who was the constant companion and
close friend of the apostle Paul for many years, and to
him Paul was the greatest hero in the early history of the
church. He admired and loved Paul with a singular devo
tion; he did not admire or love John in anything like the
same degree. It never occurred to Luke that John ever
was or would be of such service to the Christian Church
as Paul had been and would be. Luke did not care par
ticularly for the apostle John; and he does not seem to
have been a favorite with any of the other writers of the
New Testament historical books.
Peter liked John. Peter could get along with anybody,
and he liked everybody. If he had written a Gospel with
his own hand, I think John would have played a more
important part in it than in any of the Gospels we have.
Then, too, John was a favorite with Jesus. If the Master
had written a Gospel, John would have occupied a larger
place in it than any other of the apostolic band. A Gospel
written by Jesus would have concerned itself more with
spiritual affinities and less with external incidents or spec
tacular occurrences than our Gospels do. In such a Gospel
Peter would have had less room and John would have come
to the front and have occupied his rightful place close to
the Master's side. Here, then, is a second reason why we
are told so little about the apostle John in our New Testa
ment books. The writers of those books either did not
appreciate him at his true worth or they cherished an active
feeling of dislike for him in their hearts.

22 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
II. John the Unrecorded and Disregarded
It has been said that the synoptic writers never mention
John specifically except to find fault with him. It is true
that the only time John is mentioned alone in the synoptic
Gospels is when we are told that he reported to Jesus that
he had forbidden a man to cast out devils in the Master's
name because the man did not follow them, and Jesus
rebuked his spirit of intolerance and told him he had made
a mistake and that henceforth he never should forbid any
one who was doing good whether he trained in their camp
or not.4 It is also true that the only times the two brothers,
James and John, are mentioned alone are when we read
that they wanted to call down fire upon the village of the
Samaritans because they were inhospitable to Jesus, and
Jesus turned upon them and rebuked them,5 and that other
time when they came with their mother to ask for the
chief seats in the Kingdom and the rest of the apostles
were moved with reasonable and righteous indignation at
their selfish attempt.6 The Master rebuked their desire
for lordship and refused their request and told' them they
did not know what they asked. These three rebukes for
the spirit of selfishness and the spirit of revenge and the
spirit of intolerance are all that the synoptics have seen
fit to record of the apostle John and his individual relation
ship to the Lord.
They mention the fact that Peter and John were sent
together to prepare for the passover meal.7 They tell us
that Peter, James, and John were present with the Lord
on three occasions when the remainder of the apostolic
band were not admitted to the same intimacy: at the rais
ing of the daughter of Jairus,8 at the transfiguration,9 and
in the garden of Gethsemane.10 They record the call to
4 Mark 9. 38; Luke 9. 49. » Mark 5. 37.
* Luke 9. 52-55. » Mark 9. 2.
« Mark 10. 35-41; Matt. 20. 20-24. w Mark 14. 33.
'Luke 22. 8.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 23
continuous ministry of the two pairs of brothers, Peter
and Andrew with James and John.11 Mark tells us that
these four had private conversation with the Master con
cerning the last things.12
In the four lists of the apostles given in the New Testa
ment the name of John is mentioned, and always among
the first four though usually the last of the four — Peter
and Andrew and James and John.13 This is all the synop
tic Gospels have to tell us about John. They mention him
usually only in groups of the apostles, and then always in
a subordinate position as the brother of James or the com
panion of Peter, or of James, or of Peter and James ; and
whenever he is isolated from the apostolic group it is to
show him ignorant and mistaken and deserving and receiv
ing the Master's rebuke. It does seem that in these writers
there was some personal animus against the apostle John
which led them either to ignore him as much as possible
in their narratives or to record only those incidents in
which he had been found worthy of blame.
If we turn to the fourth Gospel for added information
concerning John, we find that his name is not mentioned
in the book from beginning to end. That name simply
drops out of the narrative, and whether for praise or blame
the personality of the apostle John is concealed as far as
the facts will allow. We are told that the sons of Zebedee
went fishing with Peter on the sea of Tiberias and were
in the group to whom the risen Lord appeared,14 but that
is the nearest approach in the whole Gospel to any definite
identification of the apostle John with the events narrated.
Peter is just as prominent in this Gospel as in any other.
We have long conversations of Jesus with Nathanael and
Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman and Andrew and
u Mark 1. 19, 20; Matt. 4. 21, 22; Luke 5. 8-11.
n Mark 13. 3-5.
a Mark 3. 16-19; Matt. 10. 2-4; Luke 6. 14-16; Acts 1. 13.
14 John 21. 2.

24 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Philip and Judas not Iscariot. The Lord seems to have
talked freely with these individuals and with the group of
the disciples and with the multitudes again and again; but
as far as this narrative is concerned he might seem never
to have had a word with the apostle John alone. No con
versation between these two is recorded in this book.
There are three short sentences in the fourth Gospel
which may have been spoken by John. If we decide' that
he was the unnamed disciple who with Andrew first left
John the Baptist to follow after Jesus, he may have been
the one who asked Jesus, "Rabbi, . . . where abidest
thou?"15 It would seem more probable, however, that
Andrew was the spokesman on this occasion and that John
was silent, as usual, and allowed his companion to speak
for both. If we identify John as that disciple who re
clined at the table during the Last Supper in the position
nearest the Lord, then he was the one who asked concern
ing the betrayer, "Lord, who is it?"16 However, we read
that that question was put into his mouth by Peter and
really belonged to Peter himself. If we conclude that John
was the disciple whom Jesus loved, mentioned four times
in this Gospel and nowhere else in the New Testament,
then he was the one who said to Peter when that stranger
called to them from the shore of the sea of Tiberias, "It
is the Lord."17
These three short sentences are the only ones we can
assign to the apostle John with any probability; and of the
three only the last would seem to be his own in any true
sense or with any degree of certainty. It consists of three
short words in the Greek, 'O tcvpidg kanv, but those three
words summarize the aim of the entire Gospel and express
the whole endeavor of John's writing and life — to point

u John i. 38.
16 John 13. 25.
17 John 21. 7.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 25
out, to call attention to, and to identify Jesus as Lord. At
the beginning of the Gospel stands John the Baptist saying,
"Behold, the Lamb of God !" and at the close of the Gospel
stands the apostle John saying, "It is the Lord." That is all
John says in the fourth Gospel. It is the whole of his
gospel message to men. Peter talks much in this Gospel,
as in all of the others, and many more of the disciples say
many things. John says only three words ; and this fourth
Gospel represents him as the same quiet, silent, listening,
unobtrusive, and seemingly subordinate and unimportant
individual the synoptics had pictured for us.
Nevertheless, it tells us one new thing about him which
we never might have suspected from their narratives. We
gathered from them that the other evangelists did not like
John very well. We learn from the fourth Gospel that
Jesus loved him more than he loved any other man. That
fact in itself discloses more concerning John's inner charac
ter than the record of many sayings and incidents might
have done.
In the book of Acts the name of John appears in con
nection with two narratives only. We are told that he was
with Peter at the gate of the temple when the lame man
was healed, and afterward was brought with Peter before
the Sanhedrin,18 but here, as always, Peter is the spokes
man and the prominent character and John is associated
with him as a silent and sympathetic companion. In the
eighth chapter we are told how Peter and John went down
into Samaria to take care of the converts resulting from
Philip's, evangelistic campaign,19 and John must have taken
his share in the preaching and the ministry of those days ;
but all of the recorded talking is done by Peter, and John
seems simply to have stood by and to have assisted as need
required. The prominent figures in the book of Acts are
Peter and Paul, Stephen and Philip, Barnabas, Silas, and
M Acts 3. 1 to 4. 22.
M Acts 8. 14-25-

26 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Timothy, James the brother of Jesus, Apollos, Aquila, and
Priscilla. John seems to be of secondary importance still.
Once again the name of John is mentioned. In the
Epistle to the Galatians Paul says that James and Cephas
and John were reputed to be pillars of the church at Jeru
salem when Barnabas and he visited there.20 Then John
drops out of notice in the New Testament until we come
to the book of Revelation, where his name occurs five
times as the seer and the writer of the visions there re
corded.
III. John in the New Testament
We now have outlined all the sources of information
concerning the life of the apostle John, and we have seen
how surprisingly meager is the information which these
sources furnish us. Upon the basis of the few facts they
supply we will attempt to construct his biography. We
do not know where or when he was born. Possibly
his birthplace was Bethsaida. We know that Philip was
from Bethsaida and that this was the city of Peter and
Andrew.21 We know that James and John were associated
with Peter and Andrew in the fishing business at the time
of their call to the discipleship with Jesus.22 It would be
natural to suppose that business partners would be fellow
townsmen. If so, then five of our Lord's apostles — and
the five always mentioned first in our New Testament lists
of the apostles — were from the same provincial town.
Not one of the apostles was called from the city of Jeru
salem. All of the first preachers of the gospel were country
bred. The Lord seemed to consider that the best arrange
ment in the beginning, and the Lord seems to consider that
the best arrangement to-day. The country still furnishes
us our preachers. It is notorious that city churches are for

20 Gal. 2. 9.
21 John 1. 44.
22 Luke 5. 10.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 27
the most part ministerially barren ; but that is nothing new
in the history of the Christian Church. City pulpits always
have been filled with country lads. The country has sup
plied the city with religious as well as other leadership. All
indications would seem to point to either Bethsaida or
Capernaum as the probable birthplace and home of the
apostle John, and of these two Bethsaida seems the more
likely. The name "John," 'Ia>av7/c, is Greek and represents the
Hebrew, l?1?^? Jehochanan, or "gn^ Jochanan, which
means, "Jehovah is gracious." It has a modern equivalent
in the German name, Gotthold.
We know the names of four members of the family.
James probably was an older brother, since his name
usually precedes that of John when the two are mentioned
together. The father's name was Zebedee and the mother's
name was Salome. The family probably was well to do.
We think this for several reasons: 1. They had hired serv
ants.23 They belonged to the employer class, and that must
have meant that they had an assured income and some
capital. 2. Salome was one of the women who ministered
unto Jesus of their substance.24 That must have meant that
she had money to give away, means sufficient to permit
her to be benevolent and to help to provide the necessities
for the apostolic band. 3. She was one of the women who
bought spices and came to anoint Jesus in the tomb.25 Her
purse was still open; her means had not been exhausted
by all her previous giving.
4. It may be that John was known to the high priest
and had the right of entrance into the high priest's court
and was able to bring Peter in to see the trial of Jesus
there.26 If John was the "other disciple" mentioned in this
connection, this personal acquaintance with the high priest
and his household may be an indication of a higher social
23 Mark 1. 20. 2B Mark 16. 1.
•* Luke 8. 3; Mark 15. 41. 26 John 18. 15, 16.

28 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
rank than that of the other apostles. Such acquaintance
ship is more possible at least to the prosperous middle class
than to the very poor. 5. At the cross Jesus gave his
mother into John's keeping, and we read that John took
her unto his own home.27 If the statement that John took
Mary unto his own home "from that hour" is to be inter
preted literally, it must mean that John had a home in Jeru
salem at this time. A Galilsean fisherman could not have
left his business for some years and then have acquired
property in Jerusalem unless he had some independent
fortune to draw upon.
To these five indications of some superior standing and
wealth we possibly may add, as a sixth, the request which
Salome made for her sons that they might sit, one on the
right hand and one on the left hand, in the Lord's king
dom.28 Why should she suggest that any preeminence be
granted to them? They do not appear to have been pre
eminent in influence or in service, according to the narra
tives in our Gospels. What right had she or they to set
up any claim to preeminent honor in the days of the coming
triumph of the Messiah-King? Could it be that they re
garded themselves as belonging to the aristocracy among
the disciples of the Lord? Did they consider themselves
of a superior social rank, sufficient to guarantee their right
to lord it over the rest a little, or at least to exercise au
thority over them for their good ? Was it possible that they
had put more money into the enterprise than any other
family had, and on the basis of their financial flotation they
felt they had first claim on the honors and rewards of the
Messianic kingdom?
Their love for the Master may have been just as sincere
and their loyalty to the Lord and to his program may have
been unwavering throughout, and yet this feeling may have
been cherished at the same time, that money and social
* John 19. 27.
*» Matt. 20. 20.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 29
standing ought to be recognized in the distribution of the
prizes in the end. Had not the Lord said, "Whosoever
hath, to him shall be given"?29 Jesus had to make it
perfectly clear at this time that the only preeminence
granted in his Kingdom was granted not to preeminent
wealth nor social rank, but only to preeminent ministry in
service and sacrifice.
Now, if this were true, that Salome and James and John
had cherished a feeling of family superiority and exclu-
siveness, it would go far to explain that feeling of personal
dislike for them which we more than half suspected the
other disciples to have, and in itself it would be a sufficient
reason for the indignation concerning the two brethren
which moved the ten at this time, while it would furnish
one possible and plausible ground for the conceiving and
preferring of such a request by Salome and her sons. For
some cause they seemed to think that there was a good
chance at least for James and John to obtain the chief
honors next to those held by Jesus himself. It may have
been because they felt that they were more aristocratic
than the rest, and the best things belonged to them by that
right. Another reason for this presumptuous request has been
suggested. Their superior claim may have rested upon
relationship. In John 19. 25 we read that among the
women who were standing by the cross of Jesus were Mary
his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clo-
pas, and Mary Magdalene. How many women are enumer
ated here? Three or four? If only three, then Mary the
mother had a sister also named Mary. Two Marys in one
family are not to. be accepted without good reason. If four
women are mentioned, then the sister of Mary the mother
of Jesus is not named. When we turn to Mark 15. 40 we
find a list of the women beholding the crucifixion, and

*> Matt. 13. 12.

30 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
among them are named Mary Magdalene, and Mary the
mother of James the less and of Joses, and Salome. If
these lists are parallel, then Salome in Mark's list may take
the place of the sister of Mary the mother of Jesus in the
list by John.
When we remember that John mentions neither his own
name nor that of James nor that of Salome anywhere in
the fourth Gospel, but prefers certain phrases to represent
them instead of their own names, we may be inclined to
conclude that the sister of the mother of Jesus mentioned
by John is his own mother Salome. If so, then Jesus and
James and John were cousins ; and this request for prefer
ence over the ten and all the other disciples came from his
cousins and his aunt. His own brethren had refused to
believe in him. Among his followers these cousins were
the nearest of kin. They may have considered that a good
reason for asking to sit at his right hand and at his left
in the Kingdom. We are inclined to regard these two
things, their family aristocracy (including their superior
education and means) and their family relationship, as
constituting two elements of their hope that Jesus would
give them the preference over their fellows.
A third and still better reason for the hope they had
within them was the fact that John clearly was the favorite
among the twelve and that James shared with him the
privilege of closer intimacy with the Lord. If Jesus really
did like them better than the others, let him prove it by
promising them now the favorites' final reward. If James
and John had any natural or acquired refinement of manner
which superior advantages in home or school or society had
furnished them, Jesus, who had a natural affinity for all
the refinements of life, would like them all the better on
that account. If they were the sons of his mother's sister,
his own cousins by blood relationship, he would be drawn
to them all the more on that account. If Salome was
like Mary, and her sons were like herself, then to that

THE APOSTLE JOHN 31
extent heredity would have helped to make the characters
of James and John congenial to that of Jesus.
Salome surely was a good woman, religious without
reservation, capable of entire consecration to the cause she
espoused, ready to give up to it her substance and her
sons, ready to furnish it forth as far as in her lay with both
money and men and to grant it ungrudgingly the devotion
of her own life. She was one of those mothers who have
influenced world history for good by the careful training
of their children into a love for the highest and best and a
corresponding hatred for the low and the mean. Probably
John owed more to her than to any other mortal before he
met Jesus. She started him right, and he went in a straight
line through life. He responded to the highest truth which
shone upon him as naturally as a flower might open to
the sun. Like the Master he increased in wisdom as he
increased in stature, and he increased in grace as gradually
and as quietly and as normally as he increased in knowl
edge and strength.
There seems to have been no shock or crisis anywhere
in his religious development. When John the Baptist began
preaching at the Jordan, and it became apparent that the
voice of prophecy had awakened once more in the land
of Israel, John the son of Salome at once became a disciple,
and tarried in the company of this master, listening eagerly
to his prophecies and learning much from his spirit and
ways. When John the Baptist pointed out Jesus, John the
son of Salome became one of the first disciples of this new
Master, passing as readily from the discipleship of the
Baptist into that of Jesus as he had passed from the in
structions of his mother to those of the Jordan evangelist.
We read in John 3. 21, "He that doeth the truth cometh to
the light." That seemed axiomatic to John. Anybody
who sought for the truth would come to the light, just as
soon as the light was seen, as a matter of course. That
had been the way with his own life throughout.

32 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
In this respect he was the very antipode of the apostle
Paul. Paul's life had been revolutionized by that Damas
cus vision. He had been transformed from the chief
antagonist of Christianity into its chief propagandist. He
had been changed from Saul the persecuting Pharisee into
Paul the preacher and apostle. He was converted ; and his
conversion made him a new man. Old things had passed
away and all things had become new with him. There are
such experiences to-day and some of those who have them
seem to think that they are the most desirable experiences
any man can have. They are not only desirable but abso
lutely necessary to a man's salvation when he has once gone
wrong; but surely the experience of Paul is not the only
model experience for the human race. The experience of
John is a better experience than that of Paul.
Paul and John were both good men, and they both did
great service for the Christian Church. Suppose they sat
side by side in a testimony meeting, and we asked Paul to.
tell us when he was converted. Paul would say: "It was
on the way to Damascus. I fell upon the earth. I was
blind for three days. Then the scales fell from my eyes,
and I found that the world was a new world to me. Since
then I have been a changed man. All my aims and aspira
tions are changed. For me to live is Christ and to die is
gain." Then we ask John to tell us when he was converted, and
he would say: "I do not know. I cannot point to any
definite time or place of my conversion as Paul can. I
never had such a vision as he had there on the Damascus
desert. I never had any such crisis experience in my life.
My mother always taught me to do what was right and to
love what was good and true, and I always tried to please
her by obeying her and the precepts of the Holy Book.
Then I became a disciple of John the Baptist, and he never
had any such radical transformation of character as Paul
has just described. He was filled with the Holy Spirit from

THE APOSTLE JOHN 33
his mother's womb. It had been foretold that that would be
true of him, and his life proved the prophecy reliable. I
tried to make my life like his while I remained with him
as his disciple. Then I became a follower of Jesus, and
he never had any experience like this Damascus experience
of Paul. The grace of God rested upon him as a child, and
he advanced in wisdom and stature and in favor with God
and men through all his boyhood and youth. He was full
of grace and truth as a man. I tried to make my life like
his as his disciple. Of his fullness I received, and grace
for grace, until now for me to live is Christ and to die is
gain." Suppose we should turn again to the apostle Paul and
say to him: "What do you think of that as a model Chris
tian experience ? Is it as good as your own ?" Do you not
suppose that the apostle Paul would say, "I am glad that
the Lord Jesus came into this world to save sinners,, of
whom I am chief ; but I would rather a thousand fold that
my life throughout had been like that of the apostle John
or that of John the Baptist or that of my Master and Lord.
John's life made him worthy of being chosen as an apostle,
but I always have felt that I was not worthy to be called
by that name. If I had my life to live over again I would
try my best to make it like that of Jesus or John the Fore
runner or John the Beloved" ?
Let people who have clear and definite conversions re
joice in them. Let equally good Christians who have no
such definite transformation of character to point out in
their past experiences rejoice that such a crisis has not
been necessary with them. The Johannine type of religious
development is a higher and better type for us to covet
and to endeavor to realize in the Christian home and the
Christian Church.30 The Pauline type is a blessed possi-

80 It is the type represented by Origen, Thomas a Kempis, Melanch-
thon, Bengel, Zinzendorf, and Wesley.

34 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
bility when the Johannine type has not been attained.31
The normal and model character will recognize the truth
at its first revelation and will love the truth from the first
moment of its recognition. That was the character John
had. That made him the most devoted disciple of Jesus;
and that made him the disciple whom Jesus loved.
He was made one of the Chosen Three, and accompanied
Jesus through the years of his ministry. He was the last
at the cross, and to him Jesus committed the charge of
Mary the mother. He was the first of the apostles at the
open tomb, and the first to have faith in the fact of the
Lord's resurrection. He was in the upper room and at
Pentecost and remained in Jerusalem as one of the pillars
of the church for some years afterward. Later he was an
exile on the island of Patmos and there the marvelous
visions of the Apocalypse were granted him. These he
wrote down in a book. Still later he wrote the fourth
Gospel in order that men might believe that Jesus was the
Christ. Later still he wrote three epistles which were
cherished in the church as the last memorials of the last of
the apostolic band. So much we may gather from the
Scriptures themselves. To fill out this meager outline of
Jolm's later'life we must look outside of the Scriptures and
into the records of church tradition concerning him.
IV. John in Tradition and Legend
The traditions concerning John are of varying value.
Some of them have all the marks of truthfulness and come
to us upon reasonably good authority. Others have all the
marks of pure invention and evidently are the product of
unbridled imagination. We mention first a few of the more
reliable: i. We are told that John remained in Jerusalem
until the death of Mary the mother of Jesus, about A. D.
48. Irenseus tells us that later he took up his residence in
21 It is the type represented by Augustine, Luther, and Calvin.

THE APOSTLE -JOHN 35
»
Ephesus32 ; and the early church believed that he composed
the fourth Gospel and the three .epistles while he was living
in this city. Most of the more trustworthy anecdotes con- „
cerning the apostle are related of him during his residence
in Ephesus in his old age.
Between the residence in Jerusalem and the residence in
Ephesus there is an interval of possibly a score of years
of which we know nothing at all. Tertullian says that John
came to Rome in this period and there was thrown into a
cauldron of boiling oil, from which he came forth unhurt.
He adds that John immediately was banished to his island
exile.33 Jerome repeats this story and declares that John
came forth from this bath in boiling oil more sound and
vigorous than when he was thrown in, and he bids us
observe that, although John afterward died a natural death,
he at this time "in spirit failed not of martyrdom, and that
he drank the cup of confession which the three young men
in the fiery furnace also drank, although the persecutor did
not shed his blood."34 With this single glimpse of the
apostle's experiences in this interval we may trace his
course from Jerusalem to Rome and from Rome to Ephesus
and from Ephesus to Patmos and from Patmos to Ephesus
again. Of these four places of residence we may quote
scriptural authority for the first and the fourth. We may
feel rather doubtful about the second, though it comes
within the range of possibility.35 We may feel reasonably
assured about the third, because of the practical concur
rence of all authorities among the church Fathers at this
point.

?
32 Adv. Haer. III. 1,1:3,4. So also Apollonius, Polycrates, Clement
of Alexandria, Origen, Tertullian, Eusebius, Jerome.
33 De Praesc. Haer., 36.
34 Commentary on Matthew 20. 23.
35Renan, L'Antechrist, XXX, and Salmon, Introduction, p. 396,
think it probable that John was with Peter in Rome before Peter's
martyrdom and that John escaped afterward into Asia Minor.

36 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
The city of Ephesus seems to have been peculiarly privi
leged in the apostolic age. Its Christian church was founded
by the apostle Paul, and he labored longer in this city than
in any other of the great centers of his missionary activity.
To the church in Ephesus Paul wrote his most sublime
epistle, the final formulation of his faith. Timothy was a
bishop in Ephesus in later days ; and then, last of all, the
apostle John came here to live and blessed all the neighbor
ing churches with his presence and preaching, his admoni
tion and instruction, his Gospel and epistles, his apostolic
authority and his holy life.
It was the fitting place for the last of the apostles to
spend the last of his days. It was the chief vantage point
for apostolic direction and supervision. Jerusalem had
fallen. Rome had not yet become the center of Christen
dom. Asia Minor was the most vital portion of the Chris
tian commonwealth at this period, and Ephesus was the
greatest city of Asia Minor. It was here, as in a watch
tower, that the aged apostle established himself. It was
from this center that he went out upon his apostolic visita
tions, and it was from this center that he sent out his Gospel
and his epistles, and it was in this center that he composed
the Apocalypse and preached and lived the gospel possi
bilities revealed in Christ.36
2. Polycarp was a disciple and friend of the apostle John,
and Irenasus was a disciple and friend of Polycarp. Irenseus
tells us that Polycarp said that "John, the disciple of the
Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus
within, rushed out of the bathhouse without bathing, ex
claiming, Let us fly, lest even the bathhouse fall down,
because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within."87

36 The modern name of Ephesus is Ayasalouk, which is a corruption
of S710S QeSXoyos, "the saintly divine," "the holy theologian," the name
given to John and thus preserved to this day.
"Adv. Haer., III. iii. 4.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 37
We can well believe that this story is true. Cerinthus was
a heretic, and it would be like John to show his reprobation
of a heretic by such action as Polycarp had witnessed.
3. Another side of the apostle's character is well illus
trated in a story told us by Clement of Alexandria. He
declares that the story is no myth but a true tradition con
cerning John; and it is so characteristic of the apostle of
love that we are ready to accept it on his authority. He
tells us that John was invited from Ephesus into all the
contiguous territories, to ordain ministers and to appoint
bishops and to set in order all the affairs of the churches.
Then he proceeds: "Having come to one of the cities not
far off, and seeing a youth, powerful in body, comely in
appearance, and ardent, he said to the bishop appointed,
'This youth I commit to you in all earnestness, in the pres
ence of the church, and with Christ as witness.' Then he
set out for Ephesus.
"The bishop taking home the youth committed to him,
reared, kept, cherished, and finally baptized him. After this
he relaxed his stricter care and guardianship, under the idea
that the seal of the Lord he had set on him was a complete
protection to him. But on his obtaining premature free
dom, some youths of his age, idle, dissolute, and adepts in
evil courses, corrupt him. First they entice him by many
costly entertainments ; then afterward by night issuing forth
for highway robbery, they take him along with them. Then
they dared to execute together something greater. He by
degrees got accustomed; and from greatness of nature,
when he had gone aside from the right path, and like a
hard-mouthed and powerful horse, had taken the bit be
tween his teeth, rushed with all the more force down into
the depths; and having entirely despaired of salvation in
God, he no longer meditated what was insignificant, but
having perpetrated some great exploit, now that he was
once lost, he made up his mind to a like fate with the rest.
Taking them and forming a band of robbers, he was the

38 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
prompt captain of the bandits, the fiercest, the bloodiest,
the crudest.
"Time passed, and some necessity having emerged, they
send again for John. He, when he had settled the other
matters on account of which he came, said, 'Come now, O
bishop, restore to us the deposit which I and the Saviour
committed to thee in the face of the church, over which
you preside, as witness.' The other was at first confounded',
thinking that it was a false charge about money which he
did not get ; and he could neither believe the allegation re
garding what he had not, nor disbelieve John. But when
he said, 'I demand the young man, and the soul of the
brother,' the old man, groaning deeply, and bursting into
tears, said, 'He is dead.' 'How and what kind of death?'
'He is dead,' he said, 'to God. For he turned wicked and
abandoned, and at last a robber; and now he has taken
possession of the mountain in front of the church, along
with a band like him.' Rending, therefore, his clothes, and
striking his head with great lamentation, the apostle said:
'It was a fine guard of a brother's soul I left! But let a
horse be brought me, and let some one be my guide on the
way.' He rode away, just as he was, straight from the
church. "On coming to the place he is arrested by the robbers'
outpost; neither fleeing nor entreating, but crying, 'It was
for this I came. Lead me to your captain,' who meanwhile
was waiting, all armed as he was. But when he recognized
John as he advanced, he turned, ashamed, to flight. The
other followed with all his might, forgetting his age, crying :
'Why, my son, dost thou flee from me, thy father, unarmed,
old ? Son, pity me. Fear not ; thou hast still hope of life. I
will give account to* Christ for thee. If need be, I will
willingly endure thy death, as the Lord did death for us.
For thee I will surrender my life. Stand, believe, Christ
hath sent me.'
"And he, when he heard, first stood, looking down ; then

THE APOSTLE JOHN 39
threw down his arms, then trembled and wept bitterly. And
on the old man approaching, he embraced him, speaking for
himself with lamentations as he could, and baptized a
second time with tears, concealing only his right hand. The
other pledging, and assuring him on oath that he would
find forgiveness for himself from the Saviour, beseeching
and falling on his knees, and kissing his right hand itself,
as now purified by repentance, led him back to the church.
Then, by supplicating with copious prayers, and striving
along with him in continual fastings, did not depart, as
they say, till he restored him to the church, presenting in
him a great example of true repentance, and a great token
of regeneration, a trophy of the resurrection for which we
hope."38 How like the apostle John all of this seems ! — his attrac
tion to the promising youth and his intuitive perception of
his possibilities', the unhesitating and public rebuke of the
bishop, the love which defied danger and strove with the
recalcitrant until his heart was melted and his will was
won, and in it all that unbounded confidence in the power
of his gospel to help and to save. We see no compelling
reason to question the truth of this tale.
4. Jerome tells us that in his extreme old age John, no
longer able to walk, was carried to the church; and there
he was not able to preach a sermon but contented himself
with repeating over and over, "Little children, love one
another, love one another, love one another." When the
disciples wearied of these words and asked him why he
said nothing more he answered that this was the Lord's
commandment, and if this were done it would be all-suffi
cient. Prceceptum Domini est, et, si solum fiat, sufiicit.39
5. All the traditions seem to agree that John outlived
all the other apostles and died in Ephesus in extreme old

38 Quis Div. Salv., XLII. Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. ii, p. 603.
39 Commentary on Gal. 6. 10,

40 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
age. Jerome says that he lived sixty-eight years after the
crucifixion, and that would fix his death somewhere about
A. D. 100. Epiphanius says that John was ninety-four
years old when he died, and Suidas says he lived to be one
hundred and twenty. We know as little about the date of
his death as we do about the date of his birth. We think
it probable that he was the youngest of the apostles, and
possibly ten years younger than Jesus.40 We are ready to
accept the tradition that he lived longest, surviving the
whole band of the apostles, and that he died a very old
and feeble man.
There are many other traditions concerning John, some
of which may have some basis of truth, but most of which
are the product of wild imaginations. We mention a few
of these as samples of grotesqueness in ecclesiastical fiction :
i. John Cassian, a hermit of the fifth century and the foun
der of monasticism in the West, says that it had been told
him that John in his old age had a tame partridge. One
day he was amusing himself with it and caressing the bird
by stroking its head when a young man returning from
the chase found him engaged in this trivial occupation and
said: "Art thou that John whose singular renown led even
a man like me to desire to know thee? How, then, canst
thou occupy thyself with an employment like this?" The
apostle replied, "What is that in thy hand?" He answered,
"A bow." Said John, "Why dost thou not always carry
it bent?" He answered, "Because it would in that case
lose its elasticity; and, when it was necessary to use it, it
would fail me from the too continuous strain." "Just so,"
said the apostle. "Let not this slight and brief relaxation
of mind perplex thee, since without it the spirit would
flag from unremitted strain, and it would fail me when the
call of duty came." It is a pretty story. It may be a true
story. It comes from a rather remote source, however, and

40 So Krenkel, Der Apostel Johannes, p. 129.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 41
it has been told in substance of so many other people as
well as John that we are not disposed to give it much credit.
2. In the Acts of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John
we read that John's fame spread as far as to Rome, and
the emperor sent to Ephesus for him. On the journey
from Ephesus to Rome John ate nothing except one date
on each Lord's Day and the soldiers who brought him to
the emperor declared that he was a god and no man, for
he could live without eating bread. He bore his witness
before Domitian, and the emperor demanded a sign that
what he said was true. "Immediately John asked for a
deadly poison. They brought it on the instant. John,
therefore, having taken it, put it into a large cup, and filled
it with water, and mixed it, and cried out with a loud voice,
and said, 'In thy name, Jesus Christ, Son of God, I drink
the cup which thou wilt sweeten ; and the poison in it do
thou mingle with thy Holy Spirit, and make it become a
draught of life and salvation, for the healing of soul and
body, for digestion and harmless assimilation, for faith not
to be repented of, for an undeniable testimony of death
as the cup of thanksgiving.'
"When he had drunk the cup, those standing beside
Domitian expected that he was going to fall to the ground
in convulsions. And when John stood, cheerful, and talked
with them safe, Domitian was enraged against those who
had given the poison, as having spared John. But they
swore by the fortune and health of the king, and said that
there could not be a stronger poison than this. And John,
understanding what they were whispering to one another,
said to the king: 'Do not take it ill, O king, but let a trial
be made and thou shalt learn the power of the poison.
Bring some condemned criminal from the prison.' And
when he had come, John put water into the cup, and swirled
it round, and gave it with all the dregs to the condemned
criminal. And he, having taken it and drunk, immediately
fell down and died." It is somewhat of a relief to us to

42 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
read further that John told the emperor that he did not
desire to become a murderer in his august presence and
taking the dead man by the hand he raised him up alive.41
This is a sample of many of the marvelous tales which
gathered about the name of the great apostle.
3. One of the most amusing of John's miracles, recorded
in the Apocryphal Acts of Saint John, is thus reported by
Salmon in his Introduction to the New Testament:42 "On
their journey the party stopped at an uninhabited caravan
serai. They found there but one bare couch, and having
laid clothes on it they made the apostle lie on it, while the
rest of the party laid themselves down to sleep on the floor.
But John was troubled by a great multitude of bugs, until,
after having tossed sleepless for half the night, he said to
them, in the hearing of all, T say unto you, O ye bugs, be
ye kindly considerate ; leave your home for this night, and
go to rest in a place which is far from the servants of God.'
"At this the disciples laughed, while the' apostle turned to
sleep, and they conversed gently, so as not to disturb him.
In the morning the first to awake went to the door, and
there they saw a great multitude of bugs standing. The
rest collected to view, and at last John awoke and saw like
wise. Then (mindful rather of his grateful obligation to
the bugs <than of the comfort of the next succeeding
traveler) he said, 'O ye bugs, since ye have been kind and
have observed my charge, return to your place.' No sooner ,
had he said this and risen from the couch, than the bugs
all in a run rushed from the door to the couch, climbed up
the legs, and disappeared into the joinings. And John said,
'See how these ereatures, having heard J.he voice of a man,
have obeyed ; but we, hearing the voice of God, neglect and
disobey; and how long, how long?'"
We need not spend any time upon stories like these. We
do not even care to ask whether any experience of the
41 Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. viii, p. 561.
42 Salmon, Introduction to the New Testament, p. 350.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 43
apostle ever furnished the slightest basis of fact for such a
narrative. 4. In spite of the fact that a warning and correction had
been appended to the fourth Gospel,43 the belief maintained
itself that the apostle John never had died. One tradition
stated that he made provision for the care of the church
after his departure and then asked some of the brethren
to accompany him with baskets and spades. Coming to the
grave of a certain Christian, he told them to dig; and as
they did so he urged them to make the trench deep. When
it was finished he threw his outer garments into it and
•stood and prayed : "Receive the soul of thy John. . . . 'And
as I go to thee, let the fire withdraw, let the darkness be
overcome, let the furnace be slackened, let Gehenna be
extinguished, let the angels follow, let the demons be
afraid, let the princes be broken in pieces, let the powers
of darkness fall, let the places on the right hand stand firm,
let those on the left abide not, let the devil be muzzled, let
Satan be laughed to scorn, let his madness be tamed, let
his wrath be broken, let his children be trodden under foot,
and let all his root be uprooted ; and grant to me to accom
plish the journey to thee, not insulted, not despitefully
treated, and to receive what thou hast promised to those
who live in purity, and who have loved a holy life." Then
he sent the brethren away, and when they came back on
the morrow they did not find him, but his sandals were
lying there, and a fountain was welling up at that place.44. .
5. Another legend says that he was buried, but that he
was only asleep in his grave; and Augustine tells us that
it had been reported to him that the ground above the grave
rose and fell with John's breathing and that the moving
dust bore its continuous witness to the truth that the apostle
though laid to rest was alive and breathing still.45

43 John 21. 23.
44 Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. viii, p. 563.
45 Tract, in Joh., cxxiv, 2.

44 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
6. Still another legend declared that John had been trans
lated, like Elijah, and would appear again to herald the
second coming of the Lord. The Greek Church still ob
serves the Feast of the Translation of the Body of John.
Beza tells us that an impostor appeared in his day who
claimed to be the apostle John returned to the earth. This
claimant was sent back to heaven, like Elijah, in a chariot
of fire ; for he was burned at the stake in Toulouse.
We dismiss all these legends as unworthy of any serious
consideration, and we turn back to the more trustworthy
traditions and to the facts recorded in the New Testament
to see if we can derive from a careful study of them any
vital and consistent conception of the man of whom these
things are told.
V. John the Son of Thunder
We do not know as much of the apostle John as most
people think we do.. We know too little to be absolutely
certain about any character analysis we may attempt to
present. Of one thing, however, we may feel assured.
Whatever characterization the Master may have given to
John will be a reliable one. Now, the Master gave a name
to James and to John which must have been suggested by
some peculiarity of their nature and conduct, something
which made them different from other men and worthy to
bear the title he chose for them and assigned to them for
their very own. The Master called them, Boanerges, Sons
of Thunder! What an utterly surprising fact that is to
begin with!
We thought the apostle John was gentle and sweet. We
thought he was one of these loving, clinging, delicate, sensi
tive souls who would shrink from anything which was
startling or shocking or loud. We thought there was some
thing refined and girlish and effeminate about the apostle
John; and the Master calls him Sir Thunderclap, Boaner-

THE APOSTLE JOHN 45
ges, a Son of Thunder! The Master probably was right
in giving him that name. It must have suited him and
there must have been good and sufficient^ reasons for it or
the Lord never would have chosen that name for him. It
would be well for us to begin our study of John's character
from this point of view. Here will be a fundamental
element in his make-up.
Why was John called a son of thunder? 1. It surely was
not because he had a loud voice or a boisterous manner.
It was not because he roared in his talking. It was not
because he was a man of thundering speech. There have
been preachers whose heavy voices shook the buildings in
which they spoke and whose tones rolled like thunder
among the rafters, and they may have thought that they
were Boanerges like James and John. There have been
men who measured their personal satisfaction with their
own performance in the pulpit according to the degree in
which they had wrought themselves up into a storm of
emotion or a whirlwind of passion, and according as they
freely perspired and fairly bellowed they regarded them
selves a thundering success. They were Boanerges of a
sort; but they were not like James and John. Jesus was
too quiet himself to be attracted by any habitual tempestu-
ousness of manner. James and John would not have be
longed to the Chosen Three if they could have been heard
a quarter of a mile every time they spoke. Even Elijah
had learned that an earthquake and a whirlwind and fire
were not as impressive and as helpful as a still small voice.
We feel sure that the title which Jesus gave did not mark
some personal peculiarity of manner or speech, but, rather,
called attention to some deeper characteristic of the inner
spirit of the man.
2. Some have thought that James and John were given
this name because they were disciples of John the Baptist,
whose preaching startled the whole land like a thunderclap,
whose appeals to conscience were like thunderbolts, and

46 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
whose denunciations of wrongdoing rolled like thunder
clouds over the hearts of men. John the Baptist was the
Elijah -of the New Testament. Jesus said that James and
John had the spirit of the Elijah of the Old Testament.
That spirit of the old Elijah was the spirit of the new
Elijah and probably * James and John had learned it from
him. In so far as it may have represented a spirit of in
tolerance, a spirit of harshness which would visit quick
judgment upon the wrongdoer or would leave the sinner
to the endless endurance of his fate, it did not agree with
the spirit of Christ; and it needed to be rebuked by him.
There are some preachers to-day whose* whole ministry
is like that of John the Baptist. Their sermons always are
full of thunder and lightning. They always are striking
at something or somebody. They always are "denouncing
present conditions. They lay the ax at the root of the
tree and, not content with that, they lay to with thundering
blows until the tree seems to be tottering to its fall. The
whole heaven gets black while they talk and the muttering
of God's wrath is about all that the people hear. John the
Baptist was very much disappointed when Jesus came. To
his surprise the ministry of Jesus was not a ministry of
vengeance and wrath. He did not wield the ax as John
• had thought he would. He did not burn up the chaff with
unquenchable fire. He did not blast and ruin and devastate.
He healed and helped and blessed and saved and preached
good tidings instead of instant and constant woe. He could
blaze with indignation when necessity required, but it was
only once or twice that he thought it necessary to blaze,
at all. His ministry was more like that of the summer sun
shine than that of the thunder cloud. Thunderstorms sobn
thunder themselves out. They do not keep thundering all
the time. They serve their purpose and then they pass
away. "These men who keep thundering all the time
generally have to steal somebody else's thunder to keep up
the supply; and they are belated individuals anyway. They

THE APOSTLE JOHN 47
belong to the dispensation of the Law; -they have not come
on into the dispensation of grace and truth. They make
the mistake of thinking that to be a Boanerges one must
be a John the Baptist. A Boanerges is one who can be a
Boanerges upon occasion and not one who is a Boanerges
all the time. A man may be a Boanerges and yet be a
disciple of Christ.
Here, then, we have a key to John's character. 3. Jesus
gave him this name because he had that in him which could
flash fire at times. A man cannot flash fire unless he has
some flint in him. It runs up and down his backbone and
it shows in his face. The old prophet said, "Therefore
have I set my face like a flint."46 Not all of the people
of God have faces like that. There are a few flintfaces in
every age and in every community, but not many are of
that caliber. John could set his face like a flint. There
were volcanic depths in his nature and there were erup
tions from those depths upon occasion, and sometimes they
came very unexpectedly and they caught the unwary in
their blistering lava floods. John was a man of intense
convictions, backed by a sublime courage and faith. He
was a man who made up his mind, and whose purpose
thereafter was unalterably fixed. He came to a knowledge
of the truth, and then he knew he was right and he was
ready to risk for the truth and for the right all that he had
and all that he was. He was a man who was ready to be
singular and exceptional and radical, and if need be dis
agreeable at any time and at any place. He was a man
" after God's own heart. He was the disciple whom Jesus
loved. Let us see this thing as clearly as we' may. John was
like Jesus. Both of them, both. John and Jesus, could be
Boanerges upon occasion. Jesus was the beloved Son, in
' whom the Father was well pleased. John was the beloved
46 Isa. 50. 7.

48 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
disciple who reclined on Jesus's breast. They are the types
of saintliness to all the world. Some people seem to think
that a saint of God, a man after God's own heart, will be
a white-complexioned, lily-fingered sentimentalist, with
dreamy eyes, and a pensively sweet and infantilely clinging
disposition. Their mental image of Jesus is that of a man
with a pale and bloodless countenance, framed in an aureole
of golden hair which is parted in the middle and falls in
flowing locks upon his shoulders and adown his back, clad
in a snow-white robe, and with his hands always spread in
benediction. The real Jesus was a Nazarene Jew, a Pales
tine carpenter, with hands made horny in toil, and with
feet blistered in long travel, full of manly vigor in form
and speech, as approachable as Abraham Lincoln, as gentle
as John Wesley, and at the same time as lionlike and bold
as Martin Luther, and as true to conscience and to principle
as John Knox; and just as full of courage and conviction
and immovable purpose of will and therefore just as dis
agreeable to many of his contemporaries as were Lincoln
and Luther, Wesley and Knox. There was nothing of
softness or effeminacy or flabbiness about our Christ, and
none of these things ought to be in any Christian saint.
Ideal sainthood has nothing to do with any of them.
How do most people picture to themselves the apostle
John? With the face of a sentimental young girl, with
dreamy, wistful, immature features, melting blue eyes, and
blonde curls falling in free abandon about his ears. We
get that face from the artists who seem to think that John
furnished the feminine quality in the company of the
twelve. John did not have the face of a girl; he had a
face set like a flint. John's hair was neither brown nor
blonde nor bleached. On the contrary, in all probability
it was as black as a coal. His eyes too were black; and
they could flash fire from their somber depths. John was
a Boanerges. He was no weakling ; he was a warrior. He
was no sentimentalist; he had too much sense. He was a

THE APOSTLE JOHN 49
man of temper as well as tenderness. He was a man of
nerve and of backbone, a man of stamina and of strength.
Jesus liked him because he was a man, and a manly man.
It is all right for a woman to be a woman, and she can
be just as womanly as she please and we will like her all
the better for it. That is her business ; but no man has any
business to enter into competition with her in that field.
John never thought of doing it. It is a great injustice to
him, for which the artists have become responsible, that
John should be doomed to be pictured so continuously
as a sweet young girl. Frederick Denison Maurice and
Charles Kingsley were looking at Leonardo da Vinci's
painting of "The Last Supper," and Maurice complained
that even that great master had given John too sentimental
and girlish a face. Kingsley asked, "Why not?" Maurice
replied : "Was not John the apostle of love ? Then in such
a world of misery and hate as this world is do you not
think he would have more furrows in his cheek than all the
other apostles?" He had more furrows in his cheek, more
vigor in his voice, greater depths of feeling and sympathy
within him, and greater possibilities of hate because greater
possibilities of love. John was a Boanerges because he was
a man of moral strength, a man of sublime courage, a man
of intense convictions, a man capable of holy heroism.
Jesus loved him for that.
His brother James must have shared this quality with
him, since he shared the title given by the Lord. We
know less about James than we do about John, but we
know that he was the first of the twelve apostles to be
martyred,47 and we know that that martyrdom pleased
the Jews. Why was that ? Was it because his courage and
his boldness had made him particularly conspicuous at this
time and therefore particularly obnoxious to all the enemies
of the Christian faith? Were they glad to have him put

a Acts 12. 2.

50 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
out of the way first of all, because he seemed to them to
be the worst of all? Then it is one of the strange and
inscrutable providences of God which permitted the one
brother to be taken as the first victim of persecution among
the apostles and then allowed all the other apostles to
follow him on that glorious roll of the martyrs, while the
other brother, who was just as much of a Boanerges as he,
should survive him and all the rest and at last die a natural
and peaceful death.
James and John were alike in their holy boldness and
high resolution. Take that request for the chief places in
the kingdom. We saw in it an exhibition of selfishness,
but there is an element of heroism in it as well. The Lord
had just been telling them about his coming condemnation,
suffering, and death. They may not have understood it
all, but they could not have misunderstood it all. They
knew that there was a cup for him to drink, and, whatever
it might be, they were resolved to drink it with him. When
he put that test question to them they did not flinch. With
out a moment's hesitation they told him that they had made
up their minds on that matter and they were ready to suffer
anything with him.
There may have been immense egotism in it, but there
was immense loyalty as well. There may have been selfish
ambition in it, but there was sublime faith as well. They
did not know what the Lord's Passion would be, but, what
ever it was, they were sure that there was a glory beyond
it, and it was in that glory they desired to have a share.
Whatever of portent there might be in the present and
whatever of disaster might loom in the immediate future,
they had faith to believe in the ultimate triumph of his
cause. As one writer has said, "It is like the buying of
land at full price in Rome when the city was in the power
of an enemy."48 It takes faith to do that, and faith of a

48 Culross, John, Whom Jesus Loved, p. 21.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 51
heroic quality. It was the faith of a Boanerges — ardent,
vehement, uncalculating, and sublime. James and John did
not need to take counsel with their brethren at that point.
They were able and willing to stand alone. They had come
to positive convictions and they were ready to risk all in
their behalf.
A Boanerges is a man with positive convictions, a man
of courage, constancy, and firmness, a man who will be
true to his convictions without failing and without flinch
ing. He will call things by their right names and he never
will compromise on any harmless euphemisms. To him
compromise always will seem to be born of cowardice.
The practical politician always is studying expediency.
The Boanerges studies only to know the right and to hit
the wrong as hard as he can with his tongue and his pen
and his fists. He never winks at sin, but faces it boldly
and strikes it everlastingly full in the front with his hardest
and straightest blows. He would rather be right than be
comfortable. He would rather stand alone than go with
the multitude to do evil. He desires to be righteous with
out respect to any other consideration. He is willing to
be singular and odd and unlike the great majority of his
fellows, but he is not willing to be mildly inoffensive in
the face of any wrong. He will make things unpleasant
for wrongdoers by what he says and by what he does,
and they are likely to call him idealistic and unpractical,
and they are apt to decide that he is an undesirable citizen.
If he would only compromise a little they could get along
with him, but there is no compromise in him, and that
makes him simply impossible.
Jesus loved John because he was a Boanerges. John was
not very popular with other people because he was a Bo
anerges. Sometimes a man who is reprobated by the
world is a man after God's own heart. Sometimes the
man who is crucified by the world is God's beloved Son.
Sometimes it happens that the man who is not the most

52 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
pleasant associate here upon the earth is the man whom
Jesus most loves. A Boanerges is more than likely to
disturb the peace. He is an admirable figure when he
belongs to another generation, but he is not so comfortable
when he is close at hand. Those who do not like to have
present conditions disturbed do not care to have a Boaner
ges around. He is apt to say things which are disconcert
ing. He is sure to call a spade a spade. He may give some
very bad names to people who would like to think that
they are at least halfway respectable. A man like John
the apostle has no patience with halfway respectability.
He is absolutely intolerant of evil in every form and in
every degree. He has such a love for the truth that he
fairly hates a lie. He is incapable of any compromise with
falsehood or any truce with sin. There was no looseness
nor laxity nor false liberality with him. John Duncan once
said: "We are not intolerant enough. Our very calling
is to be intolerant, intolerant of proved error and known
sin. A man must, however, have a clear eye and a large
heart before he has a right to be intolerant, either toward
concrete error or concrete sin."
John the apostle was such a man. He had the clear eye
and the large heart. He had intense convictions and he
was capable of the most intense moral indignation. A
contemplative man, he brooded, and then he blazed; he
thought, and then he thundered. He was not talking all the
time, but when he did speak his words often came like a clap
of thunder from a clear sky. See how that is apparent in
his writings. He hurls truth at us abruptly, like a thunder
bolt. We open the fourth Gospel and the first sentence
reads, "In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos
was with God, and the Logos was God." Chrysostom says,
"Hear how he thunders!" Augustine says, "John has
opened his words, as it were, with a burst of thunder!"
Bengel says, "This is the thunder brought down to us by
a son of thunder!" Frequently there is something of the

THE APOSTLE JOHN 53
suddenness and the unexpectedness of a thunderclap in
the style of John.
He is a son of thunder again in his denunciations of all
sinners and sin. He has no excuses to make for wrongdo
ing. He does not equivocate in his terms describing it. No
where else in the New Testament, not even in the words of
Jesus himself, do we find more irreconcilable antagonism
to evil. To him Judas is a devil and the son of perdition.49
The Jews are the children of the devil.50 Every professing
Christian who walks in the darkness is a liar, and he makes
God a liar.51 The antichrist is a liar.52 Every sinner is
a child of the devil.53 Whosoever hateth his brother is
a murderer.54 False teachers are to have no lodging in
their homes and no greeting in their streets.55 This is the
spirit of a Boanerges — vehement, irreconcilable, uncom
promising, intense in conviction and intense in denuncia
tion, a face like flint, a backbone inflexible, straightforward
in dealing, handling all subjects and all people without
gloves, calling things by their right names, demanding con
tinuous righteousness of life, and fearlessly faithful to the
truth as he saw it from the beginning to the end of his
days. "It is not surprising," says Dean Stanley, "that the
deep stillness of such a character should, like the Oriental
sky, break out from time to time into tempests of impas
sioned vehemence; still less that the character which was
to excel all others in its devoted love of good should give
indications — in its earlier stages even in excess — of that
intense hatred of evil without which love of good can
hardly be said to exist."56
Were the Samaritans unfriendly to the Master he loved ?
Then let fire from heaven fall upon their inhospitable

* John 6. 70; 17. 12. M 1 John 3. 8, 10.
B° John 8. 44. H 1 John 3. 15.
61 1 John 1. 6, 10. » 2 John 10. 11.
52 1 John 2. 22.
" Stanley, Sermons and Essays on the Apostolic Age, p. 250.

54 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
homes and consume them.57 Did any man use the name
of Jesus and refuse to follow him? Then let an injunction
be served upon him and let him be put out of business at
once.58 That was the spirit of a Boanerges manifest in
John's early life. It was a little too intolerant then, and
it needed to be corrected by Christ ; but John never lost the
Boanerges spirit, and Jesus never desired that he should.
He was the boldest of the twelve at the time of the cruci
fixion. He was the first to recover from the panic of the
Gethsemane garden. He was the one man among all of
the followers of Jesus who seems to have been near him at
the trial in the high priest's palace and nearest him during
the last hours on the cross. He was the first of them at
the empty tomb on the morning of the Easter day, and he
was the first to attain to the resurrection faith.
Did the enemies of the cross gather themselves together
against the Lord and his Anointed and seem ready to
celebrate their triumph over the Christian Church? Then
let a book be written, an Apocalypse, full of thunders and
lightnings, full of war and famine and pestilence and
plague, full of the denunciation of sin and a sublime faith
in the ultimate victory of the Lamb, a book to be like a
bugle call to high endeavor to all the future generations of
the church, a book to be a perfect tonic of inspiration to
every sturdily striving saint, a book to be a Boanerges in
print! John was the man of all men to write such a book.
Was Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, in the bathhouse
at Ephesus? Then John will not bathe there; the water
will be polluted by the heretic's presence, and the house
ought to fall down on his head. Had the bishop there at
Smyrna allowed the neophyte committed to his charge to
backslide and become the leader of the mountain banditti?
Then let him be denounced publicly, and humiliated before
all the people. "It was a fine guard of a brother's soul I
67 Luke 9. 54.
68 Luke 9. 49.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 55
left!" A Boanerges spake in that tone of cutting irony.
The spirit of a Boanerges did not die out in the old age of
John. We find it in the fourth Gospel and in the epistles,
those writings of the apostle's last days.
Can we summarize what we have been saying in a few
short sentences? 1. John was not a Boanerges because of
his loud voice. 2. He was not a Boanerges because he was
a disciple of John the Baptist. 3. He was a Boanerges
because of his own character. 4. Those qualities of charac
ter which gave him this title may be suggested by his in
tensity of conviction, his singleness of soul-devotion, his
loyalty of love, his hatred of sin, manifest in his action
and in his speech and in his writings as well. These things
made John a Boanerges. Jesus loved John because he
was a Boanerges. That disciple whom Jesus loved most
of all had in him these qualities of a Boanerges.
VI. John the Saint and Seer
How about all of this? We thought John was a saint.
We thought he was a holy man. We had thought that he
was rather maidenish in disposition, of the feminine if not
the effeminate type. We begin to see that that must be a
mistaken conception, and that the 'facts are far from war
ranting it. John must have been a man, and a man of the
heroic type, but he was a saint ; and saintliness is inconsist
ent with a ruffled temper and with vehement language. A
saint never must get angry and say and do violent things.
Is that true? Perhaps we are mistaken in that conception
too. What does Paul mean by giving us the command,
"Be ye angry"?59 We thought that we were to be meek
and lowly in spirit like our Lord. We thought that if we
were saints, or anything like what we ought to be, we would
be long-suffering and forbearing in love like the Master.
Can we imagine Jesus being angry with anyone? Did
" Eph. 4. 26.

56 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
he ever thunder out in angry tones his denunciation of
sinners and their sins? Yes, he did. In one place we are
told in so many words that he "looked round about on
them with anger."60 In other passages we read that his
anger expressed itself in his tones.61 He used the same
tones Judas used when he became angry with Mary for
wasting so much good ointment, representing so much good
money thrown away. The verb in the Greek is the same,
applied to Jesus and applied to Judas. Then, how about
the scourge of small thongs with which he drove out of
the temple the sellers of merchandise, and how about the
overturning of the tables of the money-changers? That
must have been quite a scene. That must have been far
from being a quiet scene. There must have been violence
and commotion, loud remonstrance and threatening of hand
and tongue. Such things cannot be done gently. There
was the rushing together of the multitude. There was
clamor and confusion. With flashing eye and ringing tones
Jesus mastered the mob and carried everything by storm.
Their traffic was duly licensed by the authorities, but Jesus
undertook to prohibit it at that time and place.62 John saw
it all and rejoiced in it. All the Boanerges spirit in him
was stirred, and he said, "This is the Master for me."
Then how about that denunciation of the scribes and the
Pharisees as fools and hypocrites and blind ? "Ye serpents,
ye offspring of vipers, how shall ye escape the judgment of
hell?"63 In all literature, sacred and profane, you cannot
find words which cut and hiss and burn like the words of
that invective. John heard them, and all the Boanerges
spirit in him was stirred by them; and he said again at
the close of Christ's ministry as he had at the beginning,
"This is the Master for me." Jesus was Jhe Sinless One.
Jesus was perfectly holy in conduct and speech. Yet in
his life there were occasions for such outbursts of indigna-
60 Mark 3. 5. « John 2. 13-22.
61 Matt. 9. 30; Mark 1. 43. a Matt. 23. 13-33.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 57
tion and anger as these. If need be, we must change our
conception of saintliness to make it consistent with such
experiences and with such scenes.
That gentle Jesus of the lily white hands and the seam
less and spotless white robe and with the aureole always
encircling his head is not to be found anywhere in our
Gospels. He is a pure invention of the artists and the
sentimentalists. The real Jesus was a man whose eyes
could flash with indignation and whose tones could tremble
with wrath upon occasion; and any man who is Christlike
will be capable of these things. If gross injustice does not
arouse deliberate anger within him, he has not the spirit
of the Christ.
Anger is a duty sometimes. "Anger at what is wrong,
at men who are false, ungodly, cruel, is Godlike, for his
wrath comes on the children of disobedience; and Christ
like, for he looked upon hardhearted hypocrites with anger ;
and a character incapable of such feeling would not be the
Christian ideal."64 It is all right to be angry on certain
occasions. The apostle Paul commands us, "Be ye angry !"
and he said upon another occasion, "Have this mind in you,
which was also in Christ Jesus,"65 and there is no inherent
inconsistency in the two exhortations. He who has the
mind of Christ will be angry sometimes. The saintliness
incapable of most intense indignation and righteous anger
has degenerated into softness and flabbiness. Resentment
under just provocation, sudden anger in the face of gross
injustice, is natural and inevitable in any strong character ;
and it is sanctioned in our New Testament and it is right
in itself. Any good man does well to be angry when he
sees the. innocent suffer and any outrageous triumph of evil.
Of course there is much to be said on the other side.
There is an anger which is sinful and Satanic. We are
not talking about that now. We are talking about anger
» Candlish, Commentary on Ephesians, p. 101.
"Eph. 4. 26; Phil. 2. 5.

58 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
which is godlike, the anger of our Lord and Master, the
anger of the Boanerges whom Jesus loved. We are con
cerned to show that it is wholly consistent with a saintly,
holy life. Godlike anger has its root in love. God so loved
the world that he gave his only-begotten Son for the very
sinners against whom his wrath had been displayed. Jesus
looked around upon that synagogue company with anger,
being grieved at the hardening of their hearts. He pitied
them and loved them, even while he was angry with them
for their stubborn hypocrisy. The anger of the Father and
of the Son served the purposes of their love. It will last
only until that end is reached.
Chrysostom said : "We have anger given us, not that we
may commit violence upon our neighbors, but that we may
correct those who are in sin. . . . Anger is implanted in
us as a sort of sting, to make us gnash with our teeth
against the devil, to make us vehement against him."66
Righteous anger is anger against sin. It springs from love,
and it aims at others' good. A man may be a Boanerges
and call his neighbors the children of the devil and fools
and hypocrites and snakes and the offspring of snakes, and
still be a saint. We know that is true because Jesus did
just those things. John was like Jesus. He was a Boaner
ges, intolerant of sin and denouncing sinners in thunder
tones when occasion required; and we cannot impugn his
sainthood upon these grounds. So we put down these two
characteristics of the apostle John side by side, paradoxical
though they may seem to some people. John was a Bo
anerges, and John was a saint.
i. He was the holiest man among the twelve apostles.
He had a passion for purity. He was called in the early
church 'OILagdevog, "the Virgin," for the tradition was that
he never had married and that his personal purity from his

68 Homilies on Ephesisns, II. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol.
xiii, p. 58.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 59
youth up had attracted the greater love of Jesus to him.
Polycrates, who was Bishop of Ephesus in the latter part
of the second century, wrote to Victor at Rome that John
was a priest of priestly descent and that in his old age in
Ephesus he wore a golden plate fastened on his forehead
which bore the inscription, "Holiness unto the Lord." If
that is a legend, it is a legend true to life. The aged apostle
walked before the Lord in the beauty of holiness, and holi
ness had written its seal on his brow, his body, his spirit,
his whole personality.
2. There was one characteristic of sainthood which John
seems to have possessed in full measure — the spirit of self-
effacement as far as that might be allowable or possible.
He seems to have been utterly void of the modern spirit
of self-advertising. He never willingly thrust himself to the
front. He was content always with a secondary or subordi
nate position. Somebody else might stand in the limelight ;
John preferred to stand in the shade. When the time came
for him to be active he was ready to assume responsibility ;
but as long as anyone else was present to take the initiative
John was content to allow him to lead.
This is apparent throughout the record of the Gospels,
where John always is mentioned in connection with others
who are more prominent than he. Only once in the four
Gospels is he mentioned alone. It is apparent in his own
writings, where his extreme reticence becomes character
istic throughout. His mother and his brother never are
mentioned by name, and he hides himself behind a descrip
tive phrase. It is apparent again in the history of the early
church. We read there that parties were formed, some
declaring that they were of Paul, and some of Apollos, and
some of Cephas, and some of Christ; but we never hear
of any party in that beginning history of the church declar
ing itself to be of John. He was a naturally modest man,
of a retiring disposition. It was only when all the other
apostles had died that he came to his primacy in the church.

6o JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Even then he bore himself with simple dignity and was
unassuming in conduct and speech.
An admirer of Dr. Dollinger wrote of him : "It may be
doubted whether there ever was a man who in a greater
degree combined such amazing powers with such beautiful
simplicity. He had received almost every honor which
the state or the university could bestow upon him ; he was
the friend of princes and the confidant of statesmen; he
was possessed of information which would have made a
score of men intellectually rich: and throughout it all he
had the simplicity of a child."67 We may well believe that
this description would apply to the old age of John. He
was honored above all other living men in the Christian
Church, but he was unaffected, unassuming, simple and un
selfish as a little child. Of such is the kingdom of heaven.
Such the saints always have been.
John was the very opposite of the man who is forever
talking about himself, vaunting his own deeds, and blowing
his own trumpet. Some men put in so much time doing
that that there is no time left for making their promises
good. They are first-class in advertising but third-rate in
performance. John omitted all advertising. He had
neither time nor inclination for boasting. He was meek
and lowly in spirit like his Lord. He was content to be
the least among his brethren on earth, and he became the
greatest in the Master's love and the church's reverence
and regard. The Master realized his worth in the begin
ning, but it took the church a generation or two to come
to the consciousness of it. He humbled himself so persist
ently and so effectually that the church was prone to ap
praise him at his own modest rating. It awoke at last to
the fact that Jesus had known better than other men the
incomparable exaltation of this apostle's spiritual percep
tion and the kinship of his character with the Divine.

•» Dr. Plummer, Expositor, Fourth Series, vol. i, p. 214.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 61
Is this reticence and modesty inconsistent with the spirit
of a Boanerges ? No, it is just the thing which makes the
Boanerges outburst most terrible. It is the quiet man, who
has thought much before he speaks, whose words are most
impressive when at last his silence is broken. It is the
self-restrained but ardent nature which is capable of rising
at times into the majesty and strength of a tidal wave. A
Boanerges is not a bull of Bashan, bellowing all the time.
A Boanerges is more like a Mount ^Etna, which lies for
long periods in perfect peace, but is capable at intervals of
an eruption with elemental force.
Is this modesty and reticence of John's character incon
sistent with the request made by James and himself for
the chief places in the kingdom? No, for that request evi
dently was made with the knowledge that they must prove
themselves worthy of the coveted honor by meeting all the
conditions of its bestowment; and James and John were
ready to meet those conditions, no matter what self-sacri
fice and self-abasement they might entail. The ten were
moved with indignation concerning the two brethren who
had seemed to be selfishly ambitious and desirous of gain
ing a secret advantage in a promise of preference over the
rest. They were inclined to think that James and John
were disposed to regard themselves as aristocrats anyway;
and, naturally enough, they resented any effort on their
part to insure their preeminence in the glories which lay
before. Then Jesus called the ten to him and explained that the
rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great
ones exercise authority over them, but he had given James
and John to understand that it was not to be so with
Christians. If they desired to be great among their breth
ren, they must prove themselves of the greatest service to
their brethren. If they desired to be first among the
apostles, they must minister to all the rest and be the serv
ants of all. This was the condition of preeminence in the

62 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Christian Church, an utter self-abnegation unto any extent
of sacrifice and service. He had offered them this cup to
drink; and they had been willing to drain it to the bitter
dregs. Anyone who desired might drink of this cup, and
it ought to arouse admiration and not indignation, love and
not jealousy or hate in all who would be benefited by such
uttermost consecration to the general good. With that
explanation the ten were satisfied. Their indignation cooled
before the challenge of James and John and Jesus to the
exhibition of like humility in service and sacrifice and suf
fering. With this understanding on the part of James and John
of the program of Christianity and the part they must play
to achieve any greatness in the kingdom their request be
comes a proof of their ardent desire to be as unselfish as
Jesus himself had been. Jesus made it so plain that they
could not misunderstand, and they did not withdraw their
request. They said: "We are able to meet this condition,
to drink this cup; and if this is the way to greatness, O
Lord, we are your men. With your blessing we will go
this way, to the cross and to the throne."
It was the character of Jesus himself which had capti
vated John. It was in his Kingdom that he hoped to
rank high. He would be like Jesus, and so worthy to sit
with him on his throne. His throne mate must be a mate
of his spirit as well. John knew that, and to be that was
the chief desire of his heart.
3. John was a man with a large bump of reverence.
Strong personalities had an attraction for him. Irresistibly
he was drawn to them, and unhesitatingly he gave them
his reverence and his love. Professor William Milligan
has said, "Perhaps the most marked characteristic of the
apostle John was his receptivity of disposition, his open
ness of heart for all that was true and beautiful and holy,
and the delight with which he dwelt upon it in the inmost
depths of his own soul, till it penetrated and formed his

THE APOSTLE JOHN 63
whole nature to a likeness with itself."68 When John the
Baptist began to preach, John the fisherman forsook his
nets and his home and went down to the Jordan to hear
him. He was soon convinced that the Baptist was a great
personality, the reviver of the ancient spirit of prophecy
and the forerunner of the better things to come. He be
came his loyal disciple; for the Baptist was a genius and
the greatest man the fisher lad ever had seen or known.
When he had passed from the discipleship of John to the
discipleship of Jesus, in the apostolic company he was
attracted most by Peter. Peter was the strongest character
aside from his own to be found among the twelve. John
attached himself to him, and they became inseparable com
panions in the itinerant ministry of the following years.
Disciple of John the Baptist and friend of Peter, John
became the devoted lover of the Lord as soon as Jesus had
appeared within his horizon. Even as Jesus excelled John
the Baptist and Peter and all other men, John's love for
Jesus excelled all other love. He had been the loyal disciple
of John the Baptist, he always was the faithful friend of
Peter ; but all the fervent affection of his young heart was
poured out at the feet of Jesus, and all the ardor of a
Boanerges was concentrated in the devotion of his life to
him. John reverenced Jesus as no one of the other apostles
did. John loved Jesus as he had loved no other soul on
earth. He became that disciple whom Jesus loved.
4. To John himself this seemed to be his chief distinc
tion ; he had loved Jesus and Jesus had loved him. In the
fourth Gospel he calls himself by that title, "The disciple
whom Jesus loved."69 It does not appear in any of our
Gospels that anyone else ever called John by this name.
He assumes it, because he deserved it. It belonged to him
by right of conquest. He had achieved the place nearest
the heart of the Incarnate One. That was the greatest
88 Expositor, Third Series, vol. x, p. 337.
"John 20. 2; 21. 7, 20.

64 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
honor he ever had had or ever could have. Abraham had
been called the friend of God. David was said to be a
man after God's own heart. Daniel was recorded in the
Scripture as the one loved of God. Now John had been
admitted into this glorious fellowship. Jesus had shown
by his manner and preference that John was a man after
his own heart. John had been the friend of Jesus, and
loved of Jesus, and that had been the unparalleled privilege
of his life. Jesus had called John a Boanerges, and that
title belonged to him by right ; but to John this was a better
title, and it belonged to him by right ; and so he wrote him
self down for all time to come as the one who had enjoyed
the distinction of being "the disciple whom Jesus loved."
Was that inconsistent with his modesty ? Of course not ;
it was the simple statement of the truth of the case.
Modesty never is inconsistent with truthfulness. In all
humility and in all gratitude John could modestly, truth
fully say, "He loved me, and he loved me most." It was
not a thing to boast about. If John ever had fallen to
boasting of his intimate relations with Jesus, he would
have forfeited all right to those relations at once. Love
vaunteth not itself, and that is one reason why it is beloved.
A braggart never could have been a bosom companion with
Jesus. However, that closest companionship with Jesus
was a thing to be cherished in memory and humbly and
gratefully to be acknowledged as a man's highest honor
and God's greatest gift.
John was the disciple whom Jesus loved because he was
a Boanerges, and because he was a saint, and because he was
modest and meek, and because he had an inherent rever
ence for genius and for goodness. Jesus loved John for
all these elements in his character, but the chief reason for
his love was that John loved him with a love surpassing
that of women. Love begets love. That disciple whom
Jesus loved loved Jesus more than any other disciple did.
He had a personal affection for the man Jesus. There

THE APOSTLE JOHN 65
was a bond of personal affinity between these two. Alex
ander the Great had two friends. Plutarch called one of
them Philo-Basileus, the friend of the king; and he called
the other one Philo-Alexandros, the friend of Alexander.
There was a difference between friendship for the monarch
and friendship for the man. So Grotius calls Peter Philo-
Christos, the friend of Christ, and John Philo- Jesus, the
friend of Jesus. We doubt whether it is quite fair to Peter
to make such a distinction; but there can be no question
that the title given to John rightfully belongs to him.
To the outside multitude Peter may have been the best-
known of the apostles and they may have looked upon
Peter as the official representative of the Christ, the friend
of the Messias who could answer for him when occasion
required, as in the collection of the temple tax;70 but in
the inner circle everybody knew that John was the closest
and dearest friend of Jesus. He shared his innermost
thought. He knew his purposes and plans. He was more
nearly one in spirit with Jesus than any other member of
their band. Peter always was saying: "What shall I do?
Shall I build three tabernacles here, O Lord? Shall I
smite off Malchus's ear?" John always was thinking,
"What does Jesus say? What will Jesus do?" His eye
always is on Jesus. In the fourth Gospel John himself
never is visible and Jesus never is invisible. Through the
whole book John's object seems to be to conceal himself
as far as possible and to reveal Jesus as fully as possible.
To him Jesus is the fairest among ten thousand and the
one altogether lovely; and he would have all men believe
in him even as he himself does.
Jesus had no wife. He loved no woman more than his
mother in the Nazareth home. Outside that home John
came nearest his heart. The wealth of his affection was
given to John, and John proved himself worthy of it by

70 Matt. 17. 24, 25.

66 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
returning it in full measure. It was the greatest distinction
ever given to a man.
5. John was a seer. In the primary sense of the term
it was true of him. It may have been because he was the
youngest in the apostolic company that he seems to have
been able to see better and to see more than the others did.
He calls himself "He that hath seen."71 He seems to have
been the only one who saw the water and the blood flowing
from the Saviour's side. When Peter and John went run
ning together to the empty tomb to see what had become
of Jesus, John the younger outran Peter and came first to
the tomb and stooped and looked in and saw all that was
needed to satisfy him in this matter. Peter came panting
behind him and never thought of stooping at the entrance
as John had. His eyes would not serve him there in that
early morning dawn. He entered the tomb where he could
give to these things the closer inspection his older eyes
made necessary to him.72 When the seven were out upon
the sea fishing and a Stranger appeared on the shore and
told them where to find fish, John strained his eyes through
the sea fog until the intuition within him had ripened into
a certainty and he turned to Peter and said, "It is the
Lord."73 His heart had been the first to surmise it. His
eye had been the first to assure it. Here are the tokens of
the seer in the primary sense.
John saw with his heart and with his intuitions as well
as with his eyes. He saw deeper into the being and per
sonality of Jesus than anyone else. The fourth Gospel
is the proof of that statement. He saw farther into the
future than any other disciple, and discerned the whole
course of the contest and glimpsed the triumph of the end.
The Apocalypse is the proof of this. He realized as no
one else the deeper principles of the new revelation. He
71 John 19. 35.
72 John 20. 4-6.
78 John 21. 7.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 67
saw more clearly than the rest how divine was the daily
life of Jesus. He was a mystic in the best sense of that
term. He does not have much interest in the outside of
things. He always is endeavoring to see to their center and
to take hold of them from within. His keen eye pierces to
the very heart of things and he looks beyond the clouds to
where the clear sun is shining.
In the ancient church the flying eagle was his symbol.
The eagle symbolized inspiration, aspiration, exaltation,
heavenly-mindedness, and holiness. The eagle lives in the
heights, rises on tireless wings into the ether, soars above
the clouds, flies to the sun and with open eye endures to
take his glories in. So the Eagle-Evangelist rises to loftier
spiritual heights than any other writer in our New Testa
ment. His thought moves in the heavenly places. His
affections are set on things above, not on things on the
earth. On tireless wings his ardor rises into the very
presence-chamber of the King.
See how the fourth Gospel begins ; and compare its open
ing words with those of the synoptics. Augustine said:
"Those three evangelists occupy themselves chiefly with
the things which Christ did in the flesh, and with the pre
cepts which he delivered to men, who also bear the burden
of the flesh, for their instruction in the rightful exercise
of this mortal life. Whereas John, on the other hand, soars
like an eagle above the clouds of human infirmity, and
gazes upon the light of the unchangeable truth with those
keenest and steadiest eyes of the heart."74 Adam of Saint
Victor, the greatest poet of the Latin tongue in the Middle
Ages, after characterizing the other evangelists says,
Sed Johannes, ala bina
Charitatis, aquilina
Forma, fertur in divina
Puriori lumine.

74 Harmony of the Gospels, I, 6. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,
vol. vi, p. 81.

68 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
John, the eagle's feature having,
Earth on love's twain pinions leaving,
Soars aloft, God's truth perceiving
In light's purer atmosphere.78
John is indeed "the eagle that flies high, so right high
and yet more high than does any other bird, because he is
feathered with fine love, and beholds above other the beauty
of the Sun, and the beams and brightness of the Sun."76
6. This leads us to say next that John is the greatest
theologian and the most profound philosopher of the early
Christian Church. The church Fathers rightly called him,
'O Qeo\&yog, The Theologian. Even Baur agrees with this
verdict. He says, speaking of the Johannine type of
thought, "In ihm erreicht die neutestamentliche Theologie
ihre hochste Stufe und ihre vollendetste Form" — "In it the
New Testament theology reaches its highest plane and its
most perfect form." A more recent authority concludes,
"In the writings ascribed to John there is more of a com
plete and reasoned theology than is to be found in any of
the other New Testament writers."77 Love gives insight.
Supreme love gives supreme insight. Ernesti called the
fourth Gospel the "heart of Christ." John does get at the
heart of things as no other apostle does. He had constant
access to the very heart of Jesus, and he gives constant
expression to the very heart of the truth. When we read
his books we say to ourselves: "The final word has how
been spoken. The ultimate reach of revelation is here.
There is nothing more to be said."
The Johannine theology is reasonable and reasoned, but
the processes of its reasoning seldom are in evidence. It
is of the contemplative, intuitive, and mystical type. It
sees life as a whole. It presents truth as a categorical im-
78 The poem and translation may be found in Schaff 's History of the
Christian Church, vol. i, p. 588.
78 The Mirror of Simple Souls.
77 T. B. Strong, Hastings's Dictionary of the Bible, II, 683.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 69
perative. It is not built up slowly and by degrees. As
recorded, it is finished and complete. Simplicity and unity
are its two characteristics. There is nothing vague or
abstract about it; it is altogether clear and concrete. The
spiritual and the practical are at one with John. He looks
at everything from the standpoint of the eternal life and
light and love, but he sees these at home in the human
heart and incarnate in human history. The riddle of the
universe is no riddle to him. He has the key which will
unlock all its mysteries. He has discovered the underlying
principles which will explain the unity of time and eternity.
He knows the Source of all things, the Reason of all
things, and the Goal of all things. The philosophy and
the metaphysics of the ages never have plumbed deeper
depths or climbed any higher heights than have been
reached by this humble and loving disciple of the Incar
nate One. All future investigation and research bids fair
to come back to the conclusions set forth in uttermost
simplicity in these writings of John.
7. John was the last in the apostolic company to come
to a commanding position in the church. Some have re
garded this fact as a prophecy of future church history.
James Stalker has voiced this opinion as follows: "Peter
first stamped himself on the church, then Paul, last John.
And, as it was in that first period of Christianity, so was it
to be in the subsequent ages. For fourteen centuries Peter
ruled Christendom, as was symbolized by the church in
scribed with his name in the city which was, for most of
that period, the center of the Christian world; then, at
the Reformation, Paul's influence took the place of Peter's,
Paul's doctrine being the soul of Protestantism. The turn
of John has still to come: his spirit will dominate the
millennial age. Perhaps in the individual Christian three
such stages may also be distinguished — the period of zeal
to begin with, when we resemble Peter; the period of
steady work and reasoned conviction, when we follow in

70 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
the steps of Paul; the period of tolerance and love, when
we are acquiring the spirit of John."78 Faith is all-impor
tant in Paul's theology, hope is the keynote of Peter's
preaching and of Peter's epistle, love is characteristic of
John. "Now abideth faith, hope, love, these three ; and the
greatest of these is love." "Love therefore is the fulfill
ment of the law." It was Paul who said these things, and
that very fact suggests that such a partition of graces
among the apostolic leaders is not altogether warranted by
the record concerning them, and we must not, therefore,
push it too far.
Professor H. C. Sheldon, with his usual caution, puts in
a partial disclaimer at this point. He says, "These different
standpoints, the Petrine, the Pauline, the Johannine, dis
tinguished as respects relative emphasis upon different
truths, give the appearance of successive doctrinal develop
ments within the apostolic age. Some have imagined that
these developments have been destined to a repetition upon
a wider scale. The Petrine standpoint, it is claimed, affili
ates with the Roman Catholic theology, the Pauline with
the Protestant, while the Johannine represents the recon
ciliation and higher union of the two. As the church has
passed through a Petrine and a Pauline stage, it has arrived
now at the border of a Johannine era.
"This view, pushed to the extreme, is artificial and fanci
ful. There is no such broad contrast between Petrinism
and Paulinism as exists between Romanism and Protes
tantism. No definite line of demarkation can be drawn
between the teaching of Paul and of John. The two types
are not exclusive of each other. They were not so in the
mind of Paul himself. His thought often ran into the
domain of John, as in that sublimest hymn to the praise
of love in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, and also in
his many references to an interior life-union with Christ.

78 The Two St. Johns, p. 21.

THE APOSTLE JOHN 71
The church in its most advanced stage will not put aside
Peter or Paul in favor of John, but acknowledge the truth
taught by each. Nevertheless, a degree of truth pertains
to the theory. We have actually entered upon an age which
lays more stress upon the Johannine theology than any age
which has preceded."79 The reason for that is that we
are desirous of getting back to Christ, and we find that
John can help us more than any other man. "The most
Christlike of the apostles has left this legacy to the church
— that without him it could not have adequately known its
Lord."80 He had powers of mind and powers of heart
which made him the most profound thinker and the greatest
theologian of the .early church. He had those qualities in
him which Jesus loved and which it might be well for us
to note and emulate.
Shall we try to summarize them now? John was a Bo
anerges, a man of intense convictions and ardent affections,
and absolutely fearless in the expression of these in action
and speech. He was no mollycoddle; he was a militant
saint. He had a real reverence for genius and a fervent
love for holiness. He had a natural delicacy and refine
ment of manner. He was of a modest and retiring disposi
tion. He was as simple as a child in his character. You
could look through him and find no obstruction to clear
vision. His eye was clear, his heart was pure, his soul was
single. He had an oceanlike depth of nature which could
apprehend the sublimest vision and the profoundest reve
lation of the Christian faith.
He lived long enough to see the city of Jerusalem forever
dethroned as the central seat of a nation's worship and love
and the temple to which the tribes had gone up so com
pletely destroyed that there was no stone left lying upon
another in that place where the religious authorities had
78 Sheldon, The Early Church, p. 104.
80 W. T. Davison, in Hastings's single volume Dictionary of the
Bible, p. 477.

>j2 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
hectored his Lord. He helped to spread the good news
of a risen Christ and a deathless hope until the gospel had
been carried from India on the east to Spain on the west.
He had wished to call down fire upon a village of the
Samaritans at one time during his Lord's ministry. He
went with Peter to that village and other villages of the
Samaritans and called down upon them the fire of the Holy
Ghost after his Lord had risen from the grave. He came
at last into the principal city of the western coast of the
continent of Asia, the focus point of all the traffic East and
West, the central headquarters of the Christian hosts of the
Roman world. It was a city dedicated for centuries to the
worship of the heathen goddess Artemis; but John took
possession of it as the Christian bishop of the universal
church, the most revered figure in the Christian world at
the close of the first century.
Here it was that he wrote the books which represent the
highest reach of inspiration and revelation in our New
Testament. He was blessed above all others in coming
nearer to the heart of our Lord than any other disciple.
He has blessed the church above all others in revealing
more of the mind and heart of our Lord than any other
disciple could. That was his supreme privilege as the
disciple whom Jesus loved. Godet has summed it up well
in these words : "The hour for work had struck in the first
place for Simon Peter; he had founded the church in
Israel and planted the standard of the new covenant on
the ruins of the theocracy. Paul ha4 followed; his work
had been to liberate the church from the restrictions of
expiring Judaism and to open to the Gentiles the door of
the kingdom of God. John succeeded them, he who had
first come to Jesus, and whom his Master reserved for the
last. He consummated the fusion of those heterogeneous
elements of which the church had been formed, and raised
Christianity to the relative perfection of which it was, at
that time, susceptible. . . . Peter was distinguished by his

THE APOSTLE JOHN 73
practical originating power, scarcely compatible with ten
der receptivity. Paul united to active energy and the most
consummate practical ability the penetrating vigor of an
unequaled dialectic. For, although a Semite, he had passed
his earliest years in one of the most brilliant centers of
Hellenic culture and had there appropriated the acute
forms of the Occidental mind.
"John is completely different from both. He could not
have laid the foundations of the Christian work, like Peter ;
he could not have contended, like Paul, with dialectic
subtlety against Jewish rabbinism, and composed the Epis
tles to the Galatians and the Romans. But, in the closing
period of the apostolic age, it was he who was charged
with putting the completing work upon the development
of the primitive church, which Peter had founded and
Paul had emancipated. He has bequeathed to the world
three works, in which he has exalted to their sublime per
fection those three supreme intuitions in the Christian life:
that of the person of Christ, in the Gospel ; that of the indi
vidual believer, in the first epistle; and that of the church,
in the Apocalypse. Under three aspects, the same theme —
the divine life realized in man, eternity filling time."81

si Commentary on. John, vol. i, pp. 50, 53.

PART II
THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL: THE GOSPEL
ACCORDING TO JOHN

PART II
THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL: THE GOSPEL
ACCORDING TO JOHN
I. Some Remarkable Estimates
Origen said, "This Gospel is the consummation of the
Gospels as the Gospels are of all the Scriptures." Jerome
asserts that "John excels in the depths of divine mysteries/'
Luther agrees, "It is the unique, tender, genuine, chief
Gospel, far preferable to the other three. . . . Should a
tyrant succeed in destroying the Holy Scriptures and only
a single copy of the Epistle to the Romans and the Gospel
according to John escape him, Christianity would be saved."
Biedermann declares it is "the most wonderful of all reli
gious books."1 Herder said it was "written by the hand
of an angel" ; but that is not true. It was written by the
hand of a man; but that man was a seer and a saint.
Culross, who has written a volume entitled John Whom
Jesus Loved, says, "I believe the writings of John have
been blotted by more penitents' tears and have won more
hearts for the Redeemer than all the rest put together";2
and he has collected into a paragraph the expressions of
affection and admiration for the fourth Gospel made by
many men. Two of these we quote. One writer says, "It
is the chief of the Gospels and one can understand it only
by reclining on the bosom of Jesus." Another declares, "It
stands out from the other Gospels as the Sabbath among
the other days of the week, as the office of the priesthood
among the other functions of the sons of Levi, or like the
1 Christian Dogmatics, p. 254.
Jp. 212. 77

78 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
gleaning of the grapes of Ephraim, which was better than
the vintage of Abiezer."*
We add the words of Matthias Claudius: "I love best
of all to read in John. There is in him something so per
fectly wonderful — dusk and night, and the quick lightning
throbbing through them: the soft clouds of evening, and
behind the mass the big full moon bodily; something so
sad, so high, so full of presage, that one can never weary
of it! In reading John it always seems to me that I see
him before me, reclining at the Last Supper on the bosom
of the Lord, as if his angel held the light for me, and at
certain parts would place his arm around me, and whisper
something in my ear. I am far from understanding all I
read, yet often John's idea seems to hover before me in
the distance; and even when I look into a place that is
entirely dark, I have a presension of a great, glorious
meaning, which I shall some day understand, and hence I
catch so eagerly at every new exposition of the Gospel
according to John."4 This suggests what Tholuck said
about the Gospel : "This Gospel speaks a language to which
no parallel whatever is to be found in the whole compass
of literature; such childlike simplicity, with such contem
plative profundity; such life, and such deep rest; such sad
ness, and such serenity; and above all, such a breadth of
love, an eternal life which has already dawned, a life which
rests in God, which has overcome the disunion between the
world that is and the world to come, the human and the
Divine."6 W. T. Davison declares: "The fourth Gospel
is unique among the books of the New Testament. In its
combination of minute historical detail with lofty spiritual
teaching, in its testimony to the Person and work of the
Lord Jesus Christ, and in the preparation it makes for the
foundations of Christian doctrine, it stands alone. Its

8 Culross, p. 106.
4 Culross, pp. 106, 107.
• Commentary on John, Introduction, p. 18.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 79
influence upon the thought and life of the Christian Church
has been proportionately deep and far-reaching. It is no
disparagement of other inspired Scriptures to say that no
other book of the Bible has left such a mark at the same
time upon the profoundest Christian thinkers, and upon
simple-minded believers at large."8
James Drummond is one of the more recent writers on
the fourth Gospel and he says: "Whether we regard the
sublimity of its thought, the width and spirituality of its
conception of religion, the depth of its moral insight, or
the tragic pathos of its story, we cannot but feel that we
have before us the work of a master mind. And when we
remember how it has molded the faith and touched the
heart and calmed the sorrows of generations of men, we
must approach it with no ordinary reverence, and with a
desire to penetrate its inmost meaning and become more
thoroughly imbued with its kindling power."7
Dr. Armitage Robinson says: "We would not willingly
give up for any other form of narrative a Gospel which
reveals to us what the Christ grew to be in the mind of
one who leaned upon his bosom in youth, had cherished a
perpetual recollection of him throughout long years of toil
and suffering for his name, and at the close wrote as in
his Master's very presence his testimony to what his Master
had been and forever should be — the Light and the Life
of men."8 Dr. A. T. Pierson gives his estimate of the
fourth Gospel in these words: "It touches the heart of
Christ. If Matthew corresponds to the Court of Israel,
Mark to the Court of the Priests, and Luke to the Court
of the Gentiles, John leads us past the veil into the Holy
of holies. Here is the inmost temple, filled with the glory
of God."9

8 Hastings, op. tit., p. 477.
7 Character and Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, p. I.
8 The Study of the Gospels, p. 157.
9 Keys to the Word, p. 103.

80 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
These three writers, Drummond, Robinson, and Pierson,
are writers of our own generation, and they represent
widely different schools of thought. Drummond is a Uni
tarian, Robinson belongs to the Church of England, and
Pierson is an old-school Presbyterian. They agree in their
high esteem for the fourth Gospel, and in so doing they
agree with the saints and scholars and commentators who
preceded them. Philip Schaff said: "The best comes last.
The fourth Gospel is the Gospel of Gospels, the holy of
holies in the New Testament. . . . The Gospel according
to John is the most original, the most important, the most
influential book in all literature. ... It is simple as a child
and sublime as a seraph, gentle as a lamb and bold as an
eagle, deep as the sea and high as the heavens."10 And
Lange declared, "Since Irenaeus it has remained for the
sons of the apostolic spirit the crown of the apostolic
Gospels."11 One reason for these remarkable estimates of
the value of the fourth Gospel is that all Christians have
felt that Schenkel was right when he said, "Without this
Gospel the unfathomable depth, the inaccessible height of
the character of the Saviour of the world would be wanting
to us, and his boundless influence, renewing all humanity,
would forever remain a mystery."12 As we read we are
assured that here at last is the worthy and adequate picture
of the life of Jesus among men.
II. Some Remarkable Omissions
If the four Gospels are the most precious books in the
world's literature and the fourth Gospel is the most pre
cious of the four, it must be a very remarkable book indeed.
We turn to its study with great expectation. It is a Life
of Jesus of Nazareth, and it is a most inadequate biography.
10 History of the Christian Church, vol. i, pp. 675, 688.
11 Addresses on John, p. 482.
B Schenkel, A Sketch of the Character of Jesus, p. 34.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 81
It is too small a book to tell us half the things we would
like to Know. It leaves out more than it puts in. It is
much smaller than any of the standard biographies of
to-day. We turn to our library shelves to look at some
of the books by way of comparison; and we find that
Boswell's Life of Samuel Johnson has 1,824 pages, and
Allen's Life of Phillips Brooks has 1,596 pages, and Smith's
Life of Henry Drummond has 534 pages. The Life of our
Lord by the apostle John occupies less than thirty pages in
our Revised Version. It is a mere pigmy beside these giant
books. The average modern biography is fifteen, twenty,
fifty, sixty times as long as this biography written by John.
When we turn to our modern lives of Jesus the difference
is just as apparent. The Prophet of Nazareth, by Nathaniel
Schmidt, has 422 pages; the Life of Jesus, by Dawson,
452 pages; Holtzmann's has 542 pages; The Days of His
Flesh, by David Smith, has 593 pages; The Life of Our
Lord, by Andrews, has 651 pages; Strauss's Life of Jesus
has 784 pages; Beyschlag's has 970; Farrar's has 988;
Weiss's has 1,143; Geikie's has 1,236; Edersheim's The
Life and Times of Jesus has 1,524 pages ; and Keim's Jesus
of Nazareth has 1,904 pages. John has told us all he cared
to say in thirty pages; and at the same time he says that
if all had been written which might have been written, the
world itself could not contain all the books covering the
theme.13 Evidently, John has thought best to leave out
much interesting material.
These other books are from more than ten to more than
sixty times as long as the fourth Gospel, and the most of
their material is worth while, and they tell us in detail
about many things of which John makes mere mention or
which he never notices at all ; and yet the fourth Gospel
is worth all of these other books put together! We put
that down as the first remarkable thing about this remark-
13 John 21. 25.

82 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
able book — that it is so small and fragmentary and inade
quate a biography. A mountain of barren rock may be
imposing because of its size and yet not be as valuable as
a single nugget of pure gold. The fourth Gospel is pure
gold. It has no admixture of alloy. It is a residuum.
John has chosen to free it from much that we would have
supposed rightly belonged in it.
Let us look at some of these remarkable omissions.
i. To begin with, John omits the whole record of the first
thirty years of the life of Jesus. He gives us no genealogy,
no account of the annunciation, and he never suggests that
there was such a thing as an immaculate conception. He
tells us nothing about the infancy and youth of our Lord,
nothing about his development of mind and soul, his early
environment and teaching. These were the most important
years of his life to Jesus himself, but John says nothing
about them!
2. John tells us how Jesus meets the Baptist at the Jor
dan, but he has told us nothing about the early life or
ministry of the forerunner, as he tells us nothing about his
later imprisonment and death. We learn about these things
from the other evangelists ; but we feel sure that John knew
more about the message and work of the wilderness prophet
than any other of the New Testament writers. He has
not chosen to tell us a word about John the Baptist until
some time after the baptism of Jesus ; and he gives us no
direct account of that baptism, but only a reference to it
as a past event in the experience of the Baptist himself.
3. In the fourth Gospel there is no mention of the
temptation in the wilderness. It was one of the capital
events in the life of our Lord. It was one of the crises in
his spiritual experience. It would seem that John must
have been fascinated by the account Jesus gave of it; but
we never would know from this Gospel that he ever had
heard of such a thing.
4. After the temptation the transfiguration was the next

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 83
most important event in the ministry of Jesus. John was
one of the three apostles chosen to witness this wonder;
yet he gives us no account of it in his narrative. We are
wholly dependent upon the other Gospels for all that we
know about it.
5. We learn from the other evangelists that John was
one of the chosen three who were present at the raising of
the daughter of Jairus to life. It was one of the chief
miracles of Christ's ministry; but John says nothing
about it.
6. There is no institution of the Lord's Supper in the
fourth Gospel. John gives us a fuller account of the hap
penings at the last supper of Jesus with his disciples than
anyone else has recorded for us, but he says never a word
about the establishment of any solemn ordinance to be
observed in the future history of the church.
7. There was that terrible Gethsemane agony and prayer,
the closing struggle of the man Jesus with the powers of
darkness, ending with the same triumph which had marked
that beginning struggle in the wilderness. John omits the
account of the agony and prayer as he omitted all mention
of the conflict and victory there.
8. Since John's whole book was written that men might
believe that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, it is
most strange that he omits all mention of that sublime
declaration of the Messiahship and of the power of world
judgment made by Jesus in his trial before the Sanhedrin.
We would have supposed that that testimony would have
been beyond value for the purposes of John's biography.
He omits it altogether.
9. John gives us no account of the ascension. He records
the promise made by Jesus to Mary, "I ascend unto my
Father and your Father, and my God and your God,"14
but this climaxing event of the whole history of this mar-

14 John 20. 17.

84 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
velous life is not described either in general or in detail by
John. What a strange biography this is! How could anyone
write a life of Jesus which would be worth anything at all
and omit from the narrative all account of the virgin birth
and the baptism and the temptation and the transfiguration
and the Gethsemane agony and the glorious ascension to
the right hand of God ! Surely, these events are too impor
tant to be omitted by any biographer ! Are they ? Here is
the most precious biography of Jesus we have, and it tells
us about none of them, and we are not half through with
our list of the remarkable omissions which characterize the
Gospel according to John!
10. In the two and a half years of the public ministry of
Jesus there are at least ten months which are an utter blank
in John's narrative. In all probability Jesus said just as
wonderful things and did just as wonderful deeds in these
months as in those which John has recorded, but John
leaves them entirely out of his story. There were over a
thousand days in the Lord's ministry, and John has given
us a record of only about twenty of them. Seven chapters
of his Gospel — one third of the book — are devoted to the
account of one day, counting from sunset to sunset as the
Jews did, and thus including the night of the betrayal and
the day of the crucifixion. We rejoice in the full record
of this day, but how many important days must have been
left wholly unrecorded !
n. There are no children in the fourth Gospel. The
third Gospel has been called the Gospel of Childhood, and
in all the synoptic Gospels the children appear again and
again. Jesus blesses them and says that of such is the
kingdom of heaven. He takes them into his arms. They
are attracted to him. They love him, and in the triumphal
entry into Jerusalem in the last days they precede the
Master shouting, "Hosanna to the son of David"; and in
the temple they continued to cry, "Hosanna in the highest,"

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 85
until the chief priests and scribes became indignant and
Jesus was moved to defend these little ones for their hearty
if noisy praise. We are glad that the Gospel pages have
the figures of these innocent little ones dancing and pranc
ing through them ; and when we turn to the Gospel accord
ing to John we feel a distinct disappointment when we find
that the children have wholly disappeared from the picture
of the ministry of Jesus. If John lived and died an un
married man, he had no children of his own, and he may
not have had that personal liking for all children which
Jesus always manifested. Anyway, he has written a Gospel
story without a child in it from beginning to end.
12. There are no demoniacs in the fourth Gospel. The
synoptics have frequent accounts of demonized individuals
and the casting out of demons is a characteristic miracle
in the ministry of Jesus. There are no exorcisms in the
Gospel according to John. His enemies say to Jesus, "Thou
hast a demon,"15 but this unreal, falsely charged demoni
acal possession is the only one recognized or mentioned in
the book.
13. There are no lepers in the fourth Gospel. The
cleansing of a leper was a most marvelous miracle, and the
other gospel writers detail the power of Jesus in accom
plishing this impossible cure by a touch or a word; but
John never mentions a single case of the kind. We never
would have known from this Gospel that Jesus ever met
any lepers or had anything to do with them in his min
istry. 14. There are no scribes in the fourth Gospel. We learn
from the synoptics that the scribes always were present in
the Lord's later ministry, plying Jesus with hard questions,
spying upon his whole procedure as his bitter and unrelent
ing foes. If we decide against the genuineness of the para
graph concerning the woman taken in adultery, as most of

» John 7. 20; 8. 48; 8. 52; 10. 20.

86 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
the authorities do, then the word "scribe" does not occur in
the Gospel according to John from beginning to end.
15. There are no Sadducees in the fourth Gospel. They
are found in the Gospels according to Mark and Matthew
and Luke and in the book of Acts, but not here. We are
told that they questioned Jesus and he silenced them. We
read later how they questioned Jesus at his trial and he was
silent before them, until they provoked him into the con
fession of his Messiahship. In the fourth Gospel they
never appear or are never named from beginning to end of
the narrative.
16. There are no publicans in the fourth Gospel. If the
scribes were the enemies of Jesus, the publicans were his
friends. He ate with them and consorted with them. They
heard him gladly, for he preached good news for them
as well as for any other class of society. The scribes mur
mured because Jesus feasted with the publicans ; but neither
the murmurers nor those who occasioned their murmuring
find a place in John's narrative. We would have known
nothing about them if we had been dependent upon John
alone for our information concerning the ministry of our
Lord. 17. There is no list of the twelve apostles in the fourth
Gospel. Matthew, Mark, and Luke thought it worth while
to record these names, and Luke has given the list
twice, once in each of his books; but John omits it alto
gether. 18. There is no Sermon on the Mount in the fourth
Gospel. That sermon was the most important manifesto
of the Messianic king. It set forth the foundation princi
ples of the new kingdom of God which he had come to
establish on earth. John makes no reference to it any
where in his book.
19. There is no prescribed formula of prayer in the
fourth Gospel. Both Matthew and Luke have recorded
that Jesus told the disciples when they prayed to say, "Our

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 87
Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name." John
omits all prescription of ritual service, sacramental or devo
tional. We are dependent upon others for all of these
things. 20. The main themes of the discourses of Jesus as re
corded in the synoptics are the conditions' of entrance into
the Kingdom. These conditions are two in number —
repentance and faith. Now, it is a strange fact that the
Greek words for "repentance" and "faith," fier&voia and
7ri(TT<c,are not to be found in the fourth Gospel at all. The
ideas they represent may be in the book, but the words
themselves do not occur. According to Luke, Jesus said,
"I am not come to call the righteous but sinners to repent
ance."16 In John this call is not recorded. The Greek
word for "faith," niarig, is used three hundred and forty
times in our New Testament, but it does not occur once in
the Gospel according to John. Some people would have
difficulty in presenting the gospel without using the words
"repentance" and "faith." John does it, and without any
difficulty at all.
21. Another item of what some people would consider a
most essential element in the presentation of the gospel is
entirely omitted by John. He never has a word to say
about hell from the beginning to the end of his book.
Neither Hades nor Gehenna or Tartarus finds any place
in his pages.
22. There are no detailed eschatologies in the fourth
Gospel, such as we find in the synoptics. Here, instead of
their predictions of the Parousia, we have the promise of
the Paraclete. The coming of the Comforter is substituted
for the coming of the Judge and King.
23. There are no proverbs in the fourth Gospel, such as
we find in the synoptics. Those sharp and pointed sayings
which have pierced to the heart and have stuck to the
18 Luke 5. 32.

88 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
memory of all succeeding generations of men are wholly
lacking in the Gospel according to John.
24. There are no parables in the fourth Gospel. Jesus
acts parables here, but he does not narrate them.
Who would undertake to write a Gospel and say nothing
about the birth of Jesus and nothing about his infancy and
youth, his baptism, his temptation, his transfiguration, and
his ascension; and omit all mention of the cleansing of
lepers and the casting out of demons, and never introduce
any children or scribes or Sadducees or publicans into the
narrative, and leave out the Sermon on the Mount and the
eschatological discourses and all the proverbs and all the
parables ? Who would undertake to write a Gospel without
any of these things in it? Surely, nothing much worth
while would remain. Surely, the result of any such effort
would be a poor affair indeed. Almost all of the choicest
portions of the life and teachings of Jesus would be un
touched. Take these things out of the synoptic narratives
and there would be a very pitiful remnant of their biogra
phy left. It would be an emasculated and mangled and
altogether unworthy presentation of the work and words of
Jesus. We are glad that the synoptics have told us about
all of these things. We would not undertake to write a
Gospel which omitted them. We could not do it, and make
a book worthy of our Lord. John could; and John did!
He wrote a Gospel without any of these things and not only
made it worthy of a place in the canon, but made it the
chief treasure of the New Testament books!17

17 We have called the fourth Gospel a Life of Jesus, and such it is.
We have said it was a very inadequate biography, and it surely is.
However, to be fair to the apostle John, we ought to add that his
primary purpose in writing was neither biographical nor historical, but
religious. He wrote that men might believe and have life (John 20. 31),
and no one will question the adequacy of his Gospel to that end. As
Drummond says, "It is not its object to tell us all that can be learned
about the life of Jesus, but to awaken or strengthen our faith in him"
(pp. 21, 22).

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 89
III. Some Remarkable New Features
It is a most remarkable Gospel because of the things it
omits. It is the most valued of all the Gospels because of
the things it adds to the synoptic narratives. It has been
estimated that ninety-two per cent of the contents of the
fourth Gospel are peculiar to itself. John has omitted
much of great worth, but in its stead he has brought us a
new treasure of such inestimable value that, like the ruler
of the feast at Cana, we are constrained to say that the
best has come last. Good as the synoptics were, we prefer
John's narrative to any one of them.
Let us note some of the remarkable new features of the
fourth Gospel now.
1. The parables are the poems in our Lord's preaching,
the bright spots in the landscape of the synoptic narrative,
like clusters of flowers in the open fields. John has no
parables, no imaginative stories wrought out in detail to
illustrate some truth or point some moral. He has, instead,
new metaphors, strange personifications, centering for the
most part about the Master himself, in which the bread and
the vine, the gate, the door, the good shepherd, the light,
and the truth either represent him or are identified with
him. 2. Instead of the proverbs found in the synoptics, John
introduces us to the discussion of metaphysical problems.
For the most part the discourses of Jesus as recorded by
him are not occasioned by the happenings of the day. They
have a character of timelessness about them which has
caused this Gospel to be called the "gospel of eternity."
3. Instead of the public discourses of the synoptics, we
have in the fourth Gospel a number of private conversa
tions. There are fourteen of these in all. Jiilicher has
called our attention to the fact that these conversations for
the most part seem to be built up after a certain scheme
or pattern. First, there is an introductory question ; second,

90 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Jesus answers with a statement which is capable of a double
construction; third, this answer is misunderstood; fourth,
Jesus explains and sets the misunderstanding straight ; fifth,
he proceeds to give fundamental instruction upon the
theme.18 The longest discourses recorded in the fourth
Gospel and the most precious in the book are those given
to the disciples in private just before the betrayal in Gethse-
mane. 4. Instead of the Disciple's Prayer, Our Father who art
in heaven, we have the Lord's Prayer, the longest prayer
of Jesus and the only prayer recorded at any length in any
of the Gospels, in the seventeenth chapter of this book.
5. There are j^ghj^jmracles- reeerded in the fourth
Gospel, and sixjr>f them are new. ._ These new miracles are :
Turning water into wine (chapter 2), Healing the noble
man's son (chapter 4), Healing the man at the pool (chap
ter 5), Healing the man born blind (chapter 9), Raising
of Lazarus (chapter 11), and the Draught of fishes (chap
ter 21). John does not call these miracles. He calls them
simply signs or works.
6. There are some new persons in this Gospel : Nathanael
(chapter 1), Nicodemus (chapter 3), the woman of Sa
maria (chapter 4), the impotent man (chapter 5), the
blind man (chapter 9), and Lazarus (chapter 11). All of
these are to be found in this Gospel alone. The name of
Malchus occurs only in the fourth Gospel; and Thomas
and Philip and Judas, not Iscariot, are more prominent in
this Gospel than in any other.
7. There are some new titles in this Gospel. John alone
calls Jesus the Logos and the Only-Begotten, and he alone
calls the Holy Spirit the Paraclete. John tells us much not
recorded elsewhere about the work of the Paraclete in the
world, but the name of the Holy Spirit occurs in his writ
ings less often than in the writings of Luke and of Paul.

18 John 2. 19; 3. 3; 4. 10; 4. 32; 6. 34; 13. 36; 14. 5.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 91
In the fourth Gospel the Holy Spirit is named only four
times.
8. There are whole sections of this Gospel whose ma
terial is entirely new. The prologue, the testimony of John
the Baptist to the Lamb of God, the first disciples (chapter
1), the Cana miracle and the first cleansing of the temple
(chapter 2), the conversation with Nicodemus and the first
ministry of Jesus in Judaea (chapter 3), the conversation
with the woman at the well and the second Cana miracle
(chapter 4), the healing of the impotent man and the dis
course on world-judgment (chapter 5), the discourse on
the bread of life (chapter 6), the discourse at the feast of
tabernacles and its results (chapter 7), the discourse on
the light of the world and its results (chapter 8), the heal
ing of the blind man and its results (chapter 9), the dis
course on the good shepherd (chapter 10), the raising of
Lazarus and its results (chapter 11), the visit of the Greeks
and the subsequent discourses of Jesus (chapter 12), the
washing of the disciples' feet (chapter 13), the farewell
discourses with the disciples (chapters 14, 15, and 16), the
Lord's prayer for the church (chapter 17), the two appear
ances to the assembled disciples in Jerusalem after the
resurrection (chapter 20), the appearance at the sea of
Tiberias and the epilogue (chapter 21). These are simply
the principal sections of new material, not paralleled in any
of the synoptics; and they form the greater part of the
fourth Gospel.
9. In the Passion history John makes his closest ap
proach to the synoptic narrative, but even here he has many
new items of information. He alone tells us that those
who came to arrest Jesus in Gethsemane went backward
and fell to the ground when Jesus advanced upon them.
He alone records that it was Simon Peter who smote off
Malchus's ear. He alone records the statements made to
Pilate about the kingdom of the truth, a kingdom not of
this world. He alone has written down Pilate's Ecce Homo,

92 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
"Behold the man !" He alone tells us about the division of
the garments of Jesus among the soldiers. He alone has
recorded the thoughtfulness of Jesus in providing a home
for Mary the mother after his death. He alone saw the
pouring forth of the water and the blood from the wounded
side of Jesus. He alone tells us how Nicodemus assisted
in the burial of the Lord.
This will be sufficient to indicate how much we are in
debted to the apostle John for new and interesting and
important information concerning the life and death of
Jesus. The fourth Gospel is remarkable for the new light
it throws upon the ministry of our Lord. It regards that
ministry from a new point of view. It looks upon it
through new eyes, the eyes of a seer and a saint. John
listened to the words of Jesus even as the others did;
but his ears were opened to hear as they did not hear.
He heard the hidden harmonies. He saw into the very
heart of things. He realized the supreme marvel of it all,
and he gave it a most beautiful setting when he undertook
to put it into writing for others to read and enjoy.
IV. A Remarkable Work of Art
The fourth Gospel has been called the "supreme literary
work of the world." The theme was worthy and the writer
was a choice spirit and he did his best to make his story
duly simple and sublime. The fourth Gospel is remarkable
as a work of art. This has been recognized by the critics.
Chrysostom said of the fourth Gospel : "John has pervaded
and embraced the whole world, he has filled it with his cry,
not by the greatness of the sound, but by a tongue moved
by divine grace. And what is wonderful is that this great
cry is not harsh, not destitute of sweetness, but sweeter
and more charming, endowed with more power to attract
than all the harmony of music; and besides all these, it is
most holy and awe-inspiring, filled with such secrets, con-

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 93
veying such good things, that those who receive and guard
it with diligence and earnestness are no longer men, no
more abide upon earth: they have placed themselves above
the things of time, they are partakers of the state of angels,
and thus dwell upon earth, as if it were heaven."19 There
is something of the extravagance of oratory in these state
ments, and yet they express the overflowing gratitude and
love of many souls to John.
Augustine is almost as unstinted in his praise. He says :
A "John, as if it oppressed him to walk on earth, has opened
\ his words as it were with a burst of thunder, has lifted him- ¦
\ self not only above earth and every sphere of sky and
J heaven, but even above every host of angels, and every
^l* order of invisible powers, and reaches to Him by whom
all things were made, as he says, 'In the beginning was the
Word,' etc. He proclaims other things in keeping with
this great sublimity with which he begins, and speaks of
the divinity of our Lord as no other person has spoken.
He pours forth that into which he had drunk. For not
without a reason is it mentioned in his own Gospel, that
at the feast he reclined upon the bosom of his Lord. From
that bosom he had in secrecy drunk in the stream, but what
he drank in secret he poured forth openly."20 Jiilicher, in
his Introduction, says, "We have here a kind of dramatic
creation." Westcott declares: "This gospel is, in fact, the
divine Hebrew epic. Every part is impressed with the
noblest features of Hebrew poetry, and the treatment of
the subject satisfies the conditions of variety, progress, and
completeness, which, combined with the essential nature
of the subject itself, make up the notion of a true epic."21
We think it might be compared better with the Greek epic
and drama. All must grant that the fourth Gospel is a
work of literary art.
u Prooem. in Horn, in Iohan.
20 Tract. 36 in Iohan.
11 Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, p. 275.

94 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
This is manifest in the following particulars : l. Its artis
tic form. It observes all the finer laws governing the
artistic composition of the ancient classical tragedies. As
in these, the catastrophe is announced in the beginning, and
the whole action of the narrative tends irresistibly toward
the tragic close. As in the Iliad and the Niebelungenlied,
and as in the tragedies of ^Eschylus and Sophocles, the
terrible outcome always is kept in sight. The shadow of
the cross falls upon the first page. The certainty of the
hero's horrible death confronts us at every turn. The first
time the man Jesus appears he is heralded as a Lamb ap
pointed for sacrifice. At the marriage feast his "hour" is
not yet come, but its dread significance is present in his
mind. When he feeds the multitude, that joyous occasion
is marred in their memory by his discourse on eating his
flesh and drinking his blood. Most of the action is con
fined to the doomed city of Jerusalem. Galilee might lie
bathed in the sunshine, filled with the glory of lilies and
the singing of birds; but over Jerusalem the clouds were
gathering, big with thunder, and the lightning flashes darted
through them like travail-pains. John did not sit down
consciously to compose a tragedy. He was telling a true
story. He was recording a genuine biography; but in the
telling he is artistic in fuller measure than the synoptics
ever were. In the recording he follows the laws of the
highest literature. He gives life, color, movement to his
narrative. His book has the freshness and the simplicity
and the beauty and the power of the primitive masterpieces
of the world's writing.
2. A second manifestation of artistic composition in the
fourth Gospel is to be found in its concentration of action.
Note how the action is concentrated in the progress of the
story. There are two great divisions of the book. In the
first division, chapters 1-12, both time and place are mani
fold. The public ministry of Jesus touches the three prov
inces of the land and the three years of his activity. In

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 95
the second division, chapters 13-20, the action is centered
in the one city of Jerusalem, and a large part of it is con
fined to one room; and the time is limited to one evening
and a few days. More and more the scene narrows from
the whole land to Judaea, and from Judaea to Jerusalem,
and in Jerusalem to the one upper room of the farewell
discourses; and the interest intensifies as the narrative
lengthens and the crisis is nearer and nearer at hand.
3. .Notice the symmetry of John's composition. This is
apparent rmfie_recurrence of certain characters and the
nice balancing of the parts. Nathanael's name appears in
the preface and the appendix, in the introductory chapter
and in the concluding chapter, and nowhere else. The
mother of Jesus is seen only in the beginning and at the end
of the Gospel. At the opening of his public ministry Jesus
attends a feast with his disciples and gives a demonstration
of his power. At the end of his ministry he is again at a
supper with his disciples, and he gives to them a demon
stration of his love.
4. Notice kr^nTiigjTola Tiring of p?n-c nypr againqt earri^
other is accompanied by continuous contrasts throughout
the narrative. The great contrast between faith and un
belief runs through the whole book, and the new characters
as they are introduced range themselves alternately between
believers and unbelievers, friends and foes. First the spy
ing, critical representatives of the Pharisees, then the faith
ful and obedient disciples of John. The blinded leaders
of the people stand over against the seeing blind man with
his bold witness to the Messiahship of Jesus. The confes
sion of Peter contrasts with the betrayal of Judas. The"~"\
raising of Lazarus to life results in the dooming of Jesus |
to death. These contrasts occur in every chapter and help j
to give to the narrative its striking variety. """''
5. This variety of treatment is noticeable at many points.
We instance only two. ( 1 ) Did you ever notice the variety
of the seasons presented in this Gospel ? In the beginning

f~""'JW*"

96 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
of the activity of Jesus it is the spring, the time of the
sowing of seed and the germination and growth of the
grain. Later in the narrative we come upon the autumn
and the feast of the ingathering of the fruits in the fall of
the year. Then at the very height of the conflict between
Jesus and the Jews we are expressly told that it was winter.
Finally, with the resurrection and the glorification of Jesus,
it is spring again. (2) A great variety is added to the
composition by the alternation of incident and interlude, of
story and sermon, of action and discourse. In the begin
ning we have two pictures introducing the light side and
the dark side of the public ministry, the marriage feast at
Cana and the scourging of the sellers in the temple. These
two vivid presentations are followed by two conversations,
one in the darkness of the night and the other in the glare
of the full noonday, with Nicodemus and with the woman
at the well. Through the Gospel there is this alternation
of word and deed. At the end there are the solemn dis
courses with the disciples, followed by the still more solemn
incidents of the trial and the crucifixion. There is a con
stant changing from action to speech and from the brighter
to the darker aspects of the history. There is a continuous
variety which never allows the interest to flag. It is an
artistic composition as well as a narrative true to the life.
6. The hand of a master is apparent in the general
grouping and the entire arrangement of the material in this
Gospel. John himself declares that if all which Jesus
said and did would be written, the world could not contain
the books filled with the narratives of these things. Out
of this incalculable wealth of material John has made a
selection of scenes and sermons which will fit his purpose
and be most suitable to his plan. It is in this selection
and arrangement of material that the literary artist, as well
as the saint and the seer, appears. He has brought this
wonderful fullness of words and works into an amazingly
brief compass. He has omitted all which seemed to him

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 97
accidental or unessential. He has united the ideal moments
of the life of Jesus into one harmonious presentation of
the Ideal Life. He has made a work of art as well as a
Gospel of the Son of God.
V. Other Remarkable Characteristics
This is surely a remarkable Gospel. It is remarkable for
what it omits, and it is remarkable for what it adds to the
Gospel narrative; and it is most remarkable in its artistic
composition. Another feature distinguishes it from all the
synoptics. 1. It has been called the Gospel of Apostolic
Comment. John meditates upon all things which he sees
and hears, and puts down his conclusions concerning them.
We have a commentary along with a biography. It is the
commentary of the philosopher of the twelve. Kaufmann
calls John "the Plato of the inspired circle." It is the
commentary of an apostle, and it is the commentary of a
saint. Sometimes, as in the third chapter, it is difficult, if not
impossible, to distinguish between the words of Jesus and
the words of John. There were no quotation marks in
these ancient manuscripts, and without their aid it some
times is very difficult to determine where direct speech ends
and reflection upon it begins. This phenomenon is not
altogether peculiar to John. A good illustration of it is
found in the second chapter of the Epistle to the Galatians,
where Paul tells us that he resisted Peter to his face and
said certain things to him and then goes on to comment
upon the situation involved. The critics and commentators
cannot agree as to where the direct speech ends and the
comment begins. However, there is more bewilderment
of this sort in the fourth Gospel than in any other book of
the New Testament.
John tells us what he has heard and then what he thinks
of what he has heard, and we are at a loss to know in

98 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
many places whether Jesus or John is speaking. Is it not
to the great glory of his Master that the disciple inspired
by him speaks and writes so gloriously that the words seem
almost like his own? "Matthew's Gospel is the child of
memory; Mark's Gospel is largely the work of an amanu
ensis; Luke's Gospel is the production of a painstaking
collector of oral and written data; John's Gospel is the
result of the brooding of a philosophic mind over the deep
things involved in the historical facts narrated by the other
evangelists."22 Narration runs into reflection, and often
there is nothing to indicate where the one ends and the
other begins. History becomes homily, and there is no
clear dividing line. It all seems of one piece. Jesus talks
like John and John talks like Jesus.
Of course critics have suggested that this fact proves
that the whole book is the reflection of John's mind rather
than a cool and historical and objective presentation of
actual truth. We have John rather than Jesus in these
long conversations and discourses, they say. Why may
we not believe that we have John become like Jesus in this
book, so that it is Jesus rather than John whose spirit is
apparent throughout? Then it is of little importance to us
whether the words we read were spoken directly by Jesus
or are appended to the words of Jesus as an interpretation
or continuation by John. Whether Jesus said, "God so
loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that
whosoever believeth on him might not perish, but have
eternal life," or whether John said it, we know that that
sentence expresses the very heart of the gospel message
and summarizes the whole of the teaching of Jesus. It is
just as precious because it is just as true whether Jesus
said it or John. If that is an apostolic commeli^ we do not
hesitate on that account to reckon it one of the choicest
texts in Scripture; and we value the Gospel of -Apostolic

22 Teachings of the Books, p. 76.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 99
Comment in the proportion in which it contains material
like this.
2. The fourth Gospel is remarkable for its spirituality.
Qement of Alexandria called it the "spiritual gospel." He
said, "John, last of all, perceiving that what had reference
to the bodily was sufficiently detailed in the Gospels,
encouraged by his friends, and divinely incited by the
Spirit, composed a spiritual gospel."23 The synoptics are
satisfied to tell the external incidents of the ministry of
Jesus ; John is not satisfied until he has reached some con
clusion as to the inner and spiritual meaning of these
things. They are objective in their treatment of their ma
terial; John always is subjective in his dealing with it.
They are more concerned with the actions of Jesus; John
is more concerned with the thoughts of Jesus. They give
the foreground of the gospel picture and the figures most
conspicuous in it; John puts in the background, stretching
away into the eternities and revealing the spiritual depths
from which all the gospel grace and truth have come.
It is the Gospel of Spiritual Insight. It has more of the
words of Jesus, and the words chosen for record are the
more weighty words concerning eternal life. "We must
read this Gospel," said Donald Fraser, "while with joy, also
with deep reverence, for heaven lies about us, and a cloud
of glory hangs about the page. . . -24 The seventeenth
chapter of this Gospel has always been regarded as a sort
of Holy of holies in the Scripture, so full is it of sublime
thought and Divine intimacy. Bengel said of it, 'In its
words it is the most simple, but in its sense the most pro
found in all the Bible.' "25
This spiritual character of the entire Gospel helps to
account for the fact that John says nothing at all about the
institution of Christian baptism or the observance of the

23 Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., vi, 14.
24 Lectures on the Bible, vol. ii, p. 74.
* Op. cit., p. 85.

ioo JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Lord's Supper. John had little interest in forms and cere
monies. Institutional religion does not seem to attract him
at all. Spiritual experience and the Christlike life are of
incomparable importance with him. Liturgies and religious
performances and rites fall out of sight in his writings.
He omits any mention of them whatever. He deals with
more weighty and more worthy things. Speaking generally,
the same thing is true of the entire New Testament. There
is less of prescribed ceremonial in the whole New Testa
ment than in scores of single chapters in the Old Testa
ment. John, however, represents this New Testament
tendency full-grown. Origen said that no one could under
stand the fourth Gospel unless he reclined upon the bosom
of Jesus and thus became a second John. One must have
spiritual insight to appreciate the spiritual insight of this
book. Much modern criticism is disposed to emphasize the
spirituality of the fourth Gospel at the expense of its his
toricity. It claims that the Gospel is a spiritual Gospel, not
because it is devotional and inspirational, but because it
is symbolical and allegorical. It claims that the author is
aiming only at an ideal reproduction of the general impres
sion made by the life of Jesus and that he is not interested
in any merely historical details. In its treatment the Gospel
of Spiritual Insight is apt to become only the Gospel of
Imaginative Puerilities. It is amusing in the extreme to
find critics of this school after a labored and sober discus
sion of the spirituality of this Gospel come to the conclusion
that the author tells us that the disciples were two hundred
cubits from the shore when the risen Lord appeared to
them at the Sea of Galilee, because Peter had that distance
to wade or swim to reach the Master's feet and in the
Philonian lore two hundred signified "repentance"! Or,
that he tells us that the net which they dragged to the shore
held one hundred and fifty and three fishes, because that
number is produced by adding together the figures from

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 101
one up to seventeen, or by adding the square of twelve to
the square of three!26 Men capable of such criticism are
incapable of any true or deep appreciation of a spiritual
gospel such as this which John has written. John is a
mystic and a seer, and there are those who never seem
able to realize that there is nothing in that fact inconsistent
with his supreme loyalty to historical truth.
A mystic may be an honest man. Spiritual insight is
perfectly compatible with historical verity. With the clear
ness of reminiscence characteristic of old age John recalls
details like these we have just mentioned without any
thought or suggestion of any symbolical significance in
them, but simply because they are a part of the general
picture of the event in his memory of it. No writer in the
New Testament is more devoted to the historical truth than
is John. He believed that grace and truth came by Jesus
Christ.27 He was a follower of Him who said, "I am the
truth."28 He had heard the Master pray, "Sanctify them in
the truth ; thy word is truth."29 He believed that Jesus had
come to bear witness to the truth, and he believed that only
those who were of the truth would hear the voice of Jesus30
and fellowship with him. He believed that, according to the
Master's promise, the Spirit of truth would guide him into
all the truth.31 Throughout his narrative there is all the
guilelessness of perfect sincerity, all the simplicity of utter
truthfulness. On every page there is the touch of reality.
The historical trustworthiness of the Gospel has been
presented by Askwith32 and Bleek33 and Brooke34 and

28 See the article by W. R. Inge on the Gospel of John, in the Dic
tionary of Christ and the Gospels.
27 John i. 17.
28 John 14. 6. 50 John 18. 37.
29 John 17. 17. 81 John 16. 13.
82 The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel.
88 Introduction, pp. 298f, 327L
84 Cambridge Essays on Biblical Questions, X.

102 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Wendt35 and J. Armitage Robinson,36 and they have shown
upon what insufficient grounds critics have concluded that
John invented his incidents to teach and illustrate his
theology while they have pointed out the abundant reasons
we have to believe that John speaks the truth when he tells
us of the things he himself claims to have seen and heard.
They are ready to sign their names to the attestation at the
close of the book, "This is the disciple that beareth witness
of these things, and wrote these things : and we know that
his witness is true."37
3. Another distinguishing characteristic of the Gospel
according to John is its simplicity of expression. No one
of the Gospels is labored or pedantic or heavy in style, and
yet no one of the synoptics equals the utter simplicity of the
Johannine sentences. There is absolutely nothing which
looks like striving after effect. The most profound truths
are set forth in the most simple terms. There is no effort
and no ornament. All is as simple as the twenty-third
psalm. Yet there is an elevation in the thought, as of
mountain peaks; a loftiness of sentiment and a sublimity of
atmosphere, as in the heights. It is easier to read the
Greek of this Gospel than that of any other. It is the book
for beginners in the study of the language. The transla
tion into English represents the simplicity of its expression
in large measure. It is the book we put into the hands of
new converts for their first study in the Scripture. Chil
dren can comprehend its truth. Catechumens find it full
of inspiration and blessing. Yet it is a strange fact that
it never loses its charm with continued study or with ad
vancing years. Old people enjoy it even more than the
young. Philosophers and profound theologians realize that
there are treasures here which are not equaled on any

88 Das Johannes-Evangelium, pp. 8f.
88 The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel.
87 John 21. 24.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 103
other pages of Scripture and which will repay their closest
thought and reward their deepest meditation.
4. We might put that down as another distinguishing
characteristic of the fourth Gospel — its remarkable union
of clearness and profundity of revelation. Strauss said
that John was "a master of lucid obscurity," but John
never is obscure in his writing. As far as we can see, it is
perfectly clear. If we cannot see through it, that is the
fault of our sight. There is no cloudiness of thought and
no hindrance to our vision as far as our insight is capable
of discernment. The pages of the fourth Gospel are like
the waters of Lake Tahoe — crystal clear but of unfathom
able depths. They are like the clear heavens above us,
filled with worlds which are hidden by the very excess of
light. The child thinks he sees all of them and he rejoices
in the sunshine and is satisfied with his fullness of light.
The philosopher and the astronomer know that they see
only an infinitesimal distance into the infinities of the
celestial spaces, and it is their joy to search and search,
that they may see more and more of their exhaustless full
ness of light. It is thus with the writings of John.
Westcott says, "No writing perhaps, if we view it simply
as a writing, combines greater simplicity with more pro
found depths."38 Philip Schaff says of the fourth Gospel,
"No book is so plain and yet so deep, so natural and yet so
full of mystery. It is . . . deep as the sea and high as the
heavens."39 It was Bishop Hopkins who said of the Bible,
"It is a ford wherein a lamb may wade, and a sea wherein
an elephant may swim"; and "that rare scholar" Robert
Boyle said of the Word of God, "It is a matchless volume ;
it is impossible that we can study it too much, or esteem it
too highly." These sayings can be applied to the Gospel
according to John in fullest measure.
Adolph Saphir has written an appreciation of the spirit
88 Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, p. 255.
89 History of the Christian Church, vol. i, p. 688.

104 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
and the style of John in these words : "There is a simplicity
which is the result of full and profound knowledge, of
varied experience and conflict; a simplicity which is the
indication of abundance and depth, which is the result of
meditation, prayerfulness, and a humble walk with God.
They who are fathers in the church, who, like the apostle
John, lean on the bosom of Jesus, who behold the glory of
the Only-Begotten, and in singleness of heart rest in his
love, reach a lofty and calm mountain height, and they
express their knowledge and experience with great sim
plicity and brevity. We often fancy we understand their
quiet and axiomatic words, or that we have fathomed their
meaning, and yet we may only have come into contact with
the surface. The apostle John is thus the simplest and
deepest teacher in the church. Like the Sabbath day, he
appears among the disciples; a solemn, yet childlike quiet
and simplicity characterize his words ; we meet with no
complicated arguments, no noise and struggle, no upward
steep ascent from earth to heaven, law to grace, Levitical
type to Melchizedek perfection; we are transplanted at
once into the high region of God's light, love, life. These
simple yet inexhaustible words are the constantly recurring
realities of which he testifies. To reach this simplicity is
the object of the Christian individual and of the Christian
Church."40 Simplicity, clearness, and profundity — these
are the three principal characteristics of the revelation of
this remarkable book.
5. John has a most remarkable literary style. We will
note some of its peculiarities. (1) A fondness for choice
words. John has a comparatively limited vocabulary. He
uses the same words again and again. These words, how
ever, are choice words, capable of a great variety of mean
ings and uses. So that Simcox declares : "John has imper
fect command of Greek idiom, but a very adequate com-

40 Saphir, Epistle to the Hebrews, vol. i, pp. 305, 306.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 105
mand of the Greek vocabulary. He frames his sentences
as he can, but he chooses his words as he will."41
As examples of the words characteristic of the Johan
nine vocabulary we subjoin the following, with the number
of times they are used in the Gospel : ffdp£ flesh, eight times ;
oKoria, darkness, nine times ; arjiielov, sign, seventeen times ;
fi£veiv,to remain, eighteen times ;kqIvuv, to judge, nineteen
times ; layov, work, twenty-three times ; 0wc, light, twenty-
three times ; 0ewpen>, to behold, twenty-three times. This
verb is found only fifteen times in all the synoptics put
together. John is the Apostle of Insight, and this verb
is a favorite with him. "Ovofia, name, occurs twenty-five
times; ifafteia, truth, twenty-five times; 86%a, glory, and
do^tadai, to glory, forty-two times ; fiaprvpla, witness, and
liaprvpeiv, to witness, forty-seven times; fwj},life, and %r\v, to
live, fifty-two times ; yivuoiceiv, to know, fifty-five times ;
ic6a[iog, world, seventy-eight times, while in all the synoptics
it occurs only fifteen times. Jliareveiv, to believe, occurs
ninety-eight times in the fourth Gospel — twice as often
as in all the synoptics put together. This is all the more
remarkable when we remember that the noun marig, faith
or belief, is not found in the Gospel at all.
These words belong to John's carefully chosen, specially
prized, and constantly used treasury of important terms.
He prefers them to others. He repeats them as often as
he chooses. He rings the changes upon them from the
beginning to the end of his book. They represent spiritual
realities to him. They have a great depth of meaning and
are capable of development along many lines of thought.
(2) As with words, so with ideas. Certain ideas seem
to cling to certain persons or things in John's mind. We
may call this peculiarity, fondness for a refrain. When
ever the relatives of Jesus are mentioned, something is said
about his "hour." Whenever the rulers are introduced,

41 The Writers of the New Testament, p. 74.

106 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
their "unbelief" is emphasized. Whenever Judas appears,
his betrayal is recalled and something is said about "Satan"
or "the devil." If John the Baptist comes into view, his
testimony is immediately mentioned ; it is always as a wit
ness that he appears. In every decisive moment Jesus
utters the refrain, "I am — ." Whether as a word of com
fort or as a word of authority it comes in again and again
like the motif of a symphony. These refrains recur in
every part of the narrative, and stand as finger-posts point
ing out the course of thought or boundary stones marking
the chief divisions of the book. They show that in John's
mind in connection with every figure and every scene the
central fact or significance of it absorbed his attention to
the exclusion of every other thing. He was as single in
thought as he was single in heart. That was essential to
the making of a Boanerges.
(3) We notice, as a third peculiarity, a fondness for the
mystic numbers three and seven. Farrar says, "Almost all
the subsections of the Gospel run in triplets,"42 and then
he quotes from Keim, "Jesus is thrice in Galilee, thrice in
Judaea, twice three feasts take place during his ministry,
and particularly three passover feasts — in the beginning,
the middle, the end — which either foretell or procure his
death. He works three miracles in Galilee and three in
Jerusalem. Twice three days is he in the neighborhood
of John ; three days are covered by the narrative of Lazarus,
and six by the fatal passover. He utters three sayings on
the cross, and appears thrice after his resurrection." Holtz-
mann adds these triplets to the list : "The Prologue begins
with three propositions ; three divisions are expressly made
of the discourse on the last day of Tabernacles ; three dis
closures of the traitor are made by Jesus ; three times he is
himself condemned; three times Pilate attempts to save
him ; three days he lies in the tomb."43
42 Messages of the Books, p. 1 12.
48 Einleitung, p. 438,

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 107
Seven times in this Gospel the Lord says, "I am — " : "I
am the bread of life" (6. 48) ; "I am the light of the world"
(8. 12) ; "I am the door of the sheep" (10. 7) ; "I am the
good shepherd" (10. 11); "I am the resurrection and the
life" (11. 25); "I am the way, and the truth, and the
life" (14. 6); "I am the true vine" (15. 1). Only seven
apostles are mentioned by name in this Gospel, if we except
Judas, who seems in John's representation to stand alone,
outside the sacred number. Seven of the apostles go fish
ing after the crucifixion, and that perfect number meet the
Lord and are, like Peter, recommissioned for service.
Westcott says, "It is not fanciful to see a significance in
the number of miracles" recorded in this Gospel. There
are seven in Christ's ministry, and an eighth after the resur
rection. To the Hebrew seven was the figure of the com
plete and perfect whole, and eight was the figure of the
resurrection or the new birth.44 Some of these suggestions
may be open to criticism; but it is true that the Hebrew
mind delighted in these symbolic numbers to a degree
almost incomprehensible in the Occident; and there are
enough of these numbers in the arrangement of John's
material to show that he was a true Hebrew at this point.
Looking the Gospel through carefully we find that there
are seven witnesses cited for the validity of the claims of
Jesus: the witness of the forerunner, John the Baptist
(T- 7> 5- 33)> t^e witness of the Father (5. 34, 37), the
witness of the Son (8. 14; 18. 37), the witness of the
works (5. 36; 10. 25), the witness of the Scripture (5. 39-
46), the witness of the Spirit (15. 26; 16. 14), the witness
of the disciples (15. 27; 19. 35).
There are seven noteworthy confessions of faith peculiar
to this Gospel: John the Baptist's "Behold the Lamb of
God" (1. 29) ; Andrew's "We have found the Messiah"
(1. 41); Nathanael's "Rabbi, thou art the Son of God"

44 Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, p. 284, n.

108 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
(i. 49); the report of the officers sent to arrest him,
"Never man so spake" (7. 46) ; the blind man's profession,
"Lord I believe" [that Jesus was the Son of God] (9. 38) ;
Martha's cry of faith, "I have believed that thou art the
Christ, the Son of God" (11. 27) ; and last of all Thomas's
triumph over every doubt in the exclamation of adoring
faith and love, "My Lord and my God" '(20. 28). Did it
just happen that the number seven occurs in all these cases ?
It is strange that it happens so many times, so strange that
the probability would seem to be that it is no happening,
but, rather, that it is intentional. This fondness for He
braic number grouping becomes all the more likely when
we notice other Hebraistic characteristics in the style of
John. (4) Schaff points out that in this Gospel "the parallelism
of Hebrew poetry is very apparent in such double sentences
as: 'Peace I leave with you; my peace I give unto you'
(14. 27) ; 'A servant is not greater than his lord; neither
one that is sent greater than he that sent him' (13. 16) ;
'All things were made through him; and without him was
not anything made that hath been made' (1. 3). Examples
of antithetic parallelism are also frequent: "The light
shineth in the darkness; and the darkness apprehended it
not" (1. 5); "He was in the world, . . . and the world
knew him not" (1. 10); "He confessed, and denied not"
(1. 20); "I give unto them eternal life; and they shall
never perish" (10. 28). 45
(5) There are Hebraistic forms of expression. The
verb "to know" is made to express spiritual union. The
phrases "to be in" or "to abide in" express moral depend
ence. These are pure Hebraisms. "To rejoice with rejoic
ing" and the Greek phrase for "forever" are Hebraic in
origin. Twenty-five times in this Gospel and nowhere else
in the New Testament we find Jesus beginning his speech

* History of the Christian Church, p. 699.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 100
/
with a "Verily, verily." This is the double Hebrew "Amen,
amen." (6) John is Hebrew again in his liking for straightfor
ward constructions. The Greek delighted in logical de
velopment and in subtle connections of thought. The He
brew preferred simplicity of statement. The Greek
language has a multitude of particles to assist in the ex
pression of the relation of the several portions of an
intricate sentence to the central thought. For the most
part John ignores all help of this sort. He uses a very
few of these particles and usually is content with the
simple conjunction nal, "and." He adds sentences to each
other rather than connects them with each other. Instead
of saying, "The light shineth in the darkness ; but the dark
ness apprehended it not" (i. 5), he says, "The light shineth
in the darkness ; and the darkness apprehended it not." In
stead of saying, "Though Jesus was in the world, yet the
world knew him not" (1. 10), he says, "He was in the
world, . . . and the world knew him not." Instead of
saying, "We bear witness of that which we have seen, but
ye receive not our witness" (3. 11), he says, "We . . . bear
witness of that which we have seen; and ye receive not
our witness." Instead of saying, "Jesus taught in the
temple publicly and openly, and yet, though it was so easy
to do it, no one laid hands on him" (8. 20), he says, "He
taught in the temple: and no man took him."
It is comparatively easy to write Greek in this fashion,
and in the fourth Gospel the Greek is comparatively good,
but it is all of this unambitious, straightforward sort. John
writes Greek after the Hebrew style and he does not involve
himself in any difficulties because he moves along straight
lines and confines himself to the simplest constructions. It
is correct but kindergarten Greek. John writes in Greek,
but thinks in Hebrew. He chooses good words and writes
good sentences, but they are of the kind which any begin
ner might construct.

no JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
These Hebrew sacred numbers, Hebrew parallelisms,
Hebrew forms of expression, and Hebrew constructions
indicate clearly enough that the writer of the fourth Gospel,
though he used the Greek language, was himself a Hebrew,
accustomed to Hebrew literature, and with Hebrew habits
of thought. Nothing could be farther astray than Renan's
judgment that the style of this Gospel "has nothing He
brew, nothing Jewish, nothing Talmudic." Ewald states
the truth when he says, "In its true spirit and afflatus, no
language can be more genuinely Hebrew than that of
John." Godet says : "Though Greek in its forms, the style
is nevertheless Hebrew in its substance. ... In the lan
guage of John, the clothing only is Greek, the body is
Hebrew; or, as Luthardt says, there is a Hebrew soul in
the Greek language of the evangelist."46 Schaff discusses
the style of the fourth Gospel and concludes, "It is pure
Greek in vocabulary and grammar, but thoroughly Hebrew*
in temper and spirit, even more so than any other book,
and can be almost literally translated into Hebrew without
losing its force or beauty."47
VI. Occasion and Aim
What was the occasion which led John to write this
fourth Gospel ? i. The first answer ever given to that ques
tion in the literature of the early church is found in the
Muratorian Fragment, whose date probably is about A. D.
170. The writer of the Fragment says that John wrote at
the request of his fellow disciples and bishops in Asia
Minor. His account is as follows: "At their entreaties
John said, Fast with me for three days from this time, and
whatever shall be revealed to each of us, let us relate it
to one another. On the same night it was revealed to
Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should relate all

48 Commentary on John, p. 138.
47 Op. cit., p. 690.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL in
things in his own name, aided by the revision of all. . . .
What wonder is it, then, that John brings forward each
detail with so much emphasis even in his epistles, saying
of himself, 'What we have seen with our eyes and heard
with our ears and our hands have handled, these things
have we written to you'? For so he professes that he
was not only an eyewitness, but also a hearer, and, more
over, a historian of all the wonderful works of the Lord
in order."48
2. A somewhat different reason for John's writing is
given by Jerome in the Preface to his Commentary on
Matthew: "The last [of the Gospel writers] is John, the
apostle and evangelist, whom Jesus loved most, who, reclin
ing upon the Lord's bosom, drank the purest streams of
doctrine. . . . When he was in Asia, at the time when the
seeds of heresy were springing up (I refer to Cerinthus,
Ebion, and the rest who say that Christ has not come in
the flesh, whom he in his own epistle calls Anti-Christs,
and whom the apostle Paul frequently assails), he was
urged by almost all the bishops of Asia then living, and
by deputations from many churches, to write more pro
foundly concerning the divinity of the Saviour, and to
break through all obstacles so as to attain to the very Word
of God (if I may so speak) with a boldness as successful
as it appears audacious. Ecclesiastical history relates that,
when he was urged by the brethren to write, he replied that
he would do so if a general fast were proclaimed and all
would offer up prayer to God ; and when the fast was over,
the narrative goes on to say, being filled with revelation
[revelatione saturatus, "having been saturated with revela
tion"], he burst into the heaven-sent Preface, In the begin
ning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the
Word was God : this was in the beginning with God."49

48 Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. v, p. 603.
49 Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, vol. vi, p. 495.

112 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
The writer of the Muratorian Fragment suggested no
other reason for John's writing than that his friends and
disciples desired him to put into permanent form the teach
ing they had- come to value so highly ; for they esteemed
him the fittest medium of the gospel revelation to be found
in the apostolic company. It is interesting to note the
occurrence of Andrew's name in this connection. It was
Andrew, according to the story told in the first chapter of
this Gospel, who was with John when the two first ap
proached Jesus. It is Andrew, according to the story told
in this tradition, who is with John in his old age here in
Ephesus and to whom the divine indication is given that
it was the will of God that John should write as the church
desired. The two names are joined in this way at the
very beginning and at the very end of their gospel ministry.
Evidently it is this tradition upon which Jerome builds his
statement, but he adds that it was the growth of heresy
in their neighborhood which led the church officials to
present this request to John. The Gospel was written, he
says, not only to be a medium of revelation but also to be
a weapon of defense. It was to be didactic and it was to
be polemic as well.50
3. Eusebius, in his Church History, suggests a third rea
son for John's writing, namely, that of supplementing the
imperfect accounts given by the synoptics. He says: "The
three Gospels already mentioned having come into the
hands of all and into his own too, they say that John ac
cepted them and bore witness to their truthfulness; but
that there was lacking in them an account of the deeds
done by Christ at the beginning of his ministry. . . . They
say, therefore, that the apostle John, being asked to do it
for this reason, gave in his Gospel an account of the period
80 Irenseus, Adv. Haer., Ill, ii, 1, had suggested that John wrote to
"remove the error" of Cerinthus and the Nicolaitanes. Erasmus,
Hengstenberg, Grotius, Hug, De Wette, Ebrard, Ewald, Lange, and
Alford lay emphasis on the polemical design of the Gospel.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 113
which had been omitted by the earlier evangelists, and of
the deeds done by the Saviour during that period."81
It is evident that these three reasons are not necessarily
inconsistent with each other. John may have been re
quested to write a Gospel in which he would be a teacher,
a polemic, and a historian. Those who heard him may
have considered his teaching too valuable to be lost when
he died, and one reason for that may have been that it
contained so much which the synoptics did not mention
and so much which was opposed to the heretical perver
sions of the truth which some already were venturing to
promulgate in the church. John may have had all of
these things in mind as he composed this fourth Gospel.
He may have aimed to give a supplementary, a more spirit
ual, a more serviceable account of the life of Jesus, one
which would present the truth of that life more faithfully
and one which would refute all errors concerning that life^
in so doing.
wi. He states his aim in writing in the closing words of \
the Gospel : "Many other signs therefore did Jesus in the |
presence of the disciples, which are not written in this
book : but these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus
is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may
have life in his name."52 This is the authoritative state
ment of the aim of the Gospel. We add two other state
ments as probably the best conclusions of scholarship on
this subject. 2. Bernhard Weiss said: "The aim is to set
forth the glory of the divine Logos, as John had beheld it
in the earthly life of Jesus, as it had more and more mag
nificently revealed itself in conflict with unbelieving and
hostile Judaism, and as it had led receptive souls to a faith
ever more firm and to a contemplation ever more blessed.

81 Eusebius, Church History, III, 24. Michaelis, Beyschlag, West-
cott, and Salmon believe that the Gospel was intended to supplement
the synoptic accounts.
82 John 20. 30, 31.

114 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
This is what the evangelist desires."53 That statement
recalls the words of John i. 14, "We beheld his glory,"
or, more literally: "We theatrized his glory. We gazed
upon it with all the absorbing interest and with all the rapt
attention and with all the conscious delight with which men
enjoy the best and highest type of theatrical representa
tion." It was such a drama as this old Globe Theater never
had seen before, and the glory of it had filled John's eyes.
Something of that glory he has been able to put into his
written page. 3. Luthardt said: "John would picture
Christ as the Son of God in the absolute sense ; that is, as
the one who has come from God himself and who stands
in absolute God-fellowship. All the fullness of the divine
life is in him and is communicated through him. He is
therefore the object of the faith which is absolutely neces
sary to salvation."54 VII. Contents
The Central Thought of the Gospel is the incarnation,
the Word become flesh, the Son of God as the Son of man.
The Central Figure of the Gospel is that of Jesus the
Divine Revealer and the Human Brother throughout.
Jesus is in the midst and on either side two, Faith and Un
belief. Here are The Three Factors which make up the
entire composition. All that John says is to show how
and why some believed in the claims and the teachings of
Jesus, and also how and why others refused to believe.
The reasons for faith, the possibilities of faith, the develop
ment of faith are pictured on the one hand and the sin
and suicide of unbelief are pictured in their development
and sad fruition on the other hand. Jesus is God incar-
hate. The Father was in him and spoke through him.
Jesus represents the highest reach of the Divine revelation.
63 From notes taken in lecture room in Berlin.
84 From notes taken in lecture room in Leipsic.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 115
Faith in him, therefore, is an absolute necessity to perfect
salvation. There is more of Jesus in the fourth Gospel than there
was in the synoptics. The keynote in them was the king
dom of God; the keynote in John is the Son of God. In
the synoptics Jesus speaks much about the Kingdom and
its claims, and he says comparatively little about himself
and his claims. In John he says comparatively little about
the Kingdom and its claims, and he talks much about him
self and his claims. In the synoptics his speeches often
begin with the words, The kingdom of heaven is like unto
this or that. In John these words do not occur, but we
hear Jesus saying again and again, "I am the Bread, the
Door, the Good Shepherd," and so on. There it is "the
Kingdom"; here it is "I." To John the person of Jesus
is of central and supreme importance. All the interests
of the Kingdom, in earth and heaven, depend upon him.
Upon these three factors, the Divine Manifestation in
Jesus, faith in him, and unbelief manifesting itself in hos
tility to him, we build our Outline of the contents of the
fourth Gospel: 1. The prologue, presenting Jesus as the
Logos revelation in human flesh (1. 1-18). 2. Jesus re
veals himself as the Messiah (1. 19 to 4. 54). 3. The
growing revelation, together with the growing faith of the
disciples and the growing unbelief of the Jews (chapters
5-12). 4. Faith consummated; the last discourses with the
disciples, and Judas expelled (chapters 13-17). 5. Unbe
lief of the Jews consummated in the arrest, trial, and cruci
fixion of Jesus (chapters 18, 19). 6. The resurrection
appearances in Jerusalem. The perfect triumph of faith
when doubting Thomas believes (chapter 20). 7. The
Epilogue. Appearance at the sea of Tiberias, and the attes
tation (chapter 21).
We suggest the following chapter and paragraph outline,
the paragraphs being those of the American Revised Ver
sion.

116 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
I. The Chapter of Beginnings. There are three clearly
distinguishable subjects treated in this chapter; first, the
Logos doctrine, "In the beginning was the Word" ; second,
the witness of John the Baptist; and, third, the First
Disciples. Subdividing the second and third heads into
two paragraphs each, we have five paragraphs in the chap
ter, as follows: (i) The Logos Revelation through Incar
nation. (2) The witness of John the Baptist to his own
relation to the Messianic movement. (3) The witness of
the Baptist to the Person of the Messias. (4) Andrew,
John, and Peter. (5) Philip and Nathanael.
2. The Beginning of Signs. (1) The Cana miracle.
(2) Capernaum visited. (3) Cleansing of the temple.
(4) Confidence refused.
3. Nicodemus chapter. ( 1 ) Conversation of Nicodemus
with Jesus. (2) Comments by the evangelist John. (3)
Conversation of John the Baptist with his disciples. (4)
Comments by the evangelist John.
4. The Woman at the Well chapter. (1) Conversation
of the woman with Jesus. (2) Conversation of the disciples
with Jesus. (3) The Samaritan revival. (4) Jesus goes
from Samaria into Galilee. (5) Healing of the noble
man's son.
5. The Sabbath chapter. (1) Jesus goes to a Jerusalem
feast. (2) He heals an impotent man on the Sabbath day.
(3) He defends himself against the charge of Sabbath-
breaking. (4) He preaches a Sabbath sermon, declaring
that the power of life and judgment is given to the Son,
and (5) proclaiming the fourfold witness to himself.
6. The Bread of Life chapter. (1) Jesus feeds the five
thousand. (2) He withdraws into the mountain. (3) He
walks upon the sea. (4) He preaches in the synagogue at
Capernaum that he is the bread of life. (5) The Jews
murmur and he tells them that the bread he will give is
his. flesh. (6) The Jews debate this statement, and he tells
them they must eat his flesh and drink his blood. (7)

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 117
The disciples murmur, and he tells them the flesh profiteth
nothing, for it is the spirit that gives life. (8) Many
disciples desert him, but Peter confesses that he is the Holy
One of God.
7. The Feast of Tabernacles chapter. (1) Jesus refuses
to go with his brethren to the feast. (2) He goes in
secret and hears the questioning of the multitude concern
ing him. (3) He teaches publicly in the temple, and
defends himself. (4) The multitude divided in opinion
about him. (5) On the last day of the feast Jesus cries,
"If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink."
(6) The officers sent to arrest him declare, "Never man so
spake." 8. The Light of the World chapter. (1) The woman
taken in adultery. (2) Jesus proclaims himself the light
of the world. (3) He foretells his going away and his
lifting up. (4) Controversy concerning Abraham. The
Jews claim to be the children of Abraham and Jesus says
they are the children of the devil, for they do not have
Abraham's spirit and they do not do Abraham's works.
9. The Blind Man chapter. ( 1 ) Jesus heals a man blind
from birth. (2) The blind man is brought before the
Pharisees and is cast out of the synagogue. (3) He meets
Jesus and confesses him to be Lord.
10. The Good Shepherd chapter. ( 1 ) Jesus talks of the
sheepfold. (2) He declares himself the door of the sheep.
(3) The Jews dispute as to whether he is a demoniac or
divine. (4) At the feast of the dedication Jesus talks of
his sheep, and the Jews would stone him, and he defends
himself from the charge of blasphemy. (5) Jesus goes
beyond Jordan.
n. The Lazarus chapter. (1) The death of Lazarus.
(2) The resurrection of Lazarus. (3) Many Jews believe.
(4) The chief priests and Pharisees in council decide to
put Jesus to death. (5) Jesus withdraws to Ephraim.
12. The Last Public Events of the Ministry of Jesus. (1)

118 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
The anointing at Bethany. (2) The chief priests decide to
put both Jesus and Lazarus to death. (3) The triumphal
entry. (4) The visit of the Greeks, and the last public
discourse of Jesus. (5) Comments by the evangelist John.
(6) Summary of the preaching of Jesus.
13. The Last Supper chapter. (1) Jesus washes the
disciples' feet. (2) Lessons of this incident. (3) Jesus
foretells the betrayal and points out the betrayer. (4) He
gives the new commandment. (5) He foretells the denial
of Peter.
14. The Comforter chapter. (1) The Comforter com
forts and promises another Comforter. (2) He bequeaths
peace and commands rejoicing.
15. The True Vine chapter.
16. The Last Words chapter, the close of the farewell
discourses with his disciples. Jesus declares ( 1 ) That it is
expedient for him to go away, and (2) That he has over
come the world.
17. The Lord's Prayer chapter.
18. The Arrest and Trial chapter. (1) The arrest of
Jesus. (2) Jesus led before Annas. (3) Peter's first
denial. (4) Jesus questioned by Annas and sent to Caia-
phas. (5) Peter's second and third denial. (6) Jesus
brought before Pilate. (7) Pilate questions Jesus. (8)
Pilate would release Jesus.
19. The Crucifixion chapter. (1) Pilate vacillates but
finally delivers Jesus up to be crucified. (2) The crucifixion.
(3) The soldiers cast lots for his coat and Jesus commits
his mother to the care of John (4) The death of Jesus.
(5) The piercing of his side. (6) His burial by Joseph
of Arimathaea and Nicodemus.
20. The Resurrection chapter. (1) The empty tomb.
(2) The appearance to Mary. (3) The appearance to the
disciples in the closed room. (4) The doubt of Thomas.
(5) The appearance to Thomas and the other disciples.
(6) The aim of the Gospel.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 119
21. The Supplement chapter, or Epilogue. (1) The
appearance at the Sea of Tiberias. (2) Conversation with
Peter at this time. (3) The Attestation. (4) Disclaimer
as to completeness.
VIII. The Johannine Authorship Disputed
The greatest battle yet fought in the field of the higher
criticism in the New Testament is that concerning the
authorship of the Johannine books and more especially of
the fourth Gospel. It has lasted for more than a century,
and it is far from being ended to-day. In the field of the
New Testament it corresponds in interest and in magnitude
to the conflict which has been waged in the field of the Old
Testament over the Mosaic authorship and the composite
character of the books of the Pentateuch. In the Old
Testament discussion the higher critics have won the day,
and there is very general agreement now among all au
thorities that the Law in its present form is a compara
tively late product in Jewish literature, and that many dif
ferent sources or documents are to be distinguished in its
composition, and that it is Mosaic only in remote origin
or inspiration; and in certain circles the feeling seems to
be prevalent that what has happened in the Old Testament
also has happened in the New Testament. Many seem
to think that the decisive victory won by the critics in the
greatest conflict in the Old Testament field has been paral
leled by an equally decisive victory in the greatest conflict
in the New Testament field, and that the belief in the
Johannine authorship of the fourth Gospel has been shat
tered as clearly and as completely as the belief in the
Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. This is far from
being the case.
The situation in all questions of criticism in the New
Testament field is very different from that which obtains
in the Old Testament. There we are dealing with the
products of remote antiquity and we have few if any con-

120 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
temporaneous records, and we must depend almost wholly
upon internal evidence for our conclusions concerning the
authorship of the Old Testament books. The first external
testimonies which we can adduce concerning the authen
ticity of these books are removed by so many centuries
from the time of their composition that they can represent
only extremely attenuated and correspondingly unreliable
tradition. It is not so in the case of the New Testament.
The New Testament books were written in a literary age.
The Christian literature is continuous, from the writings
of the apostles through the writings of the church Fathers,
the apologists, the historians, the commentators, and the
scholars to the present time. We can adduce more or less
conclusive external evidence for the authorship of New
Testament books. The church tradition concerning these
rests upon what the church deems reliable testimony, and
any attack upon the tradition must overthrow the testimony
first of all before any internal evidence can be adduced.
In the case of the fourth Gospel we have direct statements
as to its authorship among the writings of the church
Fathers and direct and indirect quotations from it as of
apostolic authority in the church, in writings reaching back
to the very time of its composition. Upon what ground,
then, has any question been raised concerning it? A brief
review of the hundred years of discussion will answer
that query.
J One cannot but suspect that some at least of the opposi
tion to the fourth Gospel has sprung from theological
prejudices and dogmatic presuppositions. A hardheaded,
prosaic critic naturally enough is disposed to run a tilt
against the supernaturalism and the mysticism of the
Johannine literature. Professor Davison closes his able
discussion of the Johannine authorship of the fourth Gospel
with this deliberate judgment : "Those who hold such views
of God, of Jesus Christ, of history, and of the Christian
religion, as to be able to accept the view that Jesus of

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 121
Nazareth was indeed the Son of God, the Word of God
Incarnate, who wrought works that never man wrought
and spoke words such as mere man never spoke, who died
for our sins and rose again from the dead and lives now
to impart the gift of that Spirit whom he promised — will
find little difficulty in accepting the statement that John the
apostle who saw the things recorded in the Gospel hath
borne witness, and his witness is true. Those to whom
such statements are upon other grounds quite incredible,
and who ascribe them not to the religion of Jesus and his
first disciples, but to the dogma of a period which had
advanced beyond the teaching of Paul to a point which is
characteristic of the second century, will naturally adopt
any theory of authorship that the case allows rather than
admit that the fourth Gospel was written by the son of
Zebedee. Absolute demonstration is from the nature of
the case impossible, but it may fairly be said that the ex
ternal and the internal evidences combined are such as
would in any ordinary case, and apart from all doctrinal
prepossessions, be considered strong, if not conclusive, in
favor of the Johannine authorship of the Gospel."55
The modern attack upon the authenticity of the fourth
Gospel usually is said to have begun with the publication
of a book by Edward Evanson, in 1792, entitled The Dis
sonance of the Four Generally Received Evangelists, and
the Evidence of Their Respective Authenticity Examined.
Evanson had been a clergyman in the Church of England
and resigned his position on the ground that Christianity
was too plain a thing to be taught as a lucrative occupation.
Free from entanglement with any religious sect or party,
advanced in years and claiming to have a mature judgment
and an unbiased mind, he professed impartiality in his
investigations. He decided that the Gospel according to
Luke was authentic, but the other three Gospels were

88 Hastings, op. cit., p. 484.

122 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
"spurious fictions of the second century, unnecessary and
even prejudicial to the cause of true Christianity, and in
every respect unworthy of the regard which so many ages
have paid to them."56 He also decided that the Epistle
to the Romans ought to be "expunged out of the volume"
of the New Testament.57 Almost no one has paid any
regard to his mature and impartial judgment upon this
subject. The Epistle to the Romans has been deemed
authentic by practically all the scholars from his time to
the present day. Comparatively little attention was paid
to any other part of his book; but the thirty-three pages
in it which had to do with the fourth Gospel marked the
beginning of an enormous literature on the subject which
has been increasing with every succeeding generation and
of which there is no apparent diminution now.
The books immediately succeeding that of Evanson
neither deserved nor received much notice. The attack
was continued by a succession of German theological
writers. In 1796 Eckermann 58 disputed the authenticity
of the fourth Gospel in its present form; and he recalled
his criticism in 1807.59 In 1801 Vogel60 summoned John
and his interpreters before the Last Judgment, and decided
the case against them. In 1808 Cludius61 and in 1812
Ballenstedt62 renewed the skirmish, but the great battle
was still to come. In 1820 Bretschneider published a
modest little book in Latin,63 not for general reading but

88 Op. cit., p. 255.
87 Idem., p. 256.
88 Theologische Beitrage, vol. v.
88 Erklarung aller dunkeln Stellen des N. T.
60 Der Evangelist Johannes und seine Ausleger vor dem jungsten
Gericht. 81 Uransichten des Christenthums nebst Untersuchungen uber einige
Bucher des N. T.
82 Philo und Johannes.
83 Probabilia de Evangelio et Epistolarum Joannis Apostoli indole et
origine.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 123
for the judgment of the learned,64 which was a profound
and comprehensive attack upon the Johannine authorship
and which, according to Weiss,85 discussed with scarcely
a single exception every important suspicion advanced by
more modern criticism against the genuineness of the
Gospel. Weiss calls it an epoch-making book, and it
surely has been an arsenal of strength to all later opponents
of the authenticity of the Gospel according to John.
Bretschneider decided that, in all probability, the Gospel
was written by a presbyter in Alexandria in the middle of
the second century. In the preface to his book he says:
"But we ask you, kind reader, to believe that whatever
conclusions we have come to, we do not regard them as
the utterances of an oracle, but as things which seem X
probable after discussion. It is not that in our opinion
the Gospel of John is spurious, but only that it seems to be
so, though we should have preferred to write is more
frequently instead of, for the thousandth time, repeating
seems. For we expect, nay, we hope, that experts in critic
ism will teach us better wherever we may have made mis
takes, and we will accept their corrections most will
ingly."66 The event proved his entire honesty in making
this promise; for when in the most comprehensive and
satisfactory manner his objections had been answered by
Lucke67 and Tholuck68 and Olshausen69 and Crome70 and
Hauff,71 Bretschneider publicly withdrew his conclusions
and declared that he was satisfied that the authenticity of
the Gospel was fully established and the question might be
84 Eruditorum judiciis modeste subjecit, is part of the title.
86 Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii, p. 389.
88 Probabilia, preface, p. viiL
87 Commentar uber die Schriften des Evangelisten Johannes, 3rd ed.
1840. 88 Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis, 1st ed. 1827; 7th ed. 1857.
89 Die Echtheit der vier canonischen Evangelien, 1823.
70 Probabilia haud Probabilia, 1824.
71 Die Authentic und der hohe Werth des Evangeliums Johannis, 1831.

124 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
considered settled for the theological world.72 It would
be well if some of the younger theologians of the present
day would take a lesson from Bretschneider's modesty and
open-mindedness, and with learning no greater, if not less,
than his would quit posing as final oracles in this field, and
substitute for their present positiveness and assumption
something of his willingness to learn.
However, Bretschneider's withdrawal of his objections
did not leave the field uncontested for any length of time.
In 1835 Strauss's Life of Jesus appeared.73 It dissolved
the Gospel history into myths and, of course, proceeded
upon the assumption that all of our Gospels were un
authentic. The specious calm which had prevailed for a
few years was followed by a fierce renewal of the conflict.
Tholuck74 and Neander75 and De Wette76 helped Strauss
to a renewed study of the fourth Gospel and in the third
edition of his Life of Jesus, published in 1838, he expressed
considerable doubt as to the validity of his former doubts
concerning its authenticity. In the fourth edition, in 1840,
however, he doubted the reasonableness of his doubts con
cerning his former doubts and went back to his previous
position that the fourth Gospel could not have been written
by the apostle John. One trouble with Strauss was that
he had written what professed to be a critical Life of
Jesus without any thoroughgoing criticism of the sources
from which his information concerning that life had been
obtained. That weakness was pointed out by Ferdinand
Christian Baur and he proceeded to make good this defi
ciency in the work of the younger man.

72 Handbuch der Dogmatik, 3rd ed. 1828, p. 268, "die aufgestellten
Zweifel konnen nun wohl als erledigt angesehen werden."
73 Das Leben Jesu kritisch bearbeitet.
"Die Glaubwurdigkeit der evangelischen Geschichte, 1837; 2nd ed.
1838. 78 Das Leben Jesu Christi, 1837.
78 Kurze Erklarung des Evangeliums und der Brief e Johannis, 1837.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 125
Baur was capable of herculean labors and he produced
an almost incredible amount of scholarly and critical ma
terial. He held the chair of historical theology in the
University of Tubingen. For more than thirty years he
was the most influential leader in theological thought in
Germany. His noble presence, his great ability, and his
ardor for original investigation attracted many brilliant
men to his classroom, and he became the founder of what
was known as the Tubingen School, or the Tendency
School in criticism. Zeller, Kostlin, Hilgenfeld, Volkmar,
Pfleiderer, Scherer, Schwegler, Holsten, Scholten, Renan,
and Samuel Davidson are among those who rallied to the
standard raised by Baur, and it may be doubted whether
any school of theology in these modern days ever had
such a galaxy of brilliant supporters or ever seemed to
have everything its own way to the extent in which Baur
and his disciples appeared to sweep all before them in the
middle and latter half of the past century. However, their
seeming success lasted but little longer than their own
generation. Hilgenfeld probably was the most able and the most
influential of the disciples of Baur, and when we visited
his lecture room in the University at Jena in the last decade
of the century, we found only two hearers there; and in
conversation afterward the old man complained bitterly
that the fashions had changed in theology and the once
popular movement in which he had taken part was being
discarded by the younger generation. To-day both the
radical and the conservative scholars declare that the
school as such is obsolete and no one professes adherence
to its distinguishing tenets any more. The only sufficient
reason for such a phenomenon as the sudden rise and
brilliant course and utter collapse of the Tubingen School
would seem to be that truth is mighty and will prevail in
the end.
Baur overworked the tendency theory of the composition

126 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
of the New Testament books and dated most of them a
hundred years or more too late. He thought that the
Gospel according to John was composed either in Asia
Minor or more probably in Alexandria in the years be
tween A. D. 1 60 and 170. Volkmar put the date back to
155. Zeller and Scholten decided that it would be safer
to say that the Gospel was written about 150. Hilgenfeld
was compelled to retreat still farther, and he decided that
the Gospel was composed in 130. Keim, after some hesi
tation, agreed with him. Weizsacker, Schenkel, Hase,
Reuss pushed the date of composition still farther back
between the years no and 125. Trench by trench the
allied forces of tradition and truth had pushed the enemy
from the territory it had usurped in its first brilliant dash,
until now the old lines are established once more. Renan
concluded, "There is one thing at least which I regard as
very probable, and that is that the fourth Gospel was
written before the year ioo,"77 and Harnack says now that
it was written not before the year 80 and not after the
year A. D. no.78
This gradual lowering of the date until it has reached
the limits prescribed by the earliest church tradition is
indicative of the compelling power of the arguments and
facts marshaled by the upholders of the Johannine author
ship. The critics have been forced to retreat step by step
until practically the last stronghold has been surrendered
and the time is even now at hand which Bishop Lightfoot
foretold, "when it will be discreditable to the reputation
of any critic for sobriety and judgment to assign to this
Gospel any later date than the end of the first century or
the very beginning of the second."70 What has discredited
the judgment of these great men who were disposed to put

77 Life of Jesus, p. xlv.
78 Chronologie, p. 680.
m The Fourth Gospel, p. 139.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 127
the composition of the fourth Gospel at a more or less
remote date in the second century and long after the death
of the apostle John ? A more thorough investigation of all
the facts in hand and in addition several most interesting
discoveries. Let us notice two or three of these.
IX. Discoveries Favorable to Authenticity
I. Tatian was a disciple of Justin Martyr and lived in the
latter half of the second century. He was the author of
the Diatessaron, the presentation of the gospel history by
a combination of the text furnished by our four Gospel
narratives. Dionysius Bar Salibi, who lived at the end of
the twelfth century, said that Ephraim of Edessa wrote
a commentary on the Diatessaron which began with a
comment on the sentence, "In the beginning was the Word."
That meant that the Gospel according to John was one
of the four Gospels used by Tatian in the composition of
his harmony, and, if so, that it was of equal authority with
the other three in the church of that age and, therefore, it
must have had some standing in antiquity and could not
have been composed in that period in which the Diatessaron
itself was constructed, as Baur had concluded.
It was easy enough to say that the statement of Diony
sius was too late to be of any authority and so rule it out
of court; and as long as no manuscript of the Diatessaron
was forthcoming that contention might be allowed to stand.
However, Ephraim's commentary upon the Diatessaron
was in existence in an Armenian translation in a monastery
in Venice, and the Mechitarist Fathers there published it
in 1836. There are not many Armenian scholars in Europe,
and this publication attracted no notice until Ezra Abbot
and . Harnack brought it to the attention of the learned
world in 1880. It contained the substance of Tatian's
Diatessaron and confirmed the statement of Dionysius as
to its use of the fourth Gospel with the other three.

128 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Great excitement was aroused by this discovery, and the
discussions which followed led to the further discovery of
an Arabic manuscript of the Diatessaron itself in the Vati
can library. This in turn led to the discovery of a very
beautiful Arabic manuscript in Egypt, and, being brought
to Rome, it was published at the time of Pope Leo XIII's
jubilee in 1888. It was apparent at once that the Diates
saron proved that the Gospel according to John was not first
coming into existence in A. D. 170, as Baur had suggested,
but that it was already in existence in A. D. 160, and of
equal standing with the other three, and that these four
Gospels had established themselves in the church with an
authority shared with no other books of this kind. That
meant that they had been handed down from the preceding
generations and it seemed more than likely that the Me
moirs of the Apostles, which Justin Martyr said were read
in the public services of the Christians, were the Gospels
thus highly honored by his pupil Tatian.
2. Baur and Zeller and Schwegler and Hilgenfeld and
Renan all denied that any quotations from the fourth
Gospel could be found in the Clementine Homilies. Only
nineteen of them were known, and the parallels of language
in these were open to question and were strenuously denied
by the Tubingen School. Then a twentieth Homily was
discovered and published, and it contained a quotation
from the fourth Gospel so plain that it had to be acknowl
edged by all.
3. The Philosophumena of Hippolytus was discovered at
Mount Athos in 1842, and when its contents had been fully
discussed it was agreed by almost all critics that it con
tained first-hand quotations from Basilides, the Gnostic
heretic of the first quarter of the second century. When
that had been decided, it was apparent that in these quota
tions from Basilides there were quotations from the fourth
Gospel, and even Keim acknowledged that the fourth
Gospel existed in the time of Basilides and that the Gnostics

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 129
were making use of the book.80 That meant that it was
of recognized authority at this early date.
All the discoveries of the past century in this field have
proved to be favorable to the Johannine authorship of the
book. No discovery has given any aid to the opponents
of that fact. Now that the composition of the fourth
Gospel is acknowledged by all parties to fall into the period
covered by the last years of the apostle John, spent, accord
ing to church tradition, in Ephesus, the battle against the
Johannine authorship must shift its ground. If the Gospel
existed from this early time, as all now admit, it could have
been written by the apostle himself, if he were living and
in Ephesus at this date. In the latest attacks upon the
authenticity of the book the attempt is made to prove that
John never lived in Ephesus, and that he did not live to
a great old age, but was martyred at the same time with
his brother James and comparatively early in the history
of the church.
X. Was John an Early Martyr?
Schwartz fixed the date of his martyrdom at A. D. 44,81
and Wellhausen calls his discussion of the subject a demon
stration.82 This theory of the early martyrdom of John
is quite a favorite among radical critics to-day, and it is
defended by Pfleiderer,83 Bousset,84 Johannes Weiss,85
Menzies,86 Jiilicher,87 Schmiedel,88 Loisy,89 Moffatt,90
80 Jesu von Nazara, vol. i, p. 144.
81 Tod der Sohne Zebedaei, 1904.
82 Commentary on Mark 10. 39.
83 TJrchristenthum, vol. ii, p. 411.
84 Theologische Rundschau, 1905, pp. 225f.
86 Commentary, on Mark 10. 39.
88 Commentary, on Mark 10. 39.
87 Introduction, pp. 3771.-
88 Encyclopedia Biblica, pp. 2509, 2510, and The Johannine Writ
ings, p. 177.
89 Revue de l'histoire des religions, 1904, pp. 568L
80 Introduction, pp. 6oif.

130 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Burkitt,91 and Bacon.92 What proofs have these men for
such a conclusion? Only three, and these are all very
questionable. i. The first is the fact that Jesus said to James and John,
"The cup that I drink ye shall drink,"93 and these critics
feel sure that such a prophecy would not have been allowed
to remain in the gospel record if it had not been literally
fulfilled, or else that the prophecy was formulated and
foisted into the gospel record after the double martyrdom.
They do not hold that James and John were literally cruci
fied, as Jesus was; but they think that the prophecy de
mands literal martyrdom for both of them, whether it ante
dates or postdates the event. Origen did not think so. He
considered the sufferings which John endured for the
cause a sufficient martyrdom to prove his participation in
the cup which the Master drank.94 Jerome declared that
John in spirit failed not of martyrdom and thus drank the
cup of confession.95 What right has anyone to say that
only literally fulfilled prophecies are recorded in our
Gospels? Such a conclusion is wholly subjective, and in
the face of clear statements to the contrary in a multitude
of the church Fathers the assumption of John's early
martyrdom upon such a basis as this is utterly unwar
ranted. 2. The church tradition represented by the testimony of
numbers of the church Fathers is that John lived to ex
treme old age. Is this tradition unanimous? Is there no
voice raised in denial of that fact? These critics think
they have one testimony which, being early, will outweigh
all the later testimonies to the contrary. They think they
have the testimony of Papias ; but when we ask them where

81 The Gospel History and its Transmission, pp. 252f.
82 The Fourth Gospel, Part I, chap. v.
83 Mark io. 39; Matt. 20. 23.
84 Commentary, on Matt. 20. 23.
* Commentary, on Matt. 20. 23.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 131
this testimony is to be found, we are told that it is found
in a passage in the writings of Georgius Hamartolus, of
the ninth century, and when we read the passage itself
we find that George the Sinful is bearing his testimony to
the truth of the general tradition that John lived in his
old age in the reigns of Domitian and Nerva in the city
of Ephesus.
We quote the passage in full: "After Domitian, Nerva
reigned one year; and he, having recalled John from the
island, dismissed him to live in Ephesus. Then, being the
only survivor of the twelve disciples, and having composed
the Gospel according to him, he has been deemed worthy
of martyrdom. For Papias, the Bishop of Hierapolis, hav
ing become an eyewitness of this one, in the second book
of the Oracles of the Lord, declares that he was slain by
the Jews, having evidently fulfilled with his brother the
prediction of Christ concerning him, and his own confes
sion and assent in regard to this. For when the Lord said
to them, Can ye drink the cup which I drink?, and when
they readily assented and agreed, Ye shall, he says, drink
my cup, and be baptized with the baptism with which I am
baptized; and this is as we should expect; for it is im
possible for God to lie. And so also the very learned
Origen, in the commentary on Matthew, affirms that John
hath suffered martyrdom, intimating that he has learned
this from the successors of the apostles. And, indeed,
also the highly learned Eusebius says in the Ecclesiastical
History, Thomas has had Parthia assigned to him; John,
Asia, with whom having lived he ended his days in
Ephesus."96 This, then, is the testimony of George the Sinful, that
John the apostle lived in Ephesus as late as the days of
the Emperor Nerva, A. D. 96-98. He evidently has no
thought of Saying that John died in A. D. 44, at the same

86 For the Greek, see Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, p. 519.

132 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
time with his brother James. He says that John was the
last survivor of the apostolic twelve, and he declares that
John was the author of the Gospel accorded to him. In
all of these things he is in line with the church traditions
concerning these matters, and in no one of these things
are the modern critics willing to follow his authority. They
think he is absolutely untrustworthy at every one of these
points. Yet with unhesitating enthusiasm they pin their
faith to his quotation from Papias, and they interpret this
quotation to mean that John and James were martyred
together. Papias, as reported by Georgius in this passage, does
not say that. He simply says in this quotation that John
was slain by the Jews and when he was slain he fulfilled
with James the prediction of Christ. It is evident that
George the Sinful did not think when .he made this quota
tion that Papias was contradicting what he himself had
just said, that John was the only survivor of the .twelve.
That would have been impossible if James and John had
suffered martyrdom together. The interpretation of the
critics, then, is not the interpretation of George the Sinful.
Would it not be fair to infer that he never would have
made this quotation if their interpretation of it had been
the correct one ? Then, who can tell whether he has quoted
Papias correctly? If he is untrustworthy in all these other
statements, why not here?
Our doubt at this point is strengthened when we remem
ber that he quotes another authority for the fact of John's
martyrdom. His second authority is no less than the
learned Origen. Why do not the critics quote Origen,
then, as well as Papias as a witness to the martyrdom of
John with James? Because we have the passage which
George the Sinful quotes from Origen, and when we con
sult the original we find that George has misunderstood
and misinterpreted Origen, who says that John's exile to
Patmos and his sufferings there were a sufficient martyr-

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 133
dom in themselves to fulfill the Lord's prophecy concerning
the cup he should drink, and who has no slightest intima
tion that John was killed by the Jews either at the same
time with James or at any later date. If George the Sinful
misrepresents Origen, may he not equally misrepresent
Papias ?
The church Fathers, Irenaeus, Eusebius, and the rest,
had the writings of Papias in their hands, and yet they all
agree that John lived to old age in Ephesus, and no one
of them ever hints that Papias or anyone else ever had
said anything to the contrary. Is it conceivable that all
of them would have been silent concerning any contradic
tory statement of Papias, and utterly ignoring it, would
have united in the propagation of what they knew to be
an untruthful tale? Is it not altogether more probable
that they knew that Papias agreed with all other ancient
authorities in this matter?
If a ninth-century author of the character of Georgius
Hamartolus is to be given any credence at this point, why
may we not quote other ninth-century authority on the
other side of the question ? The upholders of the "Papias-
tradition," so called, for the most part preserve a discreet
silence concerning the argument to the fourth Gospel con
tained in a Vatican manuscript of the ninth century which
reads, "The Gospel of John was revealed and given to the
churches by John while he still remained in the body, as
one named Papias, of Hierapolis, a beloved disciple of
John, related in his five books of Expositions."97 Here
is another ninth-century authority to be set over against
Georgius Hamartolus. Is it not likely to represent the
truer tradition in the case? We are assured here that
Papias himself witnesses to the authorship of the fourth
Gospel by John. Papias was a contemporary of Polycarp,
and, like Polycarp, he may have been twenty-five years old

97 Thomasius, Works, vol. i, p. 344, and Pitra, Analecta, ii, 160.

134 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
when, the fourth Gospel was composed. They may both
have known all about it, and if they did, of course their
testimony would agree, for they were both good men and
true. We are not so sure of George the Sinful. Moffatt be
lieves that George the Sinful is not to be trusted in his
report of what Origen said,98 but he holds with all
tenacity to his trustworthiness in the report of what Papias
said, though that report as interpreted by himself stands
in flat contradiction to the unanimous church tradition on
this subject. He says that it is confirmed by a late epito-
mizer of Philip of Side. The Chronicle of Philip was
written in the fifth century and the epitome of it was pro
duced in the seventh or eighth century, and it says, "Papias
in his second book says that John the divine and James his
brother were killed by the Jews."
Now, in the first place it is almost certain that this quota
tion cannot be an exact quotation, for all are agreed that
the apostle John was not called "John the divine" earlier
than the close of the fourth century, and therefore it would
seem to have been impossible for Papias in the second
century to make use of this much later title; and in the
second place, Philip of Side, like George the Sinful, is
acknowledged on all hands, to be inaccurate and unreliable
and utterly valueless as an authority over against such
trustworthy testimony as that given by Ireneeus, Clement of
Alexandria, Tertullian, Eusebius, Augustine, Jerome, and
the other church Fathers. Shall we cast all of these aside
in order to give heed to much later writers who stand con
victed of carelessness and inaccuracy, men surely not of
equal standing in the church and confessedly capable of
erroneous statements proving their utter lack of critical
insight and personal unreliability?
The "Papias-tradition," upon which Moffatt and Burkitt

83 Introduction, p. 604.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 135
and Bacon lay such stress, turns out to be of the most
precarious if not preposterous foundation, if it can be
called a foundation at all; and it is not strange that sober
scholarship, represented by such men as Lightfoot99 and
Harnack100 and Zahn,101 rejects its validity without any
hesitation.102 If the argument from prophecy is puerile
and futile, and the argument from Papias savors more of
wild invention than it does of firm foundation, is there
any other reason which can be suggested for thinking that
John and James were martyred together?
3. With all seeming gravity these critics refer us to the
church calendars in which James and John are commemo
rated together as martyrs. Moffatt concedes that their evi
dence is not as good as that from the prophecy and the
"Papias-tradition" — and we feel like asking, Could any
evidence be worse than this ? — but he thinks that they serve
to corroborate substantially the tradition which they em
body.103 Sir William Ramsay says with all reason, "That
James and John, who were not slain at the same time,
should be commemorated together, is the flimsiest conceiv
able evidence that John was killed early in Jerusalem. The
bracketing together of the memory of apostles who had
some historical connection in life, but none in death, must
be regarded as the worst side, historically speaking, of the
martyrologies."104 These martyrologies were made up by
combinations of local calendars and date from the fourth
and fifth centuries and were intended for convenience in
church anniversary celebrations and not for final authorities
as to historical fact; and a cause must be desperate indeed

89 Essays on Supernatural Religion, p. 211.
100 Die Chronologie, II, i, 662f.
101 Introduction, vol. iii, pp. 205, 206.
m Also Abbott, Davison, Drummond, Sir William Ramsay, J. Ar
mitage Robinson, Stanton, and Workman.
103 Introduction, p. 606.
184 The First Christian Century, p. 49, n.

136 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
which will need to bolster itself up on any such untrust
worthy props.
The supposedly literally fulfilled prophecy of Jesus, the
indefinite and garbled and almost certainly incorrect report
by Georgius Hamartolus and Philip Sidetes of what Papias
said, and the questionable corroboration of the late church
calendars — these are the three converging lines of evidence
upon which the most modern of our critics seem chiefly to
depend for reasons for their faith that John the apostle
died in early life and therefore never lived in Ephesus and
never wrote the fourth Gospel. Is it not fair to presume
that with no better proofs than these in hand this criticism
will be as obsolete in another generation as the Tubingen
criticism is in our own?
If the church Fathers are right in saying that John the
apostle lived to old age in Ephesus, and if the best authori
ties are agreed that the fourth Gospel must have come into
existence some time near the close of the first century
there in Ephesus, how shall we escape the conclusion that
the Gospel was written by the apostle John himself? There
is still one refuge left for those who are determined to
deny the authorship of the fourth Gospel to the apostle.
If the net result of a century of criticism has been to prove
that the church tradition was correct and that the fourth
Gospel was written in Ephesus by John, it is still possible
to say that it was not written by the apostle John but by
the presbyter John, John the elder, or some other John
of the same age. Some of the critics seem ready to believe
anything rather than allow that the belief in the apostle's
authorship may be trustworthy.
' XL Claims of John the Presbyter
Who was John the elder or the presbyter? What rea
sons have we to think that such a man, as distinct from
John the apostle, ever existed ? There were three converg-

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 137
ing lines of evidence ( ?) for the apostle John's early
martyrdom, and now we are told again that there are three
converging lines of evidence for the existence of the pres
byter John. 1. The Second Epistle of John and the Third
Epistle of John are written by this man. Do they not
begin with the salutations, "The elder unto the elect lady
and her children,"105 and "The elder unto Gaius the be
loved"?106 There must have been two religious leaders
in Ephesus at this time and both were named John. One
was John the apostle and the other was John the elder.
This does not seem quite self-evident to us. Was not John
the apostle very aged at this time and may he not have
been called "the elder" for that reason? Or may he not
have called himself an elder even as Peter did in his epistle
when he wrote, "The elders therefore among you I exhort,
who am a fellow elder."107 John the apostle never calls
himself by that title. Indeed, he uses the word "apostle"
only once in the fourth Gospel. He has it three times in the
Apocalypse. It does not seem to have been a favorite term
with him any more than with Matthew and Mark, both of
whom use the word only once. Luke has the title six times
in his Gospel and some twenty-eight times in the book of
Acts. John prefers the humble title "disciple" or the title
which he can share with the other officials in the church,
"elder." It is characteristic of his modesty to call himself
by this name. We must have some better proof than this,
therefore, before we come to any sure conclusion in this
matter. When we ask for further proof it is forthcoming,
and it turns out again to be a quotation from Papias.
2. Papias seems to have been a great comfort to many
of the critics. The extant fragments of his writings are
so few in number and the context in the case of each is so
uncertain and the statements he makes are sometimes so

106 2 John 1.
108 3 John 1. *?
m 1 Pet. 5. 1.

138 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
ambiguous that great freedom in his interpretation becomes
possible, and consequently we find the authorities quoting
Papias in support of quite opposite views. In this case
the authorities behind the quotation from Papias are much
better than Georgius Hamartolus and Philip Sidetes, and
we are ready to recognize the words quoted as surely be
longing to Papias; but, what do they mean? Let us look
at them and see for ourselves. Papias said, "If, then, any
one came, who had been a follower of the elders, I ques
tioned 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 John, the disciples of the Lord,
say."108 Eusebius quotes this passage and then adds : "The
name 'John' is twice enumerated by him. The first one
he mentions in connection with Peter and James and Mat
thew and the rest of the apostles, clearly meaning the evan
gelist; but the other John he mentions after an interval,
and places him among others outside of the number of
the apostles, putting Aristion before him, and he distinctly
calls him a presbyter. This shows that the statement of
those is true who say that there were two persons in Asia
that bore the same name."
This looks like a reasonable conclusion.109 Why should
Papias mention the apostle John twice in the same passage ?
However, we notice the following facts in connection with
this passage: (i) If the elder John is to be distinguished
from the apostle John in this passage, then Papias is the
single authority for the existence of such a man. Papias
appeals to him as of exceptional dignity, yet no other of
the earliest church Fathers ever mentions him or seems to
know anything at all about him. It appears improbable that
108 Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. iii, 39.
109 So Jerome, Erasmus, Grotius, Credner, Fritzsche, Bretschneider,
Wieseler, Ebrard.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 139
a distinguished teacher could have lived in Ephesus at this
time and have left no other memorial behind him. (2)
Irenaeus read this statement made by Papias and under
stood him to refer to the apostle John in both occurrences
of the name. As far as we know, this was the understand
ing of all the church Fathers up to the time of Eusebius.
Irenaeus believed that Papias was a hearer of the apostle
John and of Polycarp his disciple; and he never seemed
to suspect that Papias was citing any other authority than
that of the evangelist.
(3) With these considerations in mind we turn to the
passage in Papias again, and we conclude that Papias is
not distinguishing between two persons at all, but simply
between two methods of gathering his material, one by
report of what John the apostle had said, and one by hear
ing the apostle himself. He tells us what Aristion and John
say, and what others report that Peter and John and the rest
of the apostles said before he, Papias, became a disciple.
(4) We notice that Papias explicitly calls Peter and An
drew and Philip and Thomas and James and John and
Matthew "elders." They all belonged to the preceding
generation, and Papias calls them all "elders." Therefore
Papias himself becomes our authority for saying that John
the apostle was John the elder as well. The other apostles
had died, but John had lived on into his own day. Papias
had a chance to hear John for himself.
Then, is not this all he intends to say in this ambiguous
statement? "I had two sources of information, first, what
John the elder was reported to me to have said, and, -second,
what I myself have heard John the elder say. I call John
the apostle 'John the elder,' as I call Peter and Matthew
and the other apostles 'elders'; for they were all disciples
of the Lord, even as Aristion and John were who have
survived to our day." This quotation from Papias, then,
is far from establishing the existence of another John. It,
rather, confirms us in our opinion that John the apostle

140 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
and John the elder are one and the same man. Have we
any better proof than this that another John lived in
Ephesus during the residence of the apostle there? There
is no better proof, but we have one more authority to quote
in favor of this supposition.
3. Dionysius of Alexandria is the only other authority
previous to Eusebius who seems to have suspected that
there might be more than one John among the Christian
leaders of Ephesus. He says, "I am of the opinion that
there were many of the same name as the apostle John,
who, on account of their love for him, and because they
admired and emulated him, and desired to be loved by the
Lord as he was, took to themselves the same surname, as
many of the children of the faithful are called Paul or
Peter"; and later he adds, "They say that there are two
monuments in Ephesus, each bearing the name of John."110
Concerning these statements we make the following obser
vations. (1) Dionysius seems to be noting mere hearsay
and conjecture. (2) Jerome says that some think that
the two memorials at Ephesus are both in honor of John
the evangelist.111 Zahn tries to prove that these two me
morials were churches, one on the site of the house where
John had lived inside the walls of the city and one on the
site of John's tomb outside the walls of the city, and he has
succeeded in making this seem very probable.112
Here, then, is the sum total of the testimony to the
existence of an elder John who was not the apostle. Diony
sius lived a hundred and fifty years after John had been
buried, and he hears that there are two memorials in
Ephesus to John, and concludes, therefore, that there may
have been two Johns. Eusebius lived nearly a century
later still, and he finds a passage in Papias which mentions
the name of John twice in one long and involved sentence,
m Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., vii, 25.
m De vir. ill., 9.
m Acta Johannis, p. cliv, sq.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 141
and he concludes, therefore, that Papias must have meant
two Johns. All later writers only repeat what these two
Fathers have said.
We see at once what a nebulous character is this sup
posed additional John the elder. His very existence is open
to question. Lightfoot, Westcott, and Huther are disposed
to believe that there was such an individual, although they
do not think that he wrote the fourth Gospel, but Farrar,
Warfield, Salmon, and Plummer seriously doubt his exist
ence. Keim relegates this "Doppelganger" of the apostle
to the land of ghosts. There was another mysterious John
the presbyter or Prester John in the twelfth century. It
is interesting and almost pathetic to see what an implicit
faith many of the critics profess in the presbyter John
and in his residence in Ephesus and in his authorship of
the whole of the Johannine literature, while they maintain
a most profound skepticism as to the possibility of any
connection of the apostle John with these things. Forsak
ing the substance of the church tradition concerning these
matters, they go chasing after a shadow. They seem to
be capable of exercising more faith in a phantom than in
a fact.
If this ghost of the presbyter John could be laid by
learned argument, it would seem that the volume on John
the Presbyter and the Fourth Gospel, published by John
Chapman in 191 1, might be sufficient to do it; but in all
probability he will continue to flit through the imaginations
of modern critics and over dubious theological battlefields
for many a day to come. Delff, Dobschiitz, Harnack,
Schiirer, Moffatt, McGiffert, and Bacon defend John the
presbyter's authorship of the fourth Gospel; but we feel
like saying of all of these what Sanday said in another
connection of the last of them: "Bacon has been to Ger
many, and learned his lesson there too well. At least I
find myself differing profoundly from his whole method
of argument. The broad, simple arguments that seem to

142 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
me really of importance he puts aside, and then he spends
his strength in making bricks with a minimum of straw,
and even with no straw at all (the argument of silence)."118
XII. Evidence Favorable to Authenticity
The question concerning the authorship of the Johannine
literature is far from being a closed question as yet in the
theological world, but the century of conflict has left us
with some clear gains. In the first place, the date of the
fourth Gospel can no longer be pushed far down into the
second century or be far removed from the time of the
residence of the apostle John in Ephesus. That would seem
to be definitely settled now. In the second place, the cen
tury of unparalleled research in this field surely has war
ranted the conclusions which Harnack has expressed in the
preface to his great work, The Chronology of Ancient
Christian Literature down to the Time of Eusebius, when
he says: "There was a time in which people felt obliged
to regard the oldest Christian literature as a tissue of
deceptions and falsifications. That time is past. For
science it was an episode in which she learned much, and
after which she has much to forget. . . . The oldest litera
ture of the church is, in the main points, and in most of
its details, from the point of view of literary history, vera
cious and trustworthy."
This certainly is a great gain. We would not push such
an admission too far, but it surely is a comfort to Chris
tians to know that the most thoroughgoing use of the his
torical method of investigation, pure science as such, is at
last constrained to admit that the early Christian writers
were not persistently and perpetually deceivers and liars,
but on the whole their statements have approved them
selves as veracious and trustworthy. We take off our hats
to science and acknowledge the acknowledgment, while we
m The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, p. 24.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 143
reflect within ourselves that we were assured of it all the
time. Too many writers in this field have approached the works
of the church Fathers as if they were the productions of
men of very suspicious character, banded together to mis
lead and deceive; and such writers seem to have proceeded
upon the assumption that they were called to point out all
apparent contradictions and possible misconceptions and in
every way which human cleverness or diabolical ingenuity
could devise they have attempted to cast discredit upon
the statements made by the leaders and the saints in the
church. It often was done in the name of science, but it
has turned out to be pseudo-science at last. After a century
of conflict the better, truer science has pronounced its ver
dict in favor of the general trustworthiness of the authori
ties in this field. With this spirit of confidence in both
their ability and their sincerity we ask now what the church
Fathers have told us about the authorship of the fourth
Gospel. We naturally begin with Irenaeus, since Irenaeus, Poly
carp, and John himself furnish us with a threefold link
of evidence which cannot be broken. Irenaeus tells us how
the four Gospels were written, and after mentioning the
other three he adds, "Then John, the disciple of the Lord,
who also had leaned upon his breast, did himself publish a
Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia."114 Could
any testimony be more explicit than that? There can be
no doubt that Irenaeus intends to say that John the apostle
lived in Ephesus and, wrote the fourth Gospel there. Any
one who denies these facts must disparage or disprove this
testimony of Irenaeus in order to do so. Is it "veracious
and trustworthy"?
Irenaeus was an Asiatic by birth, but he was bishop at
Lyons in Gaul in A. D. 178. To that extent, therefore,

y

m Adv. Haer., Ill, i, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. i, p. 414.

144 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
his testimony represents the church in the east and in the
west. He was the successor of Pothinus, a man nearly
ninety years of age, a man who was a growing youth when
the apostle John died. His memory would go back to the
apostle's own time. Would Irenaeus hold any opinion as
to the authorship of the fourth Gospel which Pothinus
would not share? There is<^o slightest)reason to think
that there was any difference of thought at this point
between them. However, there is a still closer link between
Irenaeus and the apostolic age. Irenaeus was the pupil of
Polycarp, who declared that he had been "eighty-six years
in the Lord" at the time of his martyrdom, A. D. 155.
Polycarp was a disciple of the apostle John, and he was a
young man grown when the apostle John died. Irenaeus
was a young man grown when he was a disciple of Poly
carp. Writing to Florinus of those early days, he says: "I
remember the events of that time more clearly than those
of recent years. For what boys learn, growing with their
mind, becomes joined with it ; so that I am able to describe
the very place in which the blessed Polycarp sat as he dis
coursed, and his goings out and his comings in, and the
manner of his life, and his physical appearance, and his
discourses to the people, and the accounts which he gave
of his intercourse with John and with the others who had
seen the Lord. . . . These things being told me by the
mercy of God, I listened to them attentively, noting them
down, not on paper, but in my heart. And continually,
through God's grace, I recall them faithfully."115 Here
is an old man's appeal to the clearness and the validity of-
his recollections of his youth, and that youth links him
with one who was a youth of like age when he was a
disciple of the aged apostle John at Ephesus.
The certainty of Irenaeus rests upon the certainty of
116 Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., V. 20. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,
vol. i, pp. 238, 239.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 14S
Pothinus and of Polycarp, who were living at the time
when the apostle John wrote the fourth Gospel. This testi
mony does not appear first as though resolving itself out
of the blank mist at the close of the second century. It
is no original creation of Irenaeus and his age. It goes
straight back through Polycarp to the apostle John himself.
It represents the general opinion of the church in the east
and in the west. It is the ancient, primitive, unbroken,
and unquestioned tradition. It is this Irenaeus tradition
found in his extant works and of undoubted authenticity
which Schmiedel and Moffatt and Bacon and the rest would
set aside in favor of the "Papias-tradition," not extant in
any of his writings to-day, and reported imperfectly by
such unreliable authorities as Georgius Hamartolus and
Philip Sidetes in the seventh or eighth or ninth century!
That "Papias-tradition," so-called, is uncorroborated by
any one of the church Fathers. The Irenaeus tradition is
confirmed on every hand.
Clement of Alexandria probably was born in Athens and
was converted there. Having become a Christian, he trav
eled from teacher to teacher, and in this way he came under
the instruction of an Italian, an Ionian, an Egyptian, a
Syrian, an Assyrian, and a Hebrew, and in the various lands
he became acquainted with the common tradition concern
ing the origin of the Gospels and the other New Testament
books. He says of his teachers, "These men, preserving
the true tradition directly from James, Peter, John, Paul,
son receiving it from the father, came by God's providence
even to us to deposit among us the seeds of truth which
were derived from their ancestors and the apostles."116
From these sources, representing the east and the west
and covering almost the entire compass of the Christian
Church of that early age, Clement received his education
in the Christian verities ; and then at Alexandria he became

"* Strom, I, i. Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. ii, p. 301.

146 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
associated with Pantaenus, who was a contemporary of
those who had known the apostles. He knew as well as
any man could what the early church believed concerning
these things. Having written down "the tradition of the
earliest presbyters" concerning the other three Gospels he
adds, "Last of all John, observing that the external facts
J had been made plain in the existing Gospels, being urged
by his friends and inspired by the Spirit, composed a
spiritual Gospel."117 From his Ionian teacher Clement
learned the facts concerning the fourth Gospel as they were
known at Ephesus where the Gospel was composed, and in
traveling through the church he found no contrary tradi
tion anywhere. All Christians had believed from the begin
ning that the apostle John had written the "spiritual Gospel."
Tertullian was the leader of the church in north Africa.
Cardinal Newman called him "the most powerful writer
of the early centuries."118 In his extant works he quotes
from every chapter and in some chapters from almost every
verse of the fourth Gospel. It is of apostolic and unques
tioned authority with him. He says : "We assert, to begin
with, that the evangelical instrument has for its authors
apostles. ... Of the apostles then, John and Matthew
first plant faith in us."119 A little farther on in the same
treatise he says: "The same authority of the apostolic
churches will support the other Gospels which we have
equally through them and according to their use. I mean
the Gospels of John and Matthew."120 The apostolic
churches had had no other faith. They all believed in the
apostle John's authorship of the fourth Gospel.
These men, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexan
dria, give us the testimony of the church in Asia Minor,

117 Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., VI, 14, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,
vol. i, p. 201.
118 Tracts Theological and Ecclesiastical, p. 220.
u» Advers. Marc, IV, ii. Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. iii, p. 347.
m Advers. Marc, IV, v. Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. iii, p. 350.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 147
Alexandria, Carthage, Rome, and Gaul. In their travels
they had covered the entire territory occupied by Christen
dom in their day. For a quarter of a century Irenaeus was
a contemporary of Polycarp, who for a quarter of a century
was a contemporary of the apostle John. Clement studied
with elders who were contemporaries with the apostles.
Tertullian was sure that he represented the tradition of the
apostolic churches. All of them knew that their faith was
that which the church had held from the very beginning.
No other name ever was attached to the Gospel except
that of the apostle John. It would have been impossible
to impute it to him wrongly either while he lived or in
these generations immediately after his death. Too many
people knew the facts in the case. These facts were
handed down from father to son until they reached the
men we have quoted.
These men were leaders in the church. They were men
of preeminent standing and ability. They were not critical
in our modern sense of the word, but they were not credu
lous. They were careful in their inquiries, and they did
not acknowledge apostolic authority without good reason.
It seems almost impossible that the general tradition of the
church represented by these authoritative names should go
wrong as to such important facts as the long residence of
John in Ephesus and his authorship of the fourth Gospel.
The external evidence is favorable to these facts and, in
deed, gives explicit testimony to them. Any attack made
upon this testimony has proven to be either baseless or
resting upon the most fragile foundations.
Therefore we are disposed to agree with Ritschl, who
said that he believed the fourth Gospel to be authentic be
cause the denial of its authenticity raised far greater diffi
culties than its acceptance,121 and with Ewald, who de
clared in his day that "every argument, from every quarter

m Die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche, p. 48.

148 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
to which we can look, every trace and record, combine
together to render any serious doubt upon the question
absolutely impossible."122 That represents our own con
clusion, although it does not represent the conclusion of
the persistent assailants of the authenticity of the fourth
Gospel through the last one hundred years. However, we
believe that the century and more of investigation has
brought such a wealth of both external and internal evi
dence to light that Ebrard's emphatic statement is well-
nigh justified when he says that "with the exception of
some of Paul's epistles, no book can be found throughout
the whole of the ancient literature, both Christian and
profane, which can show such numerous and reliable proofs
of its genuineness as the Gospel of John."123
The first known commentary on any New Testament
book was a commentary on the fourth Gospel written by
Heracleon, A. D. 145. Quotations from the Gospel are
found in the writings of Melito, Apollinaris, and Theophilus
in the same generation with Irenaeus, Tertullian, and
Clement of Alexandria, and in the Clementines and the
writings of Tatian, Valentinus, and Justin Martyr of the
generation preceding, and in the writings of Basilides,
Polycarp, and Ignatius in the generation preceding that
and immediately following the generation to which the
apostle John belonged. The fourth Gospel did not steal
into the church by the back door at the end of the second
century. It came straight down from the end of the first
century with apostolic authority behind it from the first.
Eusebius is right in classing the fourth Gospel among the
acknowledged books, of which there never was any ques
tion in the church.124 In one of the most recent discus
sions of the subject James Iverach summarizes his conclu
sions by saying, "In truth the external evidence for the
122 Westcott, Introduction to the Gospels, p. x.
123 Scientific Criticism of the Gospel History, p. 598.
124 Hist. Eccles., Ill, 24, 2, 17.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 149
early date and Johannine authorship of the fourth Gospel
is as great both in extent and variety as it is for any book
of the New Testament, and far greater than any that we
possess for any work of classical antiquity."125
The internal evidence confirms the external evidence in
a multitude of particulars. It would be easy to show, as
it has been shown so many times, that the writer betrays
an intimate acquaintance with the language, history, geog
raphy, customs, and beliefs of Palestine in the time of
Jesus. He must have been a Jew, and a Palestinian Jew.
Then, the narrative is so vivid and circumstantial that it
makes the impression again and again that it must proceed
from an eyewitness. It is written from the standpoint of
the apostolic circle. There are numerous indications that
the author is the apostle John, though his name never is
mentioned. If it be suggested that all of these things might have
been put into the book by a clever forger, it surely is suffi
cient to say with Luthardt, "The fiction would be carried
out far too artistically, and far too cunningly, to fit either
the simplicity or the moral character of the book,"126 or
to conclude with Drummond : "I think that we may safely
say that we know that the book was not written by any
of the eminent men of the second century, whose names
have been preserved; certainly none whose works have
survived were capable of writing it. Is it, then, likely that
there lived and died among them, entirely unknown, a man
who throughout the century had absolutely no competitor
in the wealth, originality, and depth of his genius, and this
at a time when the struggling church required all her ablest
men to come to the front? And if an author possessing
this spiritual stature had issued his anonymous book, is
it credible that he would have allowed it to be received and
circulated as the work of the apostle, and thus have prac-
125 International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 1722.
m St. John, the Author of the Fourth Gospel, p. 186.

150 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
ticed an enormous deception on the church? I know tha<:
critics think that no stupidity is too foolish, no forgery
too criminal, for an early Christian ; but for my part I can
not believe in these moral monstrosities."127
Sanday sums up the whole case when he says: "The
Gospel of Saint John presents an unique phenomenon. It
contains two distinct strata of thought, both quite unmis
takable to the critical eye; and in each of these strata,
again, there are local peculiarities which complicate the
problem. When it comes to be closely investigated, the
complexities of the problem are such that the whole of
literature probably does not furnish a parallel. The hypoth
esis of authorship that shall satisfy them thus becomes in
its turn equally complicated. It is necessary to find one
who shall be at once Jew and Christian, intensely Jewish,
and yet comprehensively Christian; brought up on the Old
Testament, and yet with a strong tincture of Alexandrian
philosophy; using a language in which the Hebrew struc
ture and the Greek superstructure are equally conspicuous ;
one who had mixed personally in the events, and yet at the
time of writing stood at a distance from them; an im
mediate disciple of Jesus, and yet possessed of so powerful
an individuality as to impress the mark of himself upon
his recollections; a nature capable of the most ardent and
clinging affection, and yet an unsparing denouncer of
hostile agencies of any kind which lay outside his own
charmed circle. There is one historical figure which seems
to fit like a key into all these intricate wards — the figure of
Saint John, as it has been handed down to us by a well-
authenticated tradition. I can conceive no second. If the
Saint John of history did not exist, he would have to be
invented to account for his Gospel."128
At the close of the fourth Gospel we find this attestation :
"This is the disciple that beareth witness of these things,
127 The Character and Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, pp. 192, 193.
128 The Study of the New Testament, p. 32.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 151
and wrote these things; and we know that his witness is
true."129 This may be the attestation of the church of
Ephesus or of the officials of that church, and since it is
to be found in all the manuscripts and versions of the
Gospel, we know that it is of great antiquity. Now that
we have seen how the internal evidence so completely agrees
with the supposition of the apostle John's authorship, and
we have found that the authoritative tradition in the church
is so continuous and so unanimous upon this point, and we
remember how weak the attacks upon John's residence in
Ephesus and the attempted proofs that the presbyter John
was a different individual from the apostle have proved to
be, and we recall how every new discovery and the most
exhaustive investigation of all the records have only served
to substantiate the belief of the church from the beginning,
we are ready in our turn, after the greatest and the longest
conflict in the whole field of New Testament criticism, to
set our seal to the truth of that ancient attestation, and to
say for ourselves with all profundity of conviction: "This
matter is now beyond any serious doubt. We are assured
that the beloved disciple, the apostle John, bore his witness
to the things recorded in the fourth Gospel, and wrote the
book; and we are assured that his witness is true."
XIII. Opposition and Defense; Conclusion
The criticism of Strauss was carried to its logical ab
surdity by Bruno Bauer.130 Then the greater master Ferdi
nand Christian Baur131 founded the Tubingen School and
he and his disciples made most determined assaults upon
the authenticity of the fourth Gospel. Zeller,132 Kostlin,133
m John 21. 24.
189 Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte des Johannis, 1840.
131 Kritische Untersuchungen uber die kanonischen Evangelien, 1847.
Die Tubinger Schule, i860.
132 Die ausseren Zeugnisse uber das Dasein und der Ursprung des
vierten Evangeliums, 1845.
133 Der Lehrbegriff des Evangeliums und der Briefe Johannis, 1843.

152 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Schwegler,134 Scholten,135 Schenkel,136 Scherer,137 Hil
genfeld,138 Volkmar,139 Weizsacker,140 Thoma,141 Tay-
ler,142 Schweitzer,143 Renan,144 and Samuel Davidson,145
continued the attack begun by Baur; but even Bacon now
declares that "Baur's theory of the origin of the Johannine
writings is as obsolete as the Ptolemaic geography."146
Driven from one position to another, the line of attack has
changed as the need of the day required, but the conflict
never has ended and new theories now are being ad
vanced which in turn we believe are doomed in the light
of the advancing truth to become as obsolete as their pred
ecessors. Among the more modern opponents of the Johannine
authorship we may mention H. J. Holtzmann,147 Otto
Holtzmann,148 Dellf,149 Schmiedel,150 Wrede,151 Wernle,152

U4 Das nachapostolische Zeitalter in den Hauptmomenten seiner
Entwickelung, 1846.
188 Het Evangelie naar Johannes, 1865.
m Das Charakterbild Jesu, 1864.
187 Les Procgdes de la Critique Interne, 1855.
188 Das Evangelium und die Briefe Johannis nach ihrem Lehrbegriff ,
1849. Die Evangelien, nach ihrer Entstehung und geschichtlichen
Bedeutung, 1854.
139 Die Religion Jesu, 1857.
140 Untersuchungen uber die evangelische Geschichte, 1864.
141 Die Genesis des Johannes-Evangeliums, 1882.
142 An Attempt to Ascertain the Character of the Fourth Gospel,
1867. 143 Das Evangelium Johannes, 1841.
144 Vie de Jesus, 1867.
146 Introduction to the New Testament, 1868.
148 The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate, p. 20.
147 Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 1885.
m Das Johannes-Evangelium, 1887.
149 Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt, 1890.
m The Johannine Writings, 1908.
181 Charakter und Tendenz des Johannes-Evangeliums, 1903.
m The Beginnings of Christianity, 1903.

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 153
Harnack,153 Jiilicher,154 Reville,155 Loisy,150 Dob-
schutz,157 Briickner,158 Kreyenbtihl,159 Pfleiderer,160 E. A.
Abbott,161 Moffatt,162 McGiffert,163 Bacon,164 Cone,165
Gardner,166 Grill,167 and E. F. Scott.168 Everything writ
ten in opposition has been fully answered by the defenders
of the authenticity of the fourth Gospel and an illustrious
line of authorities stretches over the whole period of the
century and more since Evanson made his first assault and
to them belongs the credit of maintaining intact the citadel
of tradition which in this case as in so many others has
proved to be the citadel of the impregnable truth. In the
Old Testament the greatest battle in the field of the higher
criticism has been decided against the Mosaic authorship
of the Pentateuch. In the New Testament the greatest
battle in the field of literary criticism has not been decided
against the Johannine authorship of the fourth Gospel.
There are as able defenders of the authenticity of the
fourth Gospel to-day as at any time in the past century
and the many victories which have been won in the century
and the evident weaknesses in the present-day assaults give
promise that the defense soon will be in complete possession
of the field.

m Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur, 1904.
184 Einleitung in das Neue Testament, 1894.
m Le quatrieme evangile, son origine et sa valeur, 1901.
m Autour d'un petit livre, 1903.
m Probleme des apostolischen Zeitalters, 1904.
168 Die vier Evangelien, 1887.
m Das Evangelium der Wahrheit, 1905.
180 Urchristentum, 1902.
181 Encyclopedia Biblica, 1 76 if.
182 Introduction, 191 1.
183 The Apostolic Age, 1906.
164 The Fourth Gospel, 1910.
166 The Gospel and its Earliest Interpreters, 1893.
188 The Ephesian Gospel, 1915.
167 Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten Evangeliums, 1902.
188 The Fourth Gospel, 1906.

154 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Among those who have rendered valiant service to the
cause in the whole period of the discussion we may give
honorable mention to Schleiermacher,169 De Wette,170
Neander,171 Lucke,172 Bertholdt,173 Bleek,174 Ebrard,175
Ewald,176 Lange,177 Tholuck,178 Mayer,179 Hengsten
berg,180 Hase,181 Ritschl,182 Beyschlag,183 Luthardt,184
Weiss,185 Zahn,186 Godet,187 Pressense,188 Ezra Abbot,189
Lightfoot,190 Liddon,191 Leathes,192 Evans,193 Macdon-
ald,194 Norton,195 Gloag,196 Fisher,197 Orr,198 Drum-

m Einleitung ins Neue Testament, 1845.
170 Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Einleitung, 1826.
171 Das Leben Jesu Christi, 1837.
172 Commentar uber die Schriften des Evangelisten Johannes, 1840.
178 Verisimilia de origine Evangelii Johannis, 1805.
174 Einleitung in das Neue Testament, i860.
176 Das Evangelium Johannis, 1845.
176 Die Johanneischen Schriften, 1862.
177 Das Evangelium nach Johannes, i860.
178 Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis, 1857.
179 Die Echtheit des Evangeliums nach Johannes, 1854.
m Das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes, 1863.
181 Vom Evangelium des Johannis, 1866.
182 Die Entstehung der altkatholischen Kirche, 1857.
m Zur Johanneischen Frage, 1875.
m St. John, the Author of the Fourth Gospel, 1875.
186 Manual of Introduction to the New Testament, 1 886.
186 Introduction to the New Testament, 1909.
187 Commentary on the Gospel of John, 1886.
188 Jesus Christ, 1866.
189 The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, 1880.
m Biblical Essays, 1893.
m The Divinity of Our Lord, 1884.
192 The Witness of St. John to Christ, 1870.
193 St. John, the Author of the Fourth Gospel, 1888.
194 Life and Writings of St. John, 1880.
196 Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospel, 1848.
198 Introduction to the Johannine Writings, 189 1.
197 Grounds of Theistic and Christian Belief, 1902,
m The Authenticity of John's Gospel, 1870,

THE MOST REMARKABLE GOSPEL 155
mond,199 Watkins,200 Westcott,201 Scott-Moncrief,202 San-
day,203 Strachan,204 Strong,205 Stanton,208 Dods,207 and
Davison.208 The scholarship has not been on one side only
in this struggle. The scholarship of these defenders of
the authenticity of the fourth Gospel has been equal or
superior to that of their foes. It was of a saner quality and
rested upon firmer and surer foundations, as the past cen
tury has shown. It is not likely that any discovery in the
future will radically change the situation of to-day, as far
as this question is concerned. The triumph of the truth
through a hundred years will be maintained in the days to
come. In reading the fourth Gospel we shall rest assured
that we are coming into touch with that disciple whom
Jesus loved most and who had the clearest insight into the
Master's mission and message and mind.
For a long, long time John had been a disciple of Jesus.
It probably was more than sixty years since he had left his
fisher's nets to follow the Lord. It was a long, long way
he had come from Galilee to Ephesus in Asia Minor. He
had labored to do his Master's will and to maintain his
Master's spirit in the church which honored the Master's
name. He had preached the gospel truth to two genera
tions. Now he would write it down for all the generations
to come. The fourth Gospel was to be the Gospel for all
eternity.

199 The Character and Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, 1903.
200 Modern Criticism considered in its relation to the Fourth Gospel,
3890. 201 Commentary on St. John's Gospel, 1899.
202 St. Johnr Apostle, Evangelist, and Prophet, 1909.
203 The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, 1905.
204 Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, 1906.
208 Hastings's Dictionary of the Bible, 1899.
206 Gospels as Historical Documents, 1903.
207 Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. i, 1897.
m Hastings's single volume Dictionary of the Bible, 1909.

PART III
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN

PART III
THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN
I. What Shall We Call It?
What is the First Epistle of John? Is it an epistle? Is
it a letter? Is it something else? Deissmann in his Bible
Studies has written a long discussion of the distinction
between a letter and an epistle;1 and when he comes to
apply his principles to the New Testament literature he has
no trouble in deciding that the letters of Paul are true
letters, and that the Epistle to the Hebrews, the First
Epistle of Peter, and the Epistle of James are epistles; but
he is uncertain about the classification of First John, and
he gives up altogether when he comes to Second and Third
John. He cannot decide whether these are letters or
epistles. Of First John he says, "It is a brochure, the
literary eidos of which cannot be determined just at once."2
He thinks that, strictly speaking, it cannot be called an
epistle, and he seems disposed to class it among the letters
of the New Testament, but he never states any clear con
clusion concerning it.
The ancient letters always began with a stereotyped
form, just as our modern letters do. We begin with the
date and the name of the person addressed, and we sign
our name at the close. The ancient letter reversed this
practice and began with the writer's name, followed by the
name of the person or persons addressed and then by a
formal greeting. There is nothing of this sort in First
John. John's name does not appear anywhere in the
1 Pp- 3-59-
2 P. 50. 159

i6o JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
writing from beginning to end. No proper names appear
in it, either of the writer or of the persons addressed.
There is no formal greeting and no formal close. It begins
as abruptly as the fourth Gospel did and in language which
at once recalls the Logos theology of that Prologue. Like
a clap of thunder out of a clear sky the introduction to
this little writing hurls the truth at us with the vehement
affirmation of a Boanerges of the faith. If it is not an
epistle and if it has not the usual form of a letter, what
is it ? Heidegger called it "a manual of doctrine."3 Reuss4
and Westcott5 call it "a homiletical essay, a Pastoral."
Michaelis6 and others call it a treatise. It evidently is
difficult to name it.
John does what others do, but he always does it differ
ently. Others had written Gospels, and John wrote a
Gospel; and it was so different from the other Gospels as
to seem like another order of literary creation. It was
¦ a biography as the others had been, but it was a biography
of the spirit more than of the external life. It was a
history, but it was not the history of certain happenings
so much as it was the history of a heart. Others had writ
ten letters and epistles, and John writes one too, but it is
so different from all which had preceded it that we scarcely
know whether it belongs in the same category with them.
As Farrar has said : "There is in it nothing of the passionate
personal element of Paul's letters; none of the burning
controversy, of the subtle dialectics, of the elaborate doc
trine, of the intense appeal. Nor has it anything of the
stately eloquence and sustained allegorizing of the Epistle
to the Hebrews; nor does it enunciate the stern rules of
practical ethics like James; nor, again, does it throb with
that storm of moral indignation which sweeps through the
' Enchir. Bibl., p. 986.
* Geschichte der heil. Schriften, N. T., p. 226.
• The Epistles of St. John, p. 30.
• Works, vol. i, p. 1 13.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 161
Epistles of Peter and Jude. Its tone and manner are
wholly different."7
Most of the letters of Paul were occasioned by certain
definite events. There is no suggestion of any particular
occasion for the writing of First John. It might have been
written at almost any time and in almost any place and
under almost any conditions. Its contents are suitable
for all times and places and conditions of men. Yet Bishop
Alexander was undoubtedly right when he said: "It is a
mistake to look upon the First Epistle of John as a creed-
less composite of miscellaneous sweetnesses, a disconnected
rhapsody upon philanthropy. And it will be well to enter
upon a serious perusal of it with a conviction that it did
not drop from the sky upon an unknown place, at an un
known time, with an unknown purpose."8 When we look
into the letter we find that the writer of it is addressing
somebody very definitely and directly. He speaks to them
as "you" thirty-six times. He says "I write" or "I wrote"
thirteen times. He calls them "my little children" six
times. He calls them "beloved" six times.9 He evidently
recognizes a personal relation existing between himself and
his readers. He has an apostolic, prophetic, and paternal
interest in them. He knows the little children, the young
men, and the fathers among them, and he has a word of
counsel for each and all. He knows that there have been
apostates from their company and that false doctrines have
been preached to them.10 He seems to prefer the abstract
presentation of thought, but as he enunciates his general
principles he evidently has some definite persons in mind
who are to apply these principles to definite historical condi
tions.

7 Messages of the Books, p. 479.
8 Expositor's Bible, Commentary on the Epistles of John, p. 5.
'yp&Qu, Zyptitya,; rexvla, Ttudla; &yairi{rol. Compare Farrar, Op.
474- 10 1 John 2. 12-14, J9i 26.

162 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
What, then, shall we conclude as to the nature of this
book? i. We will call it a letter, with Diisterdieck,
De Wette, Huther, Ebrard, Haupt, Bleek, Weiss, Luthardt,
Westcott, Salmond, and others. Diisterdieck said, "The
whole writing rests so thoroughly on a living personal rela
tion between the author and his readers, the application of
the written exhortation is so absolutely personal, that this
ground is enough to make us consider the writing as a
genuine letter."11 Weiss says, "The work is a letter, not
a treatise; the discussion has not the form of dialectic
development but of thoughtful meditation on certain great
fundamental truths."12 2. While we call it a letter, we
acknowledge that it is very different from most ancient
letters and all of the letters of the New Testament. Farrar
agrees: "The unconstrained style, the informal transitions,
the mingled exhortations all show that it is a letter. At
the same time it is the most abstract and impersonal, the
most independent of place and time and circumstance, of
all the writings in the New Testament."13
3. The letter is not written to those at a distance, but,
rather, to those who were living in the writer's own diocese.
It was Bengel who with his usual insight said that John
seems to be among those to whom he is writing, and that
seems to us to fit the facts of the case. In his old age
John was the recognized chief authority in the church. He
was the bishop resident in Asia Minor. He was so old that
all in the church, fathers and sons alike, seemed to him to be
little children. To them all he wrote these words of in
struction and advice. They were the final formulation of
his faith. They were his seal set upon the testimony of
his life teaching. They summarized all he had said. These
younger generations might read these words and recall
his voice as they had heard him utter them. They might
11 Quoted in The Books of the Bible, p. 303.
12 Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii, p. 183.
13 Op. cit., p. 474.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 163
read these words and know the highest reach of apostolic
revelation. This little book would be the last will and
testament of the last of the apostles to the Christian Church.
It would go along with his Gospel as the church's most
precious heritage. It would appeal to the Christians of all
generations as directly and as intimately as to those of
John's own day.
II. Relation to the Fourth Gospel
What is the relation of the First Epistle to the fourth
Gospel ?
A. In attempting to answer that question we call atten
tion to the following resemblances. 1. The two writ
ings are alike in their literary style. (1) We have seen
what a fondness John had in the fourth Gospel for the
repetition of the number three in the arrangement of his
material. The same thing is true of this epistle. Most of
the commentators decide that all of its contents center
about the three propositions, God is light, God is righteous
ness, God is love. If we agree to this as the general out
line, it would be equally easy to show that the same triple
arrangement of thought ruled in the subdivisions, and even
in the single paragraphs of the epistle.
(2) We have the same meagerness of connecting
particles which we found characteristic of the fourth
Gospel. For the most part the sentences are connected by
"and" alone. "And if any man sin, we have an Advocate.
And he is the propitiation. And in this we know. And
this is the message. And this is the commandment. And
this is the witness."14 (3) We find that the same noun is
repeated, instead of being replaced by the pronoun referring
to it in the epistle, as in the fourth Gospel. "In the begin
ning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and
the Logos was God." We would have said, "He was with

" 1 John 1. 5; 2. 1-3; 3. 23; 5. 11.

i64 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
God and he was God." In the epistle we read, "He that
hateth his brother is in the darkness, and walketh in the
darkness, . . . because the darkness hath blinded his
eyes."15 We would have said, "It hath blinded his eyes."
"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the
world," John says.16 We would have said, "Neither the
things that are in it."
(4) Sometimes this repetition of the same word extends
through an entire paragraph and becomes the chain linking
the whole together. We find this in the Gospel.17 We
see it again in the epistle, "Beloved, let us love one another :
for love is of God ; and every one that loveth is begotten of
God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not
God; for God is love. Herein was the love of God mani
fested in us, that God hath sent his only-begotten Son into
the world that we might live through him. Herein is love,
not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son
to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved
us, we also ought to love one another. No man hath beheld
God at any time: if we love one another, God abideth
in us, and his love is perfected in us."18 See how the
changes are rung upon the word "love." No lovelorn
swain of the sentimental romance could be more monoto
nous in his insistence upon the dominant character of his
love. It is the divine and eternal and spiritual love of
which John writes, but he is just as fervid in his avowal
of its necessity and its supremacy as any victim of an
earthly passion could be.
In the fifth chapter of the epistle we have the same
recurrence of the word "witness" which we found in the
fifth chapter of the fourth Gospel, "And it is the Spirit
that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. For
there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water,
and the blood: and the three agree in one. If we receive
u 1 John 2. 11. " John 5. 31-39.
18 1 John 2. 15. 18 1 John 4. 7-12.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 165
the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for the
witness of God is this, that he hath borne witness concern
ing his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath
the witness in him: he that believeth not God hath made
him a liar; because he hath not believed in the witness
that God hath borne concerning his Son. And the witness
is this, that God gave unto us eternal life, and this life is
in his Son."19
(5) We find the same preference for the abstract in the
epistle and in the Gospel, as in the phrases, "to be of God,
to abide in love, to have life, to do sin, to do lawlessness,
to do righteousness, to do the truth." To John's mind the
truth was not only to be spoken, but to be done. It was
to be lived. It was to be exemplified in daily conduct. It
was to be realized in action. The general expression, "to
do the truth," stood for any number of individual concrete
illustrations. The single fact never is of so much interest
to John as a general truth. (6) We find the same limited
vocabulary in both Gospel and epistle, the same favorite
words of broadest content and capable of the most varied
meaning. Life, light, love, darkness, death, world, fellow
ship, truth — these are the words which John uses again
and again, presenting them from different points of view,
"as if a man allowed a diamond to play in ever-different
light," Luthardt once said. They are John's jewels, and
he treasures them at their true worth. It has been estimated
that there are two hundred and ninety-five different words
in the epistle and that of these only sixty-nine are not to be
found also in the Gospel.
(7) We find the same sharp contrasts in both books.
Here in the epistle we have arrayed over against each other
in irreconcilable antagonism, death and life, darkness and
light, confidence and fear, righteousness and unrighteous
ness, Christ and antichrist, love of God and love of the

u 1 John 5. 7-11.

166 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
world, believers and the world, the children of God and
the children of the devil. (8) In the fourth Gospel we
read, "He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; but
he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life."20 In the
epistle we find the same custom of stating things positively
and then negatively, as follows, "God is light, and in him
is no darkness at all," "We lie, and do not the truth," "We
deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us," "He ... is
a liar, and the truth is not in him," "His anointing ... is
true, and is no lie," and, paralleling the passage we quoted
from the Gospel, "He that hath the Son hath the life; he
that hath not the Son of God hath not the life."21 (9) The
two writings have the same profundity of thought and
simplicity of language combined in a style which is un
paralleled and inimitable. In minor details and in general
characteristics the style of these two books is peculiar.
Church tradition has found only one hand to which to
ascribe them. If John did not write them, the greatest
genius of the apostolic age is without a name in church
history, while scores of lesser literary lights are well known.
If John wrote them, the greatest philosopher and theologian
and saint and seer of the apostolic company has left us in
them a monument worthy of himself and his Master; for
there are no two books in the New Testament which we
would exchange for these.
2. The doctrines they present are fundamentally the
same. (1) The Logos doctrine of the two Prologues is
identical and has no parallel in any other New Testament
books. (2) Christ is called a Paraclete in these two books
alone. The Holy Spirit is another Paraclete.22 (3) Jesus
is called the Only Begotten Son in these two books alone.23
(4) According to these two books, eternal life begins on
20 John 3. 36.
» 1 John 1. 5, 6, 8; 2. 4, 27; 5. 12.
22 John 14. 16; 1 John 2. 1.
23 John 1. 18; 3. 16, 18; 1 John 4. 9.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 167
earth and goes on without interruption into heaven. Eter
nal life is the present possession of the Christian believer.
The phrase "eternal life" is found only once in the Old
Testament — Dan. 12. 2. It occurs forty-four times in the-
New Testament and more than half of these occurrences
are found in these two books. The word "heaven" and
the word "glory" are not found in this First Epistle, prob
ably because the words "eternal life" represented to John
all that the other words implied. To John, "the road to
heaven lies through heaven, and all the way to heaven is
heaven." (5) In both books John draws the line of cleavage be
tween believers and unbelievers, as the children of God
and the children of the devil. They are both manifest to
themselves by the Spirit's presence or by the lack of it
and to others by righteousness of daily life or by the lack
of it. There are the two armies, and only two. There
are two leaders, and only two. They forever are opposed
to each other. There is no neutral ground. There is no
compromise possible. The feud is internecine. No man
ever can flee from the responsibilities the warfare puts
upon him. We are all of us conscripts in this spiritual war.
There is no possibility of the purchase of a substitute. We
are drafted and must fight on the field. We may take the
standard we choose. We may follow the leader we prefer.
We may determine to what host we belong. But whether
we will or will not, the choice of service is imperative and
inevitable. To-day we are enrolled, in the books of record
kept with an accuracy divine. To-day it is decided that
to this army or to that our influence is given. That is the
conception of a Boanerges, to whom all compromise is
contemptible cowardice and who would have all men to
be as out-and-out as himself.
3. The same personal characteristics of the author are
apparent in these two books. ( 1 ) The author's name does
not appear in either book. He hides himself in all modesty

168 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
while he claims to be an eyewitness and to proclaim the
absolute truth. (2) He is a Boanerges in the decisiveness
and the bitterness of his assault upon all depravers of the
truth and all who indulge in Satanic sin. He calls a lie
a lie, and he never allows that darkness is light or twilight.
It is always black to him. The people who come around
with new doctrines, denying the reality of the incarnation,
are not interesting or tolerable to John. They are liars and
antichrists and children of the devil. He is the Apostle of
Love, but he does not love laxity. He loves only that
which is lovely, and he hates with a white-hot hatred every
thing which tends to mar and destroy the loveliness of the
pure and the good.
(3) He is absolutely sure of the truth. He knows what
he is talking about. He knows that he is dealing with
primary principles and that there are no exceptions. He
has been taught by intuition and confirmed in his convic
tions by long experience. He has the assurance of one
who has grasped realities and tested the certainties until
there is no more room for doubt in his heart. Doubt is
one of the impossibilities. "We are reminded of a fine
stroke of Bunyan, in his allegory of The Holy War, when
he names Captain Experience among the chief officers who
routed and slew the army of ten thousand Doubters that
came against the city of Mansoul. There is nothing so
impervious to doubts as a sound personal experience of
Christ's saving power and love."24 From this stronghold
of personal experience John spoke. He knew ; and he was
contented with stating the fact.
4. The method of dealing with error and of presenting
the truth is the same in the two books. As Bishop Mc
Dowell has said: "John does not argue against people
living in the dark. He simply floods the world with light,
and a heretic must hunt a hole if he wants darkness."26
24 Donald Fraser, Lectures on the Bible, vol. ii, p. 289.
26 Iliff School Studies, p. 72.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 169
The similarity of style, the identity of doctrine, the like
personal characteristics, and the same method of expression
would seem to settle the question as to single authorship.
5. When we add to these marks of identification the fact
that there are at least thirty-five passages in which the
thought is closely parallel in the two books, and that in
some of these cases the same words and phrases are used,
we must conclude either that one man wrote both books
or that the writer of the epistle was a wholesale and un
conscionable plagiarist.26 The beginning verses have the
same ideas, and the two books close with the same thought.
Almost all the critics therefore, whether they believe the
apostle John or some one else wrote these books, agree in
the conclusion that the same hand is responsible for both
the Gospel and the epistle.
Westcott declares, "The epistle is so closely connected
with the fourth Gospel in vocabulary, style, thought, and
scope, that these two books cannot but be regarded as works
of the same author." Law, in his volume called The Tests
of Life, which is a very able commentary on the First
Epistle, concludes: "Prima facie, the case for identity
of authorship is overwhelmingly strong. On internal
grounds, it would appear much more feasible to assign
any two of Shakespeare's plays to different authors,
than the Gospel and the First Epistle of John. They are
equally saturated with that spiritual and theological atmos
phere, they are equally characterized by that type of
thought, which we call Johannine, and which presents an
interpretation of Christianity not less original and distinc
tive than Paulinism. ... In short, it seems impossible to
conceive of two independent literary productions having
a more intimate affinity. The relation between them is, in

28 Compare John 1. 1-4 with 1 John I. 1-4, and John 1. 18 with
1 John 4. 12, and John 3. 36 with I John 5. 12, and John 20. 31 with
1 John 5. 13.

170 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
every way, closer than that between the third Gospel and
the Acts of the Apostles, where the identity of authorship
is now generally admitted, the only case of approximation
to it being that of the Epistles to the Ephesians and the
Colossians"27 For these conclusions the evidence is fur
nished in detail, and Law's whole chapter on the "Relation
of the Epistle to the Fourth Gospel" is worth careful study.
Baur, Pfleiderer, H. J. Holtzmann, Von Soden, and others
held that there was a different authorship here, but even
such radical critics as Jiilicher, Wernle, and Wrede have
been convinced that dual authorship is impossible.
B. Having noticed their likeness to each other, it may be
well for us to point out some differences between the two
books. I. We have seen that they begin with the same
ideas. The form in which these ideas are presented in the
Gospel is in striking contrast with that in the epistle. The
Gospel begins with a series of short sentences, each easily
understood and complete in itself. The epistle begins with
one long and involved sentence with 'a broken and rather
difficult grammatical construction. A parenthesis cuts
across the course of the thought, which is caught up again
toward the close. An old divine says that the epistle is
"prefaced and brought in with more magnificent ceremony
than any passage in Scripture."28 There is only one pas
sage like it in all of John's other writing, the first verses
of the thirteenth chapter in the Gospel. 2. There is not a
single quotation from the Old Testament in the epistle.
The Gospel has many of them. There are references to
Old Testament characters in both. 3. As we might natu
rally expect, the epistle has much less of historical back
ground and of local coloring than the Gospel. The differ
ence in the character of the two writings would account
for this. 4. Westcott says that their themes are different.

27 Law, The Tests of Life, pp. 340, 341.
28 Alexander, op. cit., p. 80.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 171
"The theme of the Gospel is, Jesus is Christ; the theme
of the epistle is, Christ is Jesus."29 Law draws this further
distinction between them, "The Gospel is christocentric ;
the epistle, theocentric. In the one is given the concrete
presentment of the incarnate Son ; in the other the immedi
ate intuition of the divine nature revealed in him. While
the theme common to both is the 'Word of life,' the special
theme of the Gospel is the Word who reveals and imparts
the life; in the epistle it is the life revealed and imparted
by the Word, and the thought of the indwelling Christ is
naturally carried up to the ultimate truth of the indwelling
God."30 C. We have not yet decided what relation these two writ
ings were intended to bear to each other. Lightfoot thought
that the epistle was planned to serve as an introduction
to the Gospel. Hilgenfeld said it was the pattern upon
which the Gospel afterward was built. Bleek, Huther,
Pfleiderer, Zeller thought that the epistle was written first.
Others, like Bretschneider, Ebrard,31 Hug,32 Hausrath,
Hofmann, Haupt,33 and Thiersch, have agreed that the
epistle was a dedicatory writing intended to accompany
the Gospel wherever it went. Baur said the epistle was
simply a poor copy from the Gospel. Augusti and Holtz
mann called it a summary or practical setting of the con
tents of the Gospel. Others, like Michaelis, Storr, and
Eichhorn, are content to name the epistle a companion of
the Gospel or a second part of the Gospel. Lucke,
De Wette, Reuss, Schenkel are sure of the priority of the
Gospel. Westcott says, "The substance of the Gospel is
a commentary on the epistle; the epistle is (so to speak)

29 Commentary on John, p. lxxxviii.
80 International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 1703.
31 "A companion-document." Commentary on John's Epistles, p. 25.
82 "A supplement," Introduction to New Testament, vol. ii, p. 249.
38 "A postscript," On the First Epistle of John, p. 374.

172 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
the condensed moral and practical application of the
Gospel."34 We are inclined to believe that the epistle was written
later than the Gospel and was designed to be a sort of
appendix to it. We agree with Bishop Alexander that
"The epistle is to be read through with constant reference
to the Gospel. There is a vital and constant connection.
The two documents not only touch each other in thought,
but interpenetrate each other; and the epistle is constantly
suggesting questions which the Gospel only can answer."35
"The epistle is intelligible," says Haupt, "only if we suppose
the reader to possess a knowledge of the Gospel, not only
in general, but also in detailed expressions."36 This seems
to us to be true of i John i. 1-4; 2. 7; 4. 17; and 5. 6-8.
In any case, whether the epistle is a preface to the Gospel
or, as we suppose, an appendix to it, these two books stand
together. They belong to the same family. They are of
one blood. Professor Ramsay says, "No two works in
the whole range of literature show clearer signs of the
genius of one writer, and no other pair of works are so
completely in a class by themselves, apart from the work
of their own and every other time."37
III. Genuineness and Date
The external evidence for the genuineness of the epistle
is very satisfactory. Polycarp38 and Papias39 quote from
it. The Muratorian Fragment bears its testimony to the
authorship of the apostle John. The Peshito and the
Itala recognized it. Tertullian,40 Clement of Alexandria,41
84 The Epistles of John, p. xxx.
36 Op. cit., p. 75.
38 The First Epistle of John, p. 373.
87 The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 303.
38 Ad Phil., vii.
89 Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., v, 20.
40 Adv. Prax., xv.
41 Strom., II, 15. Paedag., Ill, 11.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 173
Irenaeus,42 Origen,43 Cyprian,44 and others among the
church Fathers use it and witness to its composition by
John. Even Dr. Samuel Davidson admits that "the letter
is well attested by the voice of antiquity, and that, as far
as external evidence reaches, its authenticity seems to be
secure,"45 and Liicke asserts, "Incontestably, our epistle
must be numbered among those canonical books which are
most strongly upheld by ecclesiastical tradition."46 We
already have seen that the internal evidence is equally good.
Upon the basis of both we conclude that the First Epistle
was written by the apostle John at Ephesus or in its near
neighborhood some time during the last decades of the
first century. IV. Heresies Combated
Are any particular heresies aimed at in this epistle ? Baur
said that the author of the epistle wrote against the Monta-
nists, and Hilgenfeld thought that he aimed at the Gnosti
cism of the second century; but if the apostle John was the
author, neither of these suppositions would be possible.
We must look for heresies which were prevalent in his
time. Oriental dualism undoubtedly was taught in Ephesus
in his day.' It regarded evil as an eternal attribute of
matter. This philosophical doctrine naturally led to theo
logical Docetism. Jerome says, "When the blood of Christ
was but lately shed and the apostles were still in Judaea,
the Lord's body was asserted to be a phantom."47
If the flesh was material and evil was inherent in all
matter, then a genuine incarnation became impossible. The
Divine could not inhabit a vile body. It would be better
42 Adv. Haer., Ill, 16. 5.
43 De orat., Opp. I, p. 233.
44 Epis. 24.
45 Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii, p. 302.
48 The Epistles of John, p. 7.
47 Adv. Lucifer, xxiii. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. vi,
P- 332.

174 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
to say that the body of Jesus was an illusion than to say
it was real. Then the sufferings of Jesus were only appar
ent and there was no reality about them. It was a com
paratively easy thing, therefore, for God to save men.
Salvation was without suffering or sacrifice on his part,
and it was only natural that it should be concluded that it
might also be without much suffering or sacrifice on the
part of man. A docetic Christ led inevitably to a docetic
Christianity. A creed with its emphasis upon emptiness
led to conduct equally empty of moral content and real
worth. Those who embraced this philosophical-theological atti
tude were prone to slide into Antinomian theories and
practices. They concluded that their bodies might be evil,
but their spirits were independent of their bodies and
undefiled by them. When they once were regenerated they
remained pure. The body might be given over to any
indulgence in sensual appetites and lusts and the spirit was
uncontaminated by these things. A jewel might lie in a
dunghill, and be just as much of a jewel as in any other
surroundings. It would be separate and secure in its own
value wherever it was. This doctrine made possible
drunken and licentious professors of holiness. Their
spirits were holy even though their bodies were given over
to sin. The body was doomed to sin, and it never could
escape from it. A profession of faith, an initiation into
the true understanding of affairs, was equivalent, therefore,
to a license to any degree of immorality in daily life.
We know that Cerinthus was a contemporary of the
apostle John. We know that he was a Gnostic, with a
pretense to superior knowledge in spiritual things. We
know that his teaching was a strange mixture of Asiatic
and Jewish and Christian elements. We know that he
believed that the Christ was to be distinguished from the
man Jesus. The former was a heavenly being, while the
latter was an earthly being. The Christ entered into Jesus

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 175
at the time of the baptism in the Jordan and left Jesus
before the sufferings of the crucifixion. We know how
the apostle John hated Cerinthus. Schleiermacher, Neander,
Diisterdieck, Ebrard, Huther, Haupt, Keim, Weiss, Sal
mond, and others think this epistle was written to an
tagonize Cerinthus. We know that it is adapted to antag
onize all dualism and Docetism and Antinomianism of
whatever kind.
Whedon says it was written as "a defense of Christian
purity from sin against Gnostic purity in sin."48 Lipsius
and Holtzmann conclude that the epistle attacks the dual-
istic Gnosticism, which was Christologically Docetic and
practically Antinomian. Michaelis, Credner, De Wette,
Hausrath, Liicke, Mangold, Reuss, and Schmidt agree.
John may have had some of these specific forms of error
in mind as he wrote ; or he may have thought only of the
inevitable and general perversions of the truth to which
the Christian doctrine was liable in his day as it has been
in all the ages since his day. Anybody who embodied these
errors in his life and his teaching would be an antichrist,
a liar, and a child of the devil. There have been many
such in every period of church history.
Against them all this epistle has lifted up its testimony
in eternal protest. It gives no uncertain sound. There is
no writing in the New Testament so passionately contro
versial as this. With all the calmness and dignity of an
apostle, with all the peace of one who has attained the
incontrovertible truth, John deals sledgehammer blows at
all the' errorists of his day. All the heresies of history
are anticipated and answered here. The church might
have been saved from them if all Christians had studied
and appreciated and realized within themselves the truths
of this epistle. The church may find a safeguard here
against all heresies in time to come. Let us cherish it at

48 Commentary on New Testament, V, p. 251.

176 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
its true worth. It will be found to be serviceable according
to our needs to-day.

V. A Final and Crowning Revelation
The First Epistle of John is generally considered to be
the last book of our Scripture to be written. Jude follows
it in our canon, but Jude belongs to a much earlier period.
The Apocalypse comes last in our New Testament, but
nobody thinks that it was last chronologically. The
arrangement of books in our Bible is not a chronological
arrangement. The Second and Third Epistles of John
are not second and third in time, but in importance. They
doubtless were written in some earlier period of John's
ministry in Ephesus. The First Epistle of John is the last
message from God to man contained in the Sacred Scrip
tures. It is the last word of the Bible revelation. For
the last time an inspired writer sits down to add some
closing words to the Holy Book. Surely, this last message
will be a precious and important one.
We would not lose one word of those final conversa
tions of Jesus with the disciples recorded alone in the
fourth Gospel. We could not spare one word of this
final communication of the apostolic age, this last publica
tion of authoritative inspired and canonical truth. We
sympathize with the feeling of Chrysostom when he speaks
of the writings of John: "Wherefore, as if we all at once
saw one stooping down from yonder heaven, and promising
to tell us truly of things there, we should all flock to listen
to him, so let us now dispose ourselves. For it is from
up there' that this man speaks down to us. . . . All that he
utters is with the steadfast accuracy of truth, and as if
he stood upon a rock he budges not. . All time is his wit
ness. Seest thou the boldness, and the great authority of
his words! — how he utters nothing by way of doubtful
conjectures, but all demonstratively, as if passing sentence.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 177
Very lofty is this apostle and full of dogmas, and lingers
over them more than over other things!"49 What Chrys
ostom said applies both to the style and the contents of
this epistle. It contains a most remarkable series of state
ments concerning the most fundamental facts of our faith.
No other book in the Bible contains a larger number of
the essentials in the gospel put so compactly and clearly.
VI. The Epistle of Love
The word "love" occurs more often in this epistle than
in any other book of the New Testament and the verb "to
love" occurs twice as many times in this epistle as in any
other book of the New Testament, except the Gospel ac
cording to John. Therefore the epistle has been called
the Epistle of Love. Love dominates the thought from
beginning to end. Six times John calls his readers, dyanrjToi,
"beloved." Twelve times the noun dydnq is found. The
verb dyandu is repeated twenty-seven times. Fifty-one
times in all the word "love" with its derivatives occurs, and
the repetition of the word is only an indication of the con
tinuous burden of the epistle. Augustine said, "Locutus
est multa, et prope omnia de caritate" — "He has said many
things, and almost all about love." Luther said, "The main
substance of this epistle relates to love." Calvin said, "It
contains doctrine with exhortations, but in no continuous
order. He especially insists upon brotherly love, but
touches also briefly upon other things."50
The brotherly love taught in this epistle may have the
warmest affection in it or it may not. It may include
passionate regard or it may not. It can be independent
of any passing emotion. It rests upon deep-seated principle.
It is a feeling of affinity with and obligation to the race.

49 In Johan. Homil, I, II, III. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,
First Series, vol. xiv, pp. 2, 5.
80 Farrar, op. cit., p. 485.

178 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
It is unselfish devotion to the highest interests of others
and of all. It is the fixed purpose to help everybody and
to do all we can to make the world better by making every
man good. It will feed an enemy when he is hungry and
give him drink when he is thirsty. It will suffer long with
him and be kind to him. It will bear all things, believe
all things, hope all things, endure all things. It never will
fail, even as Christ's love never failed. What is the use
of attempting to define it? The best definition of it is to
be found in the life of Jesus. The best personal exhibition
of it will be found in the life of the man who walks even
as Jesus walked. No man in himself can attain unto it.
This love must come from God, and from him alone. He
enables us to love as he enabled Jesus to love. All love
is from him. Jesus said, "God is your Father," and that
was a great revelation. John says, "God is love," and that
is the final revelation of the Holy Book concerning God
the Father revealed through Jesus Christ.
John is responsible for each of those three remarkable
four- word statements of the essential being of God. The
first he quotes from the lips of Jesus in the Gospel, "God
is a spirit." The other two occur in this epistle, "God is
light," and finally "God is love." It is the climaxing truth
of the New Testament, the final, culminating, unapproach
able formulation of our faith. There is no higher truth
contained in the Book. This is the Kohinoor of revelation.
This is our incomparable gospel to men. Archbishop
Trench was inspired to put it into poetry which ought to
be committed to memory or cherished in heart by every
ambassador from God to men.

I say to thee, do thou repeat
To the first man thou mayest meet
In lane, highway, or open street,
That he, and we, and all men move
Under a canopy of love
As broad as the blue sky above.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 179

And — ere thou leave him — say thou this,
Yet one word more — they only miss
The winning of that final bliss,
Who will not count it true, that love,
Blessing, not cursing, rules above —
And that in it we live and move.
And one thing further make him know,
That to believe these things are so,
This firm faith never to forego —
Despite of all that seems at strife
With blessing — all with curses rife —
That this is blessing — this is life!

All other revealed truth must be coordinated with this
and subordinated to it. God is Spirit — that is of interest
to the metaphysicians and the philosophers. God is light
— that is of interest to all seekers after the truth and all
pilgrims toward the Holy City. God is love — that is of
interest to all alike, just as much to those who never heard
of metaphysics and philosophy as to those who have, just
as much to the multitudes dwelling in dense ignorance and
the throngs crowding the broad and downward way as to
the saints who toil up the straight and narrow path. From
everlasting to everlasting God is love and nothing but love.
Love is not one of God's attributes. It is the essence
of his being. It is the center from which all God's attri
butes spring. It is their basis and their source. It is the
final explanation of all which God has done or may do.
It is the one fact to which Christian faith must cling in
the face of all the mysteries of Providence and all the
untoward circumstances of individual experience or world
history. God is Everlasting and Unfailing Love, and,
therefore, love is the law of this universe, and it is the will
of our God that all men shall share in his love and in all
of its benefits. All is love and all is law. All law is of
love. Augustine said, "If nothing whatever throughout the
other pages of Scripture were said in praise of love, and

180 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
this one thing only were all we were told by the voice of
the Spirit of God, 'For God is love,' nothing more ought
we to require." This epistle shows love to be the central
fact in the universe, the central truth of Christian theology,
and the central grace in the Christian life. It may well
be called the Epistle of Love.
VII. The Epistle of Knowledge
No book in the Bible puts a higher premium upon
knowledge than this epistle does. Some have called it the
Epistle of Knowledge and have tried to show that all its
contents could be congregated about this point. There
were Gnostics in Ephesus who claimed to know all the
mysteries of the truth. John gave them to understand
that the Christians could be Gnostics too, and he declares
that the Christian Gnostics knew all spiritual truth, "Ye
have an anointing from the Holy One, and ye know all
things."51 Tauler the mystic said, "The Holy Ghost will
not teach us all things, so that we shall know whether
there shall be a good harvest and vintage, whether bread
will be dear or cheap, whether the present war will come
to an end soon; but all things which we can need for a
perfect life and for a knowledge of the hidden truth of
God." Knowledge is power. It always has been and it always
will be. Therefore all men always have been desirous to
know all things. However, there are some things which
we can go without knowing, if need be. It is not necessary
that every man shall know how many bones there are in
a fish's back or how many rings there are about Saturn.
It is not necessary that every man shall know all about
the megalosaurus or the primitive protoplasm. But it
is an absolute necessity for his present and his future
welfare that he know those things which pertain to the
• » i John 2. 20.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 181
right relationship between his soul and his God. There
must be a certainty and sufficiency of knowledge concern
ing his spiritual past, present, and future or he dwells in
culpable ignorance here and may go into denser darkness
hereafter. John says that we may be anointed and know
all these things ; all things which affect the soul's salvation,
all necessary knowledge concerning the will of our God
and our disposition toward him. This is the really im
portant knowledge, and in this field there need be no mental
uncertainty, there need be no manner of doubt. In John's
estimation all other knowledge drops out of account. It
will be partial and unsatisfactory at the best. It will be
surrounded by mystery on every side; but in this most
essential knowledge of all unto man John says there may
be perfect assurance in which the mind and heart and soul,
in which the man entire can rest in complete confidence,
in entire satisfaction, in perfect peace.
John believed in a knowable salvation, as firmly as John
Wesley did. It was the power of this primitive preaching
of the Christian faith that it preached great realities which
could be tested and proved in personal experience. It pro
claimed a salvation which a man could possess and know.
That was the power in the preaching of the Wesleyan
revival. A type of Christianity had come into general
acceptation which could be represented as believing con
cerning a Christian experience : "If you seek it, you cannot
find it; if you have it, you will not know it; and if you
lose it, you never had it." This whole epistle is a protest
against any such perversion of Christian truth. Twenty-
five times in the epistle John uses the verb "to know." All
through the epistle he emphasizes the certainty and suffi
ciency of our knowledge in spiritual things.
It is the result of our anointing. In the Old Testament
times the anointing was given to special individuals, and
they were thus inducted into one of the three typical offices
of the early kingdom. A man was anointed to be a prophet ;

182 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
he was anointed to be a priest; he was anointed to be a
king. All the nation understood that these anointings were
typical of the higher anointing which should be given to
the Messias when he came, by virtue of which he was to
be both Prophet, Priest, and King, and so worthy to bear
that name, the Messias, the Anointed One. Jesus came,
and gathered up into himself all the gifts and graces of
the three anointings; and he did this, John says, only that
he might scatter them abroad again among all his people.
The anointing of the Holy One was to be given to all the
followers of the Christ. Henceforth there would be no
chosen prophets to whom alone the Lord's will would be
made known ; but all would know him from the least to the
greatest, and all would preach the glad gospel as authorized
messengers. Henceforth the Levitical priesthood should
perish, but the royal priesthood of the universal Christian
Church should be established in its stead. Henceforth no
single king should hold a scepter to rule, but every fol
lower of the Christ should be blessed with royal preroga
tive. Prophets, priests, and kings, the members of the
Christian Church from Pentecost to Judgment Day, should
dwell in no uncertainty, should be blessed with a fullness
of light, should stand in full assurance of the knowledge
of the truth. The triple anointing of the Holy One should
be upon them, and they should know all things.
See how John illustrates his meaning in five statements
in the third chapter of this epistle. "Ye know that he
was manifested to take away sins."52 "We know that
we have passed out of death into life."53 "Hereby shall
we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our
heart before him."54 "Hereby we know that he abideth
in us, by the Spirit which he gave us."55 "We know
that ... we shall be like him; for we shall see him even

82 1 John 3. 5. «i John 3. 19.
88 1 John 3. 14. 65 1 John 3. 24.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 183
as he is."56 John says that in every stage of Christian
experience there is an absolute certainty of knowledge; in
conviction, in conversion, in the full assurance of faith,
in the abiding baptism of the Holy Spirit or present sancti-
fication, in the glorification which lies beyond. John says
"We know" concerning all of these. He says "We know"
seventeen times in this epistle, and "Ye know" eight times.
It does seem that it might be called "An Epistle on the
Subject of Christian Knowledge."
John closes the book with three affirmations which sum
up the leading thoughts of the epistle.57 They set forth
the purity, the privilege, and the Presence which charac
terize the Christian life. Concerning each of these John
says, "We know." It is as though he set the seal of uni
versal Christian consciousness upon the conclusions set
forth in his book. This and this and this are settled mat
ters. We know that these three things are true. "We
know that whosoever is begotten of God sinneth not; but
he that was begotten of God keepeth himself, and the evil
one toucheth him not." We know that purity is possible
and victory is assured. "We know that we are of God,
and the whole world lieth in the evil one." We know our
transcendent privilege in fellowship with the Father and
in our rescue from Satan's power. "We know that the
Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding,
that we may know him that is true, and we are in him
that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true
God and eternal life." We know the Presence who makes
our Christian life possible and permanent. He is true.
He has the truth. He gives us an understanding. He
enables us to know. That is our blessedness — to know
and to live. That sums it all up; knowledge, understand
ing, truth, and life in the eternal enjoyment of these. We

88 1 John 3. 2.
87 1 John 5. 18, 19, 20.

184 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
know and we know that we know ; that was John's convic
tion as to all spiritual truth and that was his challenge to
all Gnostics, all the Illuminati, all the advanced thinkers
of his own or any later time. "See what we Christians
know. We know much more than you do; and we know
about better things. We have the anointing of the Holy
One and we know all things."
VIII. The Epistle of the Incarnation
The burden of this epistle is the reality of the incarna
tion. John is concerned that all Christians shall believe
and know that Jesus was a brother man. To lose the
certainty of the humanity of Jesus would be to lose the
sweetest sympathy and the most sufficient comfort of the
Christian life. It would be the loss of the strongest motive
to holy living. It would rob the example of Christ of all
reality and all inspiration. Only he who has a real faith
in the real humanity of Jesus will feel the obligation upon
him to walk even as he walked.58 John says that the
greatest lie of the ages will be the denial of the reality of
the incarnation.59 John says that the very climax of all
antagonism to the truth will be manifest in the antichrist
who will promulgate this doctrine.
The spirit of the antichrist will be that spirit which is
bent upon annulling Jesus.60 The Vulgate in this pas
sage reads, "separates Jesus," and we understand that to
mean, divides his single personality into two separate, dis
tinct, and incompatible parts, makes him a double-minded,
two-souled being, neither God nor man, but God and man,
instead of the God-man. Jesus had no two natures. He
was one, even as we are one. He lived on our plane. The
incarnation was genuine. He did not pretend to ignorance

68 1 John 2. 6.
89 1 John 2. 22.
60 i John 4. 3, R. V., margin.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 185
when he was omniscient in reality. He did not profess
inability to do anything of himself when he was omnipotent
in reality. It was no sham humanity he put on. There
was no Omnipotent One masquerading behind the human
weakness presented in the Gospels. There was no Omnis
cient One concealing himself behind the show of human
surprise and wonder and ignorance of which we read in
the Gospels. There was no Omnipresent One behind, back
of, beyond, different from, separate from Jesus. The
incarnation was not Docetic, but actual. The incarnation
was not seeming, but real. The Divine really became
human, not partly so, but wholly so, in Jesus. There was
not Divinity and humanity in him; but Divinity in hu
manity, one and inseparable in thought and in fact. The
Word became flesh; God became man; and thereafter he
was not God and man in any contrasting or distinguishable
or separable sense, not two entities, two personalities, two
beings, but one, the Cod-Man for evermore. It is to this
reality of the incarnation that John clings as the supreme
article of his faith.
He knew the facts, and it was not possible for him to
doubt it. He had seen and heard and handled the manifest
proofs. He knew that those who denied these proofs were
liars and antichrists. Could he ever forget that day when
Jesus had first said to him, "Come and see"? Could he
ever forget any of the incidents of that marvelous day?
Did he not remember many other days only less wonderful
than that because his eyes were becoming accustomed
to this revelation of truth and of grace ? He had lived with
Jesus. They had journeyed together and worked together.
They had reclined at the same table ; they had dipped in the
same dish. They had been weary and hungry together.
Jesus had been his companion, brother, teacher, friend. He
had had daily and indisputable proofs of the Lord's true
and real humanity. It was a plain and unquestionable fact
to him. The denial of that fact was equivalent to a denial

186 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
of the whole gospel; for the whole gospel depended on
this fundamental truth.
If the incarnation was not a reality, if the Divine Messias
was to be distinguished from the man Jesus, then the whole
faith was hung on a phantom, the cross was a sham, the
death was a delusion, the resurrection was an hallucination,
and the ascension was the climax in a long series of a Divine
Comedy of Errors; and the Christians were the worst
dupes in all history and the most miserable of men on the
earth. To assert this was to annul the Christian faith.
Therefore the last message of the aged apostle to the Chris
tian Church, the final word of the Book of Divine Revela
tion to men, was this : "The most important dogma of your
faith is that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. The most
damnable heresy ever devised among men is the denial of
the reality of the incarnation. Every spirit that confesseth
that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every
spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is
the spirit of the antichrist whereof ye have heard that it
cometh; and now it is in the world already."61
IX. The Epistle of the Atonement
The Epistle of the Incarnation would naturally be the
Epistle of the Atonement. Bishop Warren has said of the
First Epistle of John: "No book of the New Testament
is so pervaded and saturated with the idea of the atonement
by blood. The book contains but five short chapters. In
each of the first two and last two is a distinct statement
or definition of the atoning work, while the middle chapter
has three. Hence there are seven clear testimonies, inde
pendent and emphatic ; a larger number than can be found
anywhere else in the same space. . . .62 There is no refin
ing of the language of the Jewish sacrifices. ... No inti-
81 1 John 4. 2, 3.
82 Iliff School Studies, p. 78.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 187
mation is allowed that Christ's death was an instructive
spectacle, a most influential example, a power of emotional
effect on the beholder. But it was a real substitution of
the death of Christ for the eternal death of man."63
In some quarters a "bloody salvation" is as much decried
as is "the bloody shirt" in other quarters in politics. Yet
these old war veterans who go around with one leg and a
crutch, or with an empty sleeve, or with shattered constitu
tion and health, still talk and will talk about the bloody
sacrifices of the Civil War and they still think that its
bloodshed and sacrifice was the salvation of the nation. It
is even so with the veterans of the cross in the New Testa
ment. Their salvation is a salvation obtained by suffering
and blood. They are redeemed by the blood, cleansed by
the blood, saved by the blood. They have no other gospel
to preach.
Let us recall their testimony. Paul declares, God hath
set Christ forth "to be a propitiation ... in his blood."64
We have been "justified by his blood."65 "We have our
redemption through his blood."66 "Ye . . . are made nigh
in the blood of Christ."67 He hath "made peace through
the blood of his cross."68 God purchased the church "with
his own blood."69 Peter agrees, "Ye . . . were redeemed
with precious blood . . . even the blood of Christ."70 We
are elect "unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of
Jesus Christ."71
John, the beloved disciple, the veteran apostle, last of the
great leaders to write his testimony concerning these things,
tells us that Jesus loved us and loosed us from our sins in
his own blood,72 and in heaven they sing about it, "Worthy
art thou: ... for thou wast slain, and didst purchase

83 Op. cit., p. 75- "Col. 1. 20.
84 Rom. 3. 25. K> Acts 20. 28.
88 Rom. 5. 9. ™ 1 Pet. 1. 18, 19.
88 Eph. 1. 7. " 1 Pet. 1. 2.
87 Eph. 2. 13. n Rev. 1. 5.

188 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
[men] unto God with thy blood."73 The saints there have
washed their robes and made them white in the blood of
the Lamb.74 They overcame the adversary because of the
blood of the Lamb.75 In the First Epistle John has written
the final subscription to the faith of the New Testament
church, "The blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from all
sin."76 It is the final protest of Scripture against that
over-refinement which shirks the facts.
It may be too that there were those in John's day who
were denying the universal efficacy of the atonement made
by Jesus. They may have been claiming it for themselves
alone, or limiting it to some circle of the elect. Anyway,
John takes occasion in this epistle to state as clearly as it
could be stated, "He is the propitiation for our sins; and
not for ours only, but also for the whole world."77
X. The Epistle of Personal Experience
This is the Epistle of Personal Experience. Hilgenfeld
says of it, "The fresh, vivid, attractive character of the
epistle consists exactly in this, that it conducts us with such
a predilection into the inner experience of genuine Chris
tian life."78 That is the glory which rests upon these pages.
They speak of the knowledge, the privilege, the possession,
the experience, the anointing, the light, the love, the life
which have been made possible to every Christian.
It surely is noteworthy that in this last literary legacy
from the apostolic church, the last picture drawn by an
apostle of the possibilities and the realities in the Christian
brotherhood, there is no mention of miracles or visions or
tongues or any other extraordinary supernatural phenom
ena. These are all dropped out of view, and only those
things remain which are the continuous heritage of be-

78 Rev. 5. 9. '8 1 John I. 7.
74 Rev. 7. 14. « 1 John 2. 2.
78 Rev. 12. 11. 78 Quoted in Meyer, p. 451.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 189
lievers — fellowship with the Father, the inspiration of the
Spirit, pardon, peace, and purity in the practice of prayer
and progress in a life of love. These are the topics of
supreme importance in the Christian life. They may be
few in number, but they outweigh all others in their value
to personal Christian experience. The spiritual perception
of this epistle is born of the insight of a saint and seer.
John lives in the heights. He has continuous fellowship
with great thoughts and abiding enjoyment of profound
experiences, and he covets the company of all Christians in
these things.
XL The Epistle of Fellowship
This is the Epistle of Fellowship. It is the aim of the
epistle that its readers may have such fellowship as John
himself enjoyed. "That which we have seen and heard
declare we unto you also, that ye may have fellowship with
us."79 Westcott thinks that this is the main thought of
the epistle.80 It seems to run through the whole course
of the discussion. The epistle begins with the statement,
"Our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus
Christ."81 It goes on to detail the conditions upon which
this fellowship may be maintained, in conformity to the
divine will, in communion with the Divine Spirit, in conse
cration to the divine ideals of light and love. It closes with
the statement, "We are in him that is true, even in his
Son Jesus Christ."82 Surely, no man ever was better quali
fied to speak upon this subject of fellowship between God
and man than was the apostle John. He had reclined upon
the bosom of Jesus. He had been admitted into the closest
intimacy with the Incarnate Lord. For two generations
since the ascension of Jesus he had proven the possibility
of continuous life in the Presence Divine. He knew what

79 1 John 1. 3. S1 1 John 1. 3.
60 Commentary, p. xlvii. M 1 John 5. 20.

190 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
he was talking about. He desired that the whole church
might know this fellowship, in order that its joy might be
full as his own.
The two conditions for the maintenance of this unbroken
relationship, John says, are absolute righteousness and un
failing love.83 Righteousness and love are the marks of
the children of God. Wickedness and hate are the marks
of the children of the devil. Here is the spirit of a
Boanerges in theology. "Little children, let no man lead
you astray: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even
as he is righteous: he that doeth sin is of the devil; for
the devil sinneth from the beginning. ... In this the chil
dren of God are manifest, and the children of the devil:
whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither
he that loveth not his brother."84
Let the church understand this, then, for all time to
come. Fellowship with the Father is to be maintained not
by subscription to any creed or union with any organiza
tion. Fellowship with the Father is to be maintained only
by righteousness, out and out Tightness; straightforward,
steadfast, unswerving adherence to principle; downright,
outright uprightness of character; through and through,
thorough and true honesty of purpose; purity of intention,
integrity of action everywhere. The man who maintains
fellowship with God must be righteous in business, right
eous in public, righteous in private, righteous from sunrise
to sunset, right with God and right with man while he
wakes and while he sleeps. A son of God moves in as
steady an orbit as the sun in heaven. The child of God
is true to his heart's core, sound from center to circum
ference. His conscience is as steady as the needle to the
pole. He loves the right in his heart. He plans for the
right with his head. He does the right with his hands.
He will stand for the right, if the heavens totter and the
83 1 John 3. 7-10.
84 1 John 3. 7, 8, 10.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 191
earth reels. He cannot be bought with any bauble. He is
not for sale at any price. He neither brags nor runs away.
He tells the truth and looks the world and the devil right
in the eye.
Righteousness is his characteristic, righteousness of out
ward conduct and righteousness of inward life. There
is no chance here for crookedness, no loophole for hypo
crites to hide in, no opportunity for double dealing of any
kind. Righteousness always moves along right lines, and
always at right angles to anything and everything wrong.
The rising tide of Socialism in all the lands to-day urges
the social necessity of this primary demand of the apostle
John for the Christian life. The Socialists say: "It is
simple justice we demand. We will be satisfied with our
rights." Their indictment against the Christian Church is
that righteousness has not characterized its treatment of
the working classes.
However, when the social Utopia has been realized and
every man has his just rights, John's standard for the
Christian life will be still far in advance of that condition.
John says that social righteousness must be the product of
Christian love. To maintain fellowship with God the
Christian must be kindly affectioned to all men with
brotherly love. He must realize the fact that if God is
his Father, all men are his brothers. No matter how much
•some men may differ with him in their tastes or their habits
of life, there is some point of sympathy between them
which proves affinity. There is a relationship between the
most abject savage and the most cultured scholar. There
are so many chords in this golden harp of a thousand
strings which forms our earthly life that some one can
be found to vibrate in unison with those in any other. A
touch of nature makes the whole world kin.
Where is that Pharisee who draws his robes of righteous
ness about him or lifts from your path the royal purple
wealth affords or shrouds his face behind a veil of intel-

192 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
lectual superiority and gives thanks that he is not as other
men? To him let the lie be given. The vilest sinner, the
poorest wretch, the most illiterate creature on God's earth
is a man, is his brother, has a soul, and will appear before
God. His destiny may depend upon the degree in which
we love him. Our destiny surely depends upon the degree
in which we love him. Our eternal interests are one. Our
fortunes for eternity are indissolubly linked. To the child
of God all men are his brothers, and he is not only righteous
but loving. "In this the children of God are manifest, and
the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteous
ness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."85
It is a high standard, this standard of fellowship with the
Father of all. It is as much higher than the standard
demanded by our social reformers as the Christian millen
nium will be higher and better than the best of the Utopias
planned by them. It is a high standard. Is it too high
to be within the reach of men on the earth? It surely
would be unless men can be saved entirely from selfishness
and from sin. Is that an utter impossibility? John did
not think so, as this epistle clearly shows.
XII. The Epistle of Purity
This is the epistle which promises cleansing from sin and
perfecting in love, the epistle of perfect love in a purified
life. Sin and selfishness are incompatible with fellowship
with the Father. Only purity and love can fellowship
with him. Did John say that he wrote this epistle in order
that we might have fellowship with the Father? He says
again, "My little children, these things write I unto you
that ye may not sin."86 The two objects are the same. He
aims at sinlessness in order that there may be fellowship.
Nothing could be clearer than that John puts the sinner

88 1 John 3. 10.
-*r John 2. 1.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 193
into one category and the Christian into another. Sin
distinguishes the one from the other. The man who sins
is a sinner; afrd the Christian is cleansed from sin and
kept from the power of the evil one. It is the normal
experience in the Christian life to have constant and com
plete victory over sin. John aims at sinlessness because
sinlessness alone is capable of sustained fellowship with the
Father and the Son. Purity was no impossibility. Perfect
love to God and man was not contrary to any law of life.
Sinlessness was no abnormality in humanity. It is the
natural and inevitable result of the presence of the Holy
Spirit in the heart.
John is indulging in no visionary flights of rhetoric, but
he is stating the simple facts of his own experience and
the experience of all who had tested the grace of God in
their lives. Hear how he puts the truth. "If we walk in
the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with
another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanseth us from
all sin. If we say that we have no sin" to be cleansed from,
"we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." No man
is superior to the need of God's grace. No man can say
truthfully that he has no need of a Saviour. The man
who thinks that is self-deceived and never has realized the
facts of the case. Let him search his own heart. Let him
see if there is no unrighteousness there and no selfishness
that needs to be forgiven and taken away. Then when
he has realized his true condition, let him hear the gracious
truth, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous
to forgive us our sins, and to. cleanse us from all unright
eousness. If we say that we have not sinned," and there
fore have no need of forgiveness and cleansing, "we make
him a liar, and his word is not in us." It is only upon
sinners that these gracious gifts are bestowed. The be
stowal of these gifts makes the sinner a child of God.
Henceforth he is to be saved from sin.
All sin is Satanic. The child of God is no longer a child

194 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
of the devil. "My little children, these things write I unto
you that ye may not sin" at all. You may not indulge in
sin even once. The aorist tense denotes a single act as
distinguished from the abiding state. You are no longer
to abide in sin; that goes without saying. You are not
to sin in any single act ; but if any man be overtaken in a
fault, be swept off his feet for an instant, sin in some single
act which is clearly opposed to the general current and
tenor of his life, we have an Advocate with the Father.
Confess to him, and the life will be restored to the state of
likeness to the Holy One.87 "Whoso keepeth his word, in
him verily hath the love of God been perfected."88 "Every
one that hath this hope set on him purifieth himself, even
as he is pure."89 "Whosoever abideth in him sinneth
not."90 "Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin, be
cause his seed abideth in him: and he cannot sin, because
he is begotten of God."91
It is no physical impossibility which is here posited. It
is the moral impossibility, the impossibility a clean man
feels of his plunging into a bed of mire for no other reason
than that he loves filth. He says : "Let the swine seek their
enjoyment in such a place, and let them wallow there to
their heart's content. It is impossible for you or for me
to think that I could enjoy it. I cannot do such a thing."
He can, as far as the physical possibility is concerned. He
cannot and remain a clean man. The Christian has no
desire to be dirty. His desire is to be clean. With that
desire he cannot do anything which would blacken his soul
or even his finger tips with the devil's dirt.
Joseph in Potiphar's house was tempted to adultery, and
he said to the temptress, "How then can I do this great
wickedness, and sin against God?"92 He could have done
it, if he had so desired. There was no restraining hand.
87 1 John i. 7 to 2. I. "i John 3. 6.
88 1 John 2. 5. » 1 John 3. 9.
88 1 John 3. 3. « Gen. 39. 9.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 195
Possibly he might have escaped detection. There was no
seeming prospect of danger to himself in any such indul
gence. Yet how could he do it and remain an honest man ?
How could he do it and retain his self-respect? How could
he do it and continue to enjoy the favor of God? He could
go to prison for years. He could suffer for righteousness'
sake. He could not do that which would forfeit his fel
lowship with the Father. He could not do that which
would make him a child of the devil and no longer a child
of God.
In the regeneration of the Christian the Spirit was put
within him as the germ of a new life. He brings forth the
fruit of the Spirit in all his doings. That is all he can do,
as long as that is the only seed he cherishes in his heart.
That is John's figure. He is an honest man. Is an oppor
tunity given him to rob somebody and never be discovered ?
He says: "I cannot. It is impossible for me to think of
such a thing. It is no physical impossibility. I see that.
Yet it is impossible for me to wrong my brother and main
tain my Christian life. I would rather do that than have
any sum of money."
He is a total abstainer. Somebody offers him a glass
of intoxicating drink and asks him to enjoy it. He says:
"I cannot. I have signed the pledge. I cannot do it with
out breaking my pledge. I cannot do it and maintain my
integrity. I would rather do that than have the promised
pleasure of getting drunk." Whosoever is begotten of
God doeth the will of God and finds in that his highest
pleasure; because the seed of the Spirit abideth in him
and the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, and peace. He can
not sin, because he is begotten of God and as a child of
God he is not willing to risk his Christian heritage for any
single pottage mess of the devil.
The white robes of the book of Revelation are the right
eousness of the saints, achieved and manifested here upon
the earth, recognized and guaranteed forever there in

ig6 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
heaven. John says that those robes are to be spotlessly
clean, fine and white and pure as the driven snow; for
there will be no print of the devil's dirty fingers on any fold
of them. The Christian man keepeth himself and the evil
one touches him not. It is as clear as the sunlight that
John's standard for the Christian life, as set forth in this
epistle, is that of absolute righteousness and perfect love,
perfect obedience in perfect purity. He represents this as
possible and normal for every Christian. This is the last
message from God to man in the Holy Book, as to the
Christian vocation and what it involves. Such a standard
would cast us into despair if we had not along with it
the assurance of sufficient divine help and the promise of
present and eternal victory.
XIII. The Epistle of Victory
This is the Epistle of Assured Victory. John lived the
overcoming life, and he believed that every Christian might
live it as well as he. The devil was a defeated foe. He
dared not come near enough to the Christian to touch him.
Even in the throng he did not venture to reach forth his
hand and touch the hem of his garment. God was greater
than the devil and all his imps; and John wrote, "Ye are
of God, my little children, and have overcome them: be
cause greater is he that is in you than he that is in the
world."93 As surely as God was greater than the devil,
the Christian might live secure. As surely as Jesus had
come to defeat the devil, the Christian might enter into
all the fruits of his conquest and enjoy continuous victory
for himself and claim it for the rest of men. "To this end
was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the
works of the devil."94
There is a school of religious thinkers in the present
93 1 John 4. 4.
94 1 John 3. 8.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 197
day who are not content with the verb in that sentence as
John wrote it. They think that Jesus will be manifested to
destroy the works of the devil. They postpone the amelio
ration of all of this world's ills until the second coming of
the Lord. They believe that this world lieth in the evil
one, and that there is no hope of its recovery. They think
things are getting worse and worse all the time and they
have no call to set them right. They believe in evangelism
because individuals may be saved from the general wreck
and made ready for the second coming of the Lord. They
believe in foreign missionary work because the sooner the
heathen nations are evangelized the more reason we may
have to expect the speedy second coming of the Lord.
However, they are thoroughgoing pessimists as to the
power set loose upon this world in the first coming of our
Lord. They expect the devil to win in the first round of
the battle. They search the newspapers for the signs of
the times, and they find them in every evidence of corrup
tion and the approaching dissolution of the present status
of things. While the rest of us look hopefully to the com
ing days, they prophesy woe upon woe unto the very end.
While the rest of us see in the slow evolution of the ages
the steady uplifting of the race, the survival of the fittest
in physical and moral life, they find nothing but the evi
dences of continuous degeneration and the fulfillment of the
devil's great expectations at every point. While all classes
are being roused to new effort for social betterment and
community good, they have a feeling that this is flying in
the face of Providence; and that seriously to endeavor to
construct an earthly paradise would be to falsify Scripture
and defeat the revealed program of God.
We believe that they are unscriptural themselves. We
believe that Jesus was manifested to destroy the works of
the devil, and that the power sufficient to destroy all the
devil's works on earth is even now at our command. We
believe that the regeneration of any individual is positive

198 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
proof that all individuals may be regenerated even as they
all are now redeemed. We believe that foreign missionary
work, to be scriptural and apostolic and Christlike, must
aim not only at the evangelization but also at the thorough
going Christianization of all the peoples in all the lands.
We believe that all effort to make men better and to im
prove their physical and mental and moral and spiritual
condition is in accordance with the revealed will of God.
We believe in helping men, individually and collectively;
and we believe that with the help of God all men may be
helped as all men have been helped in all the ages past.
We believe that the world is growing better all the time.
We believe that there are many things which ought to be
better than they are at present and we believe that we are
put into this world to better them. We believe that it is
the task and the glorious privilege of the Christian Church
to usher in the kingdom of God everywhere, until the will
of our God is done upon earth as it is done in heaven. We
labor to that end, in confident faith that all the victories of
the past are only the beginnings of yet greater victories to
come. Greater is he that is with us than any power which
may be brought against us, and therefore we may rest in
the assurance of victory.
That is the spirit of the apostle John in his old age here
in Ephesus. He knows that the devil is active, and there
are many antichrists, and there are some deserters, and the
world seems hostile, but he is not alarmed. He is as calm
as if there were no conflict on hand. He is so sure that
it will end in triumph for his Lord that it never occurs to
him to be nervous about it. It is this atmosphere of perfect
assurance and peace which seems to have impressed Haupt
most in this First Epistle. He mentions it again and again.
He says, "As when, in a firmly built house, the master,
hearing the storm without, gives one more glance around
to see that all is secure, while still he knows that he is shel
tered and safe, and, indeed, the more furiously the tempest

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN 199
blows, feels all the more sense of security, so it is with
this epistle, which gives us the feeling of an inexpressibly
beautiful peace and silent confidence of joy diffused through
it from beginning to end."95 Again he writes : "Here comes
in that character of the epistle which has been indicated
above: its rest and its peace, as if adjusted to the most
joyful relations; its internal release from all the agitation
of the world, as if its author were looking out from a
secure haven into the tumult of the distant sea."96
The haven in which John rests is the haven of faith in
the unfailing and unequaled power of his Lord. He de
pends upon it with absolute trust in its triumph in the end.
If Jesus was manifested to destroy the works of the devil,
then the works of the devil will be destroyed. The devil
may rage, but his doom is declared. He has reason to be
nervous, but the Christian goes ahead in calm confidence
that the will of his God will be accomplished in due time.
The assurance of victory gives him perfect peace all the
tinie. That is the faith in which this final New Testament
epistle is written. It is an Epistle of Victory from begin
ning to end.
We are glad that our New Testament closes with a bugle
blast of defiance to the world, the flesh, and the devil. We
are glad that the last book written is a trumpet note of
triumph for all time. Its first chapter pictures the victory
over sin. Its second chapter proclaims the victory over
the evil one. Its third chapter announces the victory of
righteousness. Its fourth chapter declares the victory of
love. The fifth chapter peals forth the victory of faith.
Hear how John repeats his confidence in individual and
universal spiritual victory. "I write unto you, young men,
because ye have overcome the evil one."97 And immedi
ately again, "I have written unto you, young men, because
98 Haupt, Commentary on the First Epistle of John, p. 362,
98 P. 364-
87 1 John 2. 13.

20o JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye
have overcome the evil one."98 Again he strikes the note of
triumph for all his children in the faith, "Ye are of God,
my little children, and have overcome them : because greater
is he that is in you than he that is in the world."99 Finally
his voice rings out over the whole Church of Christ for all
time to come, "Whatsoever is begotten of God overcometh
the world, and this is the victory that hath overcome the
world, even our faith."100 The world has been overcome.
The victory has been won. Faith claims it and claims it
now. Jesus was manifested to destroy the works of the devil.
The devil called himself the prince of this world. He
had his stronghold in the hearts of men. As the stronger
man our Lord entered into the palace of the strong and
took possession of all its furnishings. Then from the
cross-top he made the further descent into the depths of
hell and the grave; and he came back with the shout of
victory, bearing the keys of hell in his hand, to live for
evermore in undisputed triumph and rulership over all his
universe. Now it is true that whithersoever we go Jesus
will be with us. We never can get beyond his providence
and his power. We never need be without his sympathy
and his aid. We can sing with the psalmist: "If I ascend
up into heaven, thou art there : if I make my bed in hell,
behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of the morning,
and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea; even there
shall thy hand lead me, and thy right hand shall hold
me."101 We never can go anywhere as the children of God, we
never can be anywhere in all the experiences of life here
or hereafter, as long as we trust him, where he cannot give
us present and continuous victory. Yea, though he should
send us into the very centers of the enemy's territory and
88 1 John 2. 14. 10° 1 John 5. 4.
88 1 John 4. 4. m Psa. 139. 8-10.

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN , 201
power, into the midst of the hotbeds of vice, into the haunts
of sin and iniquity, into what may seem to be a veritable
hell on earth, we will be strong and of a good courage.
Yea, though he should give us to be tried with all the multi
plied devices of Satan which our past life has known and
which in the future may be increased and intensified, we
will not be afraid, neither will we be dismayed. Yea,
though we walk through the valley of the shadow of death,
we will fear no evil. For the Lord our God will be with
us ; and there will be victory with him, whithersoever we go.
This is the note of triumph with which the First Epistle
of John and with which our New Testament ends. We
have overcome the evil one in ourselves; and this is the
victory that hath overcome the world, even our faith.
There is no form of evil we need fear to attack. No
matter how strongly it is entrenched, it can be and it will
be overthrown. There is no principle opposed to righteous
ness and love which is invincible. However long it may
have lasted, it is facing now toward the day of its final
doom. Jesus was manifested to destroy all the works of
the devil. He has done it within us and he has commis
sioned us as his agents to carry forward the conquest to
the ends of the earth. Ye are of God, my little children,
and ye have overcome ; because greater is he that is in you
than he that is in the world.
"We know that whosoever is begotten of God sinneth
not ; but he that was begotten of God keepeth himself, and
the evil one toucheth him not."102 There is our Purity,
undefiled by even the devil's touch. "We know that we
are of God, and the whole world lieth in the evil one."103
There is our Privilege, a privilege which we must share
with all other men until by right of conquest it has taken
possession of all the earth. "We know that the Son of
God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we
102 1 John 5. 18.
Kt 1 John 5. 19.

202 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even
in his Son Jesus Christ."104 There is the Presence who
insures our triumph for evermore. He will be true. We
are in him that is true. The only question is, Will we be
true to him? John does not doubt that the church will be
true, but he closes with that warning and exhortation, "My
little children, guard yourselves from idols."105
That is the last word of the aged apostle. That is the
last word of the Holy Book. Let no one think that because
victory is assured to faith he may fold his hands and take
things easy in the Christian life. Faith is not compatible
with laziness. It is not characteristic of easy-going folk.
It belongs to robust spirits. It is an exercise of the
strongest characters. There is heroic quality in it. It is a
soldier's attribute. One must keep alive and alert. One
must keep awake and on his guard. One must battle like
a Boanerges. The battle will be a winning one. The victory
will be sure. Only there must be no negligence, no care
lessness, no going to sleep on any post of duty. One must
be on guard all the time. There in Ephesus the whole
atmosphere was filled with reverence for Artemis. It was
not easy to keep clear of all complications with the prev
alent idolatry. In our day the whole atmosphere is filled
with the idolatry of riches and power and position and suc
cess. It is not easy to keep clear of all complications with
its thousand and one insidious modes of attack. The child
of God must be true to him and have no other gods before
him. He cannot serve God and any of the idols. He must
cling to him and despise the others. The love of God must
be supreme in his heart always. "My little children, keep
yourselves from idols ; and God will give you the Privilege
of His Presence and His Purity and His Victory for ever
more." That is John's last written message to men.
104 1 John 5. 20.
108 1 John 5. 21.

PART rv
THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN

PART IV
THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN
I. General Character
i. The Second and Third Epistles of John are specimens
of the less important religious correspondence of the apos
tolic age. The Muratorian Fragment says of Paul's letters
to Timothy and Philemon, "They are written out of private
affection, and yet to the honor of the catholic church."
The same thing might be said of these epistles, for they
have even less general interest than the Pastoral Epistles
have, and yet they have been treasured by the general
church. 2. They are unoriginal, and add almost nothing to the
treasury of New Testament truth. Of the thirteen verses
in Second John, eight are repeated in substance in First
John. There is only one distinctive passage in each of
these Minor Epistles — 2 John 10, 11 and 3 John 9, 10.
3. Holtzmann calls these two epistles Zwillings-geschwis-
ter, "twin sisters." Jerome had given them the same name.
They belong together. They have the same general charac
teristics. Short as they are, we note a general agreement,
(1) in the use of peculiar expressions, (2) in similar gram
matical constructions, (3) in the association of the same
ideas, (4) in the definitions given to favorite terms, and
(5) in the object they aim at — the consolation of believers
in special trials and their strengthening with apostolic
advice and authority. II. The External Evidence
There seems to have been a comparative lack of acquaint
ance with these two epistles in the early church. There
205

2o6 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
are at least three good reasons for this. i. Their brevity.
They are the shortest writings in the sacred canon. 2. Their
unimportant character. We could spare them from the
sacred canon more easily than any other two books there.
3. Their lack of any special or original matter. As private
letters they did not appeal to the interest of the general
church. They were so simple and clear in their meaning
that they did not need any commentary. One can easily
see how in making up a collection of writings for use in
the public worship of any church these epistles might have
been omitted, even though the compiler had known of their
existence. Taking these things into consideration, the ex
ternal evidence for these epistles is as good as could be
expected. Irenaeus quotes 2 John 10, 11 as the words of "John,
the disciple of the Lord." Clement of Alexandria quotes
from them, and it may be that he commented on them in a
book now lost. Dionysius of Alexandria speaks of the
apostle John writing the Second and the Third Epistles
"anonymously, as the presbyter." The church in North
Africa recognized the Second Epistle in a synod held at
Carthage A. D. 256. It was included in the Itala. Salmond
sums up the favorable evidence for the Second Epistle as
follows : "The most ancient historical testimony, therefore,
although it is of limited quantity, is in favor of the author
ship by the apostle John. It is testimony that comes from
sources so far apart as Gaul, Alexandria, and North Africa.
It is confirmed by the resemblance of Second John to First
John; the considerations which go to establish the Johan
nine origin of the latter being so far available also for the
Johannine origin of the former."1 This resemblance to the
style of John is, of course, equally true of the Third Epistle.
On the other hand, Origen puts these epistles among the
doubtful writings of the New Testament canon, and he

1 Hastings's Bible Dictionary, vol. ii, 740.

THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN 207
never uses them or quotes from them himself. Eusebius
put them among the Antilegomena. They were rejected
by Theodore of Mopsuestia. They were not noticed by
Theodoret. They were mentioned doubtfully by Gregory
of Nazianzen. They were not included in the Peshito, the
Bible of the Syrian Church, though they are mentioned
by Ephraem, the greatest of the Syrian Fathers. When
First John, First Peter, and James had been admitted to
the Syrian canon, these epistles were still excluded, and
they are not found in The Syrian New Testament until
1630. They are not quoted by Tertullian or by Cyprian,
and as late as the fourth century there seems to have been
determined opposition to their admission to the canon of
the church in North Africa. The testimony of the Mura
torian Fragment is doubtful, since the text is too corrupt
for us to be sure of it. Jerome received the two epistles
as canonical, but he says, "Many say that John the pres
byter wrote them."
It is evident, therefore, that the testimony for these two
epistles is not as good as that for most of our New Testa
ment books. We may consider the reasons we have as
signed as sufficient to account for this, or we may decide
to regard these epistles as of lesser authority and minor
importance among the New Testament writings.
III. The Internal Evidence
This seems to be better than the external evidence, for,
as Salmond says of the three Johannine epistles, "They are
so much of the same stamp that in all ages the prevailing,
if not absolutely universal, opinion has been, that they
come from the same mint and are by the same hand. They
are writings in which the profound and the simple kiss
each other, great and inexhaustible thoughts being wedded
to the clearest and least ambitious terms. They combine
the qualities of majesty, maturity, authority, and serenity

zo8 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
with occasional fire and vehement utterance. ... It has
been the prevailing belief from the oldest times that they
are all three apostolic writings, and part of the legacy of
the beloved disciple to the church."2 They have the Johan
nine spirit and style, ideas and ideals. They use the
Johannine words in the Johannine way. Weiss says, "It
is quite incomprehensible how these two small epistles
could have maintained their position and acquired canonical
authority in the church unless they had been handed down
as apostolic memorials."3
IV. John the Elder
If the apostle wrote these epistles, why did he call him
self "the elder"?4 We may suggest several reasons.
i. Papias evidently used this title to represent all of those
who had companied with the Lord. He calls all of the
apostles by this name. If this was a general church desig
nation for these revered fathers and leaders in the faith,
this last survivor of their number very fittingly might call
himself "the elder," the one remaining representative of a
generation past. 2. John's great age would in itself be a
sufficient occasion for his choice of this name, as Credner
and Bleek have seen. 3. It may have been an official title
and have represented his position of dignity in the church,
as Liicke and Diisterdieck have thought. Did not Peter
write in his epistle, "The elders therefore among you I
exhort, who am a fellow elder"?5 As Peter here puts
himself on a plane of equality with other officials in the
church, so John may have hesitated to arrogate to himself
any superior claims as an apostle, and with characteristic
modesty have called himself an elder with only the au
thority any elder might have.
There may have been something of all of these reasons
2 Hastings's Bible Dictionary, vol. ii, p. 728.
8 Introduction, vol. ii, p. 197.
4 2 John 1 and 3 John 1. 5 1 Pet. 5. 1.

THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN 209
entering into John's choice of this title. He may have
meant to say to those to whom he wrote : "I am an official
in the church. I am the most aged among them. I belong
to that company who were supremely privileged in the
fact that they saw and loved and lived with the Lord of
truth and love and life. Hear me, therefore."
V. The Person Addressed in the Second Epistle
The best reading is tuXe/try icvqIo,. How shall we translate
these words ? If they represent a proper name, three possi
bilities are open to us :
1. We may read "to the elect Kyria." Athanasius so
understood it. He says, "John is writing to Kyria and
her children." Bengel, Liicke, Diisterdieck, Bruckner,
De Wette, Guericke, Credner, Neander, Olshausen, Bishop
Alexander, Dean Alford, Davidson, Bleek, Ebrard, and
others have followed the opinion of Athanasius at this
point. This proper name has been found upon an ancient
inscription. It corresponds to the Hebrew name "Martha,"
inasmuch as both are feminine forms of the word for
"Lord." The address of the Second Epistle would be
like the address of the Third Epistle, if both contained a
proper name. However, the Third Epistle is addressed
to Gaius the beloved; and this is the natural order of the
Greek. If John had been writing to a woman whose name
was Kyria and he had desired to call her "the chosen one"
or "the elect," he ought to have transposed the order of
the words in the Greek and written "Kyria the elect"
rather than "the elect Kyria," just as in Rom. 16. 13 we
find Tov<j>ov rdv ktcXenrdv, "Rufus the elect."
2. Following this order in the Greek, it would be possible
to translate "to Eclecta the lady." Clement of Alexandria
so understood it. He says, "The epistle was written to a
Babylonian lady named Eclecta." Grotius, Wetstein, and
Bishop Middleton have followed the opinion of Clement

210 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
at this point. Our objections to this view are that (i)
though the masculine form "Eclectus" occurs as a proper
name, we know of no example of the use of the feminine
form "Eclecta" as the name of a woman, and (2) we would
be under the necessity of reading in the thirteenth verse,
"The children of thy sister Eclecta salute thee," and that
would give us two women of the same strange name in one
family. This seems most unlikely.
3. We might translate both words as proper names and
read, "To Eclecta Kyria," but this would give to one
woman two very unusual names, one very rare and the
other without a parallel.
4. If we decide that neither of the words represents a
proper name, then the best translation is "to the elect lady."
With this translation there are at least three interpretations
of the phrase: (1) Jerome declared that this epistle was
addressed to the general church under this title. Hilgen
feld, Lunemann, and Schmiedel have followed him in this
opinion. This suggestion surely goes to pieces on verse 13.
What could the phrase, "the children of thy elect sister"
mean? (2) CEcumenius and Theophylact said that an indi
vidual church was addressed under this form. A large
number of modern scholars have adopted this view, among
them Michaelis, Huther, Hammond, Hilgenfeld, Baur,
Wordsworth, Ewald, Luthardt, Lightfoot, Salmon, Hof-
mann, Holtzmann, Wieseler, Weiss, Wolf, Whitby, and
Whiston. At the close of Peter's epistle we read, "She that is in
Babylon, elect together with you, saluteth you."6 This is
very generally understood to mean, "The church in Babylon
salutes you." It is argued that here we have a parallel
case in which the elect sister is an individual church. How
ever, it seems doubtful that any such symbolism should be
introduced into a short epistle like Second John, and it
8 1 Pet. 5. 13.

THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN 211
would be without a parallel in the New Testament if an
individual church should be called a "lady." The church
is called the bride of Christ, in a book which is given up
to religious symbolism from beginning to end,7 but in no
instance is the church called a lady. (3) There remains,
therefore, only one possible understanding of this phrase.
The person addressed is "the elect lady," der auserwdhlten
Frau, as Luther translated it, and this elect lady is some
woman with whom the apostle had become acquainted and
in whose home in all probability he had been entertained,
and in whose children he had come to take a personal
interest. This is the conclusion of our English versions.
Beza, Schleiermacher, Mill, Macknight, Lardner, Plummer,
Farrar, Salmond, and others agree.
VI. Some Notes on the Second Epistle
1. Keynotes. The word "truth" occurs five times, "love"
four times, "commandment," four times. These may be
called the keynotes of the epistle. The term "walking" is
found three times. These Christians are walking in the
truth (verse 4). They are exhorted to walk after' the
Lord's commandment (verse 6). This is declared to be a
proof of love (verse 6). Walking in love, walking in
obedience, walking in truth — these are three definitions of
the Christian life. In a sense they are synonymous, and
in a sense they are complementary. Love leads to obe
dience and cannot be maintained without it. Obedience,
unless it is servile and unworthy, is the result of love and
the manifest proof of it. Both obedience and love demand
truth in the inward parts. They flourish only in the realm
of reality.
2. The deceiver and the antichrist mentioned in the
seventh verse is the one who denies the reality of the
incarnation, the one who does not confess that Jesus Christ
7 Rev. 21. 9.

212 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
came in the flesh. He who robs the church or any indi
vidual believer of a real faith in the genuine humanity of
Jesus does an irreparable injury.
3. In verses 10 and 11 John the Boanerges tells us how to,
treat such heretics and deceivers. He tells us to give them
neither greeting nor lodging. One winter night some years
ago I was seated before the blazing logs in the fireplace of a
comfortable farmhouse in southern Ohio, when we were
startled by a loud halloo at the garden gate outside. The
farmer went out to see what was wanted. He returned
a few moments later and said that two men who had an
nounced themselves as Mormon missionaries had asked for
a night's lodging and he had turned them away. It was
about ten o'clock at night and bitter cold. There were no
hotels within many miles. I wondered what the poor fel
lows would do. I asked my uncle about it, and he did not
seem much interested. He simply remarked that they did
not want men like that in their neighborhood. I learned
the next day that those two Mormon missionaries had gone
on down the country road, asking for entertainment at
every farmhouse they found on it, and they had been
turned away from every door until they had traveled about
twelve miles and it was two o'clock at night. Then they
found a man who allowed them to sleep on the hay in
his barn until morning.
There had been no collusion among those neighbors.
They had not been expecting these visitors. Every man
had decided for himself that he could not afford to grant
them hospitality. It was no lack of the milk of human
kindness. I never knew a community more generous with
lodgings and meals and more unstinted in its hospitality
on ordinary occasions. The only reason for that treatment
of these men was that they announced themselves as Mor
mon propagandists, and every one of those Ohio farmers
decided at once that he would not be a party to the intro
duction of any such despicable doctrine, even to the extent

THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN 213
of harboring its missionaries over one night. They were
all of them patriots. That neighborhood had sent its sons
without hesitation into the ranks in the Civil War. They
believed that Mormonism was heretical and treasonable
and they would have nothing to do with it. They were
largely of Puritan stock and they had the downright spirit
of a Boanerges in their adherence to principle. They were
literally faithful to the command of John in this epistle,
although it may be doubtful if any one among them thought
of it or knew about it. John says, "If any one cometh
unto you, and bringeth not this [Christian] teaching, re
ceive him not into your house, and give him no greeting:
for he that giveth him greeting partaketh in his evil
works."8 Does this seem rather harsh when taken as a general
principle? The general principle is simply that we must
not become partakers in evil deeds. Any social amenities
which fall short of that may be allowable. However, it
would be well to remember that the apostle John in all
probability is not laying down general principles here, but
giving -advice to a particular woman in a particular situa
tion. Since John addresses this lady and says nothing of
her husband, it might be a fair supposition that she was a
widow and had by her bereavement come to be the re
sponsible head of the household. Then as a widow the
hospitality of her home would need to be specially guarded ;
and as a widow the care of her children would need to be
more particularly a matter of concern.
Designing men must not be admitted within the circle of
her family, for her children might be led astray by those
whose only intent was to deceive. Their salvation and
their security from harm was her first concern, and all else
was to bend to that end. No one must be permitted under
the shelter of her roof to undermine the faith of her

8 2 John 10, 11.

214 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
family; and if the zealous propagators of any form of
evil heresy were known to be about the town, it would be
just as well for the woman who was the head of a family
to abstain from all social intercourse with them. If she
did not know them, she would be free from all obligation
to them and need not even greet them on the street. From
this point of view the command of the apostle does not
seem so harsh, and it may have been justified absolutely
by the circumstances of the particular case, concerning
which we know nothing. It may well have a lesson for us
against undue laxity and indifference indicated by the social
and personal recognition of heresy until we are hindered
by our sense of hospitality and social obligation from bear
ing our decided testimony against doctrinal error of the
most insidious and deceptive kind. A little more loyalty
to principle and a little more readiness to stand by our
colors would not hurt most of us to-day.
4. Upon our understanding of the person addressed in
this epistle it bears its tribute to the dignity of wifehood
and motherhood and womanhood. John recognizes this
elect sister as the head of her household and her home as
the conservator of the Christian virtues and graces. John
knew the influence of a good mother himself. Here in
Ephesus in his old age he recalled the ministries of Salome
in that Galilaean home so many years before. Later he had
had in his own home the mother of his Lord. Mary and
Salome must have been ideal mothers, and John honored
their memory by honoring this mother in addressing one
of his epistles to her. She was an elect lady, and therefore
John wrote her. John wrote her a letter, and therefore
she will be an elect lady for evermore.
VII. Notes on the Third Epistle
1. The word "truth" occurs six times, and is the dominant
word in the epistle.

THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN 215
2. In the ninth verse there is a reference to a former
epistle, which in all probability is a lost epistle. There
seems to be no reason for supposing that the reference is
to either First or Second John. We judge that it had to
do with the affairs of this local church and probably it
contained some introductions or recommendations of travel
ing evangelists who represented the apostle John or had
his indorsement, but whom Diotrephes would not receive.
3. The facts given here suggest a very interesting picture
of early church life. They furnish us a glimpse of the in
side difficulties of administration and discipline besetting
the church even in these beginning days.
4. The three names mentioned may stand as types of
three characters to be found in almost every local church
history. There is Gaius the beloved. He may have an
invalid body, but he has a robust soul. He walks in the
truth and proves his love to the brethren by the bounty of
his hospitality to them whenever they visit this church.
The apostle John always enjoyed entertainment in his home.
Then there is the domineering Diotrephes, who is ambitious
to be the church dictator. He heads the opposition party
and is a man of , fluent and persuasive speech. He has influ
ence enough to make things unpleasant for Gaius and even
to threaten his expulsion from the membership. Against
the authority of the apostle John he prates with wicked
words. Then there is Demetrius, who may be the innocent
cause of all of the present trouble. He is a worthy man
and has a good reputation everywhere. He has come into
this community with the indorsement of the apostle John
and he has been entertained by Gaius; and that is enough
to settle his case with Diotrephes. The latter decides to
drive him out of that neighborhood and to discipline or cast
out of the church Gaius, his hospitable host. Possibly he
has succeeded in doing both things, and the apostle John
having heard of it writes this epistle to Gaius to reassure
him concerning Demetrius and to comfort him with his

216 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
word of approval for all he had done. In the Second
Epistle the apostle warned the elect lady against the abuse
of her hospitality by the unauthorized and heretical itiner
ants who under the guise of a religious propaganda made
their way into Christian homes and led many astray. In
the Third Epistle he praises the hospitality of Gaius, whose
home has been opened to the duly authorized and wholly
worthy itinerant evangelist Demetrius, and who has brought
trouble upon his own head in so doing. Both epistles have
to do with the subject of hospitality, with the refusal of
hospitality to some and with the continuance of hospitality
to others. VIII. Value of These Epistles
i. They are of great interest to the church historian.
They present a picture of the condition of affairs in the
period of transition from the apostolic to the postapostolic
times. They suggest the errors of doctrine and the troubles
of internal organization with which the early church had to
contend. Evidently, there were teachers of heresy and
ambitious church laymen from the very beginning. Har
nack thinks that Diotrephes was the first bishop of the
monarchical type whose name is mentioned in history. We
think, rather, that the apostle John was the bishop whose
authority had been supreme in this church and that Diotre
phes was a layman who aspired to be the church autocrat
and was ready to defy the representatives of John and to
oppose their preaching with his blatant doubts and denials
and many wicked words.
Anyway, in both the churches of which we are given
glimpses in these epistles there were those who walked in
the truth and those who went about with the purpose to
deceive. There were the good and loving and obedient
and there were the wicked and hateful and self-willed.
There was the spirit of the Christ and the spirit of the anti
christ. There were traveling evangelists who had the

THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN 217
witness of the truth and there were traveling heretics who
did not deserve a friendly greeting in the street. There
were homes hospitably open to the good and homes closed
tight against the bad. There was very much the same
condition we find in any small country church community
to-day. 2. These epistles are of interest to all devout people for
the deep spirituality of their contents, although that might
have been found elsewhere in the New Testament if these
two epistles had been lost.
3. Together with the Epistle to Philemon they "furnish
an apostolic sanction to private letters on religious themes."9
It is questionable whether any apostolic sanction would
have been needed for such religious correspondence; but
these letters are interesting as the first specimens extant of
that worthy department of world literature. The world
surely would be much poorer if it were deprived of the
letters of Basil and Gregory of Nazianzen and Gregory of
Nyssa and Gregory the Great and Jerome and Augustine
and Luther and Bengel and John Newton and Cowper and
Doddridge and McCheyne and Robertson and Romaine
and John Wesley and Samuel Rutherford. Rutherford's
Letters are better known to-day than his sermons or his
theological works. When they had been gathered into a
volume and published, Richard Baxter said of them, "Hold
off the Bible, such a book the world never saw." McCheyne
was a saintly soul, and his biography shows that Ruther
ford's Letters and the Bible were the two books he took
with him into the closet of prayer.
John Wesley's Letters deserve to be read much more
than they are to-day. Many of them are worthy to rank
with the best of the church's treasures of this kind. These
New Testament epistles are gems of the first order. Paul
and John knew how to say much in little and how to say

• Donald Fraser, Lectures on the Bible, vol. ii, p. 291.

218 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
it well. It is not an easy thing to write a good religious
letter. Those of us whose duty it is sometimes to write
them have learned that by experience. As apostolic models
these letters may suggest some points of excellence in corre
spondence of this character. Religious letters should be
brief. They should go straight to the point. They should
be free from platitudes. They should be courteous, sym
pathetic, true to the facts and true to the spirit of Christ.
4. Their teaching is valuable. They tell us how to con
duct ourselves toward heretical propagandists. They incul
cate due respect for worthy laymen and laywomen and love
and help for all preachers who have made sacrifices for
"the sake of the Name." Daniel Steele used to declare that
they made him more contented with presiding elders and
bishops, district or general superintendents who could step
in when it was necessary and support the pastor and teach
a usurper better manners. When the general superintend
ents are on the right side they are a great comfort. If
they should happen to be on the side of the rich and the
ambitious as against the pious and the poor, their interfer
ence is not always most helpful.
5. Professor J. Rendel Harris has suggested that these
two epistles may serve us in some of our problems of
textual criticism. He calls attention to the fact that the
Second Epistle has 1,143 letters, and the Third has 1,124.
In the Second Epistle at the 976th letter John says, "Hav
ing many things to write unto you, I would not write them
with paper and ink." In the Third Epistle at the 967th
letter John says, "I had many things to write unto thee,
but I am unwilling to write them to thee with ink and pen."
The closing greetings in the Second Epistle have 168 letters,
and in the Third Epistle 158 letters. Now, Professor Harris
suggests that John closed his epistles at just this point and
with the use of just so many letters because he saw that
he was at the end of his sheet.
Beginning with this clue, Professor Harris pursues his

THE MINOR EPISTLES OF JOHN 219
investigations through various fields of prices, styles, and
measures of ancient writing materials and comes out at last
upon the proposition that he can tell just how many pages
of just what size the original copy of each of our New
Testament books had, and he thinks that he can decide
within half a dozen letters just how many letters each page
contained. Applying the measuring rule thus obtained, he
has a means of deciding between the longer and the shorter
readings in our New Testament text. He concludes, for
example, against Matt. 17. 21, "This kind goeth-not out
but by prayer and fasting." This verse is not found in our
New Testament to-day. There were better reasons for its
rejection than this application of Professor Harris's measur
ing rule; but it surely is interesting to find that his rule
agrees with the readings of the oldest and best texts at this
point. Incidentally, these two short epistles may serve us in the
ways we have indicated. They do not compare in impor
tance with the First Epistle, of course. They were slower
in obtaining recognition in the New Testament canon.
However, we are glad that they have been preserved for us.
They are worthy of the apostle John. They give us some
added glimpse of his abiding characteristics. He is the
same saintly Bpanerges we have known from other sources.
He may have written these epistles at almost any time dur
ing his ministry in Asia Minor.

PART V
THE APOCALYPSE

PART V
THE APOCALYPSE
I. Relation to the Other Johannine Writings
The Apocalypse is a unique book. All the other books
of our New Testament are histories or letters. John wrote
one of the histories and three of the letters. The Apoca
lypse represents an entirely different form of literature.
It is so different, not only from all the other books of the
New Testament but also from the other books written by
John, that Dionysius of Alexandria was sure that we had
a new author here as well as a new vehicle of literary
expression. So little has been added to what Dionysius
said on this subject that in enumerating the differences
between the Apocalypse and the other writings of John we
may as well begin with his statement of the case.
Dionysius was Bishop of Alexandria about the middle of
the third century, succeeding the great Origen as the head
of the catechetical school in that city. He decided that John
did not write the Apocalypse, and he gave the following
reasons, i. "The evangelist, nowhere gives his name, or
proclaims himself, either in the Gospel or epistle. . . . But
the author of the Apocalypse introduces himself in the very
beginning. The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which he gave
him to show unto his servants quickly; and he sent and
signified it by his angel unto his servant John, who bare
witness of the word of God and of his testimony, even of all
things that he saw, i. 1,2. Then he writes also an epistle ;
John to the seven churches which are in Asia, grace be
with you, and peace, 1. 4. But the evangelist did not prefix
his name even to the Catholic Epistle; but without intro-
223

224 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
duction he begins with the mystery of the divine revelation
itself : That which was from the beginning, which we have
heard, which we have seen with our eyes, i John i. i.
Neither in the reputed Second and Third Epistle of John,
though they are very short, does the name John appear;
but there is written the anonymous phrase, 'the elder.' But
this author did not consider it sufficient to give his name
once and to proceed with his work ; but he takes it up again :
I, John, who also am your brother and companion in tribula
tion, and in the kingdom and the patience of Jesus Christ,
was in the isle that is called Patmos for the Word of God
and the testimony of Jesus, I. 9. And toward the close he
speaks thus: Blessed is he that keepeth the words of the
prophecy of this book, and I, John, who saw and heard
these things. 22. 7, 8."1
This, then, is the first difference which Dionysius points
out. In the Gospel and in the epistles John seems bent upon
concealing his own identity. At least we decided that his
modesty was apparent in his evident omission of his own
name and the suppression of his own personality and au
thority. He mentions himself only when it seemed to be a
necessity, and then he prefers to call himself by some title
which others besides himself might claim, "the elder," or
"the disciple whom Jesus loved." The author of the Apoca
lypse seems bent upon emphasizing his own personality. He
repeats his own name three times in the first chapter and
once more at the close. Is this consistent with the character
of John as we have read it in the other books ?
The answer usually given to this inquiry is as follows:
All the historical books of the Old Testament are anony
mous, except Nehemiah. AH the prophetical books, on the
contrary, have the author's name prefixed. Here, then,
would seem to be the rule in Hebrew literature, and the
writers of our New Testament, being Jews, have followed
1 Eusebius, Eccles. Hist., vii, 25. Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,
Second Series, vol. i, p. 310.

THE APOCALYPSE 225
it. As a historian John suppresses his name. As a prophet
he puts his name at the very forefront of his work. This
may be a satisfactory and sufficient explanation of this
manifest difference between the Gospel and the Apocalypse.
John claims to be a prophet. In the beginning he says,
"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words
of the prophecy."2 Again, in the middle of the book, he
records that he was told, "Thou must prophesy again over
many peoples and nations and tongues and kings."3 In
the closing chapter he makes three several statements con
cerning "the words of the prophecy of this book,"4 and
the angel speaks to him of his "brethren the prophets."5
It would seem clear, therefore, that John himself believed
that he belonged to the illustrious company of the prophets
of Israel.
However, his book does not belong properly to the pro
phetic literature. It belongs, rather, to the department of
Apocalyptics ; and John calls it rightly by that title, "The
Apocalypse of Jesus Christ."6 It was not customary among
the writers of the Jewish Apocalypses for the author to
prefix his own name to his work as John has prefixed his
name here. If John is the author, then this is the single
instance in which an Apocalypse is published under the real
author's name. Therefore if we attempt to explain John's
use of his own name as a guarantee for his own work upon
the basis of Jewish custom, we must acknowledge that he
does not follow the Jewish custom for works of this charac
ter, but, rather, that he counts himself with writers of an
other sort and follows their custom, although he is writing
a book of a radically different character. At any rate, there
is this striking contrast between the Gospel and the Apoca
lypse and between the epistles and the Apocalypse, as Diony
sius pointed out. The name is prominent here and wholly
2 Rev. 1. 3. B Rev. 22. 9.
8 Rev. 10. 11. 8Rev. 1. I.
4 Rev. 22. 7, io, 18, 19.

226 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
lacking there. Dionysius thought that that fact argued dif
ferent authorship.
He goes on to say that the author of the Apocalypse does
not say that he was the beloved disciple of the Lord, or the
one who lay on his breast, or the brother of James, or in
any way identify himself with the evangelist. He calls him
self simply our brother and companion, and a witness of
Jesus. There were many Johns, like John Mark, who ac
companied Barnabas and Saul in their first missionary jour
ney. The apocalyptist was probably a John resident in
Ephesus, but not the apostle. He gives a second reason
for thinking so, as follows:
2. "From the ideas, and from the words and their ar
rangement, it may be reasonably conjectured that this one
is different from that one. For the Gospel and the epistle
agree with each other and begin in the same manner. The
one says, 'In the beginning was the Word' ; the other, 'That
which was from the beginning.' The one : 'And the Word
was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his
glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father' ; the
other says the same things slightly altered : 'Which we have
heard, which we have seen with our eyes; which we have
looked upon and our hands have handled of the Word of
life — and the life was manifested.' . . . John discusses
everything under the same heads and names ; some of which
we will briefly mention. Anyone who examines carefully
will find the phrases 'The life,' 'The light,' 'Turning from
darkness,' frequently occurring in both; also continually,
'Truth,' 'Grace,' 'Joy,' 'The flesh and the blood of the Lord,'
'The judgment,' 'The forgiveness of sins,' 'The love of God
toward us,' the commandment that we love one another, that
we should Keep all the commandments ; the Conviction of
the world, of the Devil, of the Antichrist, the Promise of
the Holy Spirit, the Adoption of God, the Faith continually
required of us, The Father and the Son, occur everywhere.
In fact, it is plainly to be seen that one and the same charac-

THE APOCALYPSE 227
ter marks the Gospel and the epistle throughout. But the
Apocalypse is different from these writings and foreign to
them ; not touching, nor in the least bordering upon them ;
almost, so to speak, without even a syllable in common with
them."7 We must agree that Dionysius is right as to the internal
evidence binding the Gospel and the epistles together. His
list of common phrases might be corrected and improved
somewhat, but his general contention is good. We must
agree, again, that the main contents of the Apocalypse are
in striking contrast with the material found in the other
writings of John, although the closing statement of Diony
sius that they have scarcely a syllable in common surely is
extravagant. On the contrary, a close study of these books
will reveal the fact that together with their broad difference
of subject matter there are many minor points of resem
blance which suggest if they do not prove common author
ship. We will instance a few of these. ( 1 ) The Logos title for
our Lord is found in the prologue of the Gospel, in the
epistle, and in the Apocalypse ; and in no other books of the
New Testament.8 This most suggestive link between the
Christian faith and the Alexandrian and the Greek philoso
phy seems to be peculiar to the writings of John. It is an
indissoluble bond uniting his three books and distinguishing
them from all others in the New Testament times.
(2) Again and again in the Apocalypse the victorious
Jesus is called the Lamb. Nowhere else in the New Testa
ment is this title given to the Saviour, except in the Gospel
according to John, where he has recorded that the Baptist
pointed out the Master to him in the beginning with the
words, "Behold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the
sin of the world."9 John never forgot that text of the
''Op. cit., pp. 310, 311.
8 John 1. 1, 14; 1 John I. 1; Rev. 19. 13.
'John 1. 29.

228 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
sermon which brought him to Christ. To him Jesus always
was the Lamb of God, taking away the sin of the world.
In the Apocalypse it is the Lamb he sees from the begin
ning to the end of the book. Twenty-six times he mentions
him in the twenty-two chapters.
He is the Lamb that was slain.10 The redeemed wash
their robes and make them white in the blood of the Lamb.11
The Lamb is on the throne.12 In the New Jerusalem they
need no sun, for the Lamb is the light thereof.13 The in
habitants of that city rejoice evermore; for, John writes,
"Blessed are they that are bidden to the marriage supper
of the Lamb."14 "The Lamb that is in the midst of the
throne shall be their shepherd, and shall guide them unto
fountains of waters of life."15 There are those who cry
for the rocks to hide them from the wrath of the Lamb.16
For if they "war against the Lamb, the Lamb shall over
come them, for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings."17
John the Baptist had said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!"
John the evangelist followed Jesus and saw him live the
spotless life, and die on the cross ; and then in apocalyptic
vision he saw him at the head of heaven's hosts and sitting
on heaven's throne; and to him Jesus was the Paschal
Lamb, slain for sin, saving from sin. To him heaven's King
was a warring, overcoming, purifying, illuminating Lamb on
the throne. This title furnishes another link between the
Apocalypse and the other writings of John.
(3) In the very beginning of the Apocalypse we read,
"Every eye shall see him, and they that pierced him."18 The
piercing of our Lord's side is recorded in only one of our
Gospels and that is the fourth, written by John.19 The
context of these two passages contains a quotation from the

"Rev. 5. 12. 1B Rev. 7. 17.
u Rev. 7. 14. " Rev. 6. 16.
12 Rev. 22. 3. " Rev. 17. 14.
18 Rev. 21. 23. u Rev. I. 7.
14 Rev. 19. 9. u John 19. 34.

THE APOCALYPSE 229
prophet Zechariah, and the two agree in the form of the
quotation, although it is not the form of the Septuagint.
(4) The phrases, "keep my word," and "keep my say
ings" are found in the fourth Gospel, the First Epistle, and
the Apocalypse ; and nowhere else in the New Testament.20
We begin to see that the statement of Dionysius that these
writings scarcely have a syllable in common is far from
warranted by the facts. Any of these titles and phrases
we have now instanced is like that colored strand woven
into all the cordage used by the British government and
peculiar to it, so that it can be identified as government
property wherever it may be found. These words are
peculiar to the usage of John and mark the books containing
them as belonging to a common authorship.
We might give a long list of common phrases which are
not absolutely peculiar to John, while they are characteristic
of his usage.
(5) The remarkable Greek word for "true," dXrjdivdg, is
found in the Gospel nine times, in the epistle four times, and
in the Apocalypse ten times ; and only five times in all the
other New Testament books.
(6) The thought of "overcoming" is found in the Johan
nine writings more frequently than in any other writings
in the New Testament, and it is common to the Gospel, the
epistle, and the Apocalypse.21
(7) The word "witness" is a favorite with John. He
uses it more frequently than any other New Testament
writer; and this frequency of use is as characteristic of the
Apocalypse as of the Gospel and the epistle.
(8) In the Gospel we read, "If any man thirst, let him
come unto me and drink."22 In the Apocalypse we find

29 John 8. 51, 52, 55; 14. 23, 24; 15. 20; 17. 6; 1 John 2. 5; Rev. 3.
8, 10; 22. 7, 9.
21 John 16. 33; 1 John 2. 13; 4. 4; 5. 4; Rev. 2. 7, 11; 3. 5; 12. 11;
21. 7.
22 John 7. 37.

230 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
the same invitation, "And he that is athirst let him come:
he that will, let him take the water of life freely."28
(9) Christ is the bridegroom in the Gospel, and he ap
pears as the bridegroom again in the Apocalypse.24
We need not extend this list farther, though it might be
made much larger. The illustrations we have given will
suffice to show that the stamp of the Johannine literature
can be traced through the Apocalypse, although the book
itself is so strangely different from any other of the Johan
nine books and any other book in the New Testament. We
grant that Dionysius is right in his main contention. The
books are radically unlike in their material of composition.
We believe that the difference of subject is sufficient to
account for this, and that with all their differences there are
many traces of a common origin remaining.25
Dionysius has a third reason for his belief in a difference
of authorship which is not so easily disposed of. He says :
3. "It can be shown that the diction of the Gospel and the
epistle differs from that of the Apocalypse. For they were
written not only without error as regards the Greek lan
guage, but also with elegance in their expression, in their
reasoning, and in their entire structure. They are far
indeed from betraying any barbarism or solecism, or any
vulgarism whatever. For the writer had, as it seems, both
the requisites of discourse— that is, the gift of knowledge
and the gift of expression — as the Lord had bestowed them
both upon him. I do not deny that the other writer saw a
revelation and received knowledge and prophecy. I per
ceive, however, that his dialect and language are not ac-
23 Rev. 22. 17.
24 John 3. 29; Rev. 19. 7; 21. 2; 22. 17.
28 The Tubingen school called the fourth Gospel "a spiritualized
Apocalypse," in so far acknowledging a relationship between them.
Harnack concludes that the relationship is that of common author
ship. "I confess my adhesion to the critical heresy which carries back
the Apocalypse and the Gospel to a single author" (Chronologie der
altchristlichen Litteratur, p. 675).

THE APOCALYPSE 231
curate Greek, but that he uses barbarous idioms, and, in
some places, solecisms. It is unnecessary to point these out
here, for I would not have any one think that I have said
these things in a spirit of ridicule, for I have said what I
have only with the purpose of showing clearly the difference
between the writings."26
It is impossible not to admire the spirit in which Diony
sius makes his criticisms. He agrees that the book is writ
ten by a man whose name was John, and that this John was
a holy and inspired man. He is led by his study to conclude
that this John was not the apostle John, and his reasons
are given clearly, and they seem almost conclusive at first
glance. They were sufficient to satisfy him ; and in all prob
ability this last reason was the climaxing reason in his mind.
He wrote in Greek himself, and he was so familiar with the
language and its uses that he could not believe that one and
the same man could have written the comparatively faultless
Greek of the Gospel and the epistle and at the same time
have been guilty of publishing to the world the barbarous
Greek of the Apocalypse.
The Greek of the Apocalypse is the worst Greek in the
New Testament, and that is saying a great deal for it.
Some of its constructions seem impossible and inexcusable.
The nominative is put for the accusative and the accusative
for the nominative.27 There are impossible cases in apposi
tion. The author seems to be anxious to get away from the
oblique cases and back to the nominative again. Of course
most of these grammatical blunders are obscured in the
English translation or corrected outright into smooth flow
ing constructions ; but in the Greek they stand as pure bar
barisms, as Dionysius said. It also is true that in this re
spect the style of the Apocalypse is not like that of the
other writings of John.

28 0£. cit., p. 311.
27 Rev. 7.9; 20. 2.

232 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Suppose, as an example of the uncouthness of the gram
mar in the Greek, we should attempt to translate into some
what corresponding English the very first sentences of
greeting. They might be fairly represented grammatically
by the following: "John to the seven churches in Asia:
Grace to you and peace from he being and from he was and
from he coming; and from the seven spirits which are be
fore his throne ; and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness
(a nominative in apposition with a genitive. We do not
know how to represent such a solecism in English), the first
born of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth
(two more nominatives and all in apposition with the geni
tive preceding). To the one loving us (present participle),
and having loosed us (aorist participle) from our sins in
his blood, and to the one he made us a kingdom (an aorist
indicative introduced along with the participial construc
tion), priests to God and his Father, to him be the glory
and the power to the aeons. Amen."28
If the John who wrote the Gospel and the epistles was,
as Dionysius said, not only without error in his use of the
Greek language but also with elegance in his expression,
anyone at home in the use of this tongue naturally would
raise the question how it could be possible for the same
man to write in such crudities and irregularities of style.
The author of the other Johannine books writes in easy and
flowing style and is observant of all the rules of syntax.
The writer of the Apocalypse, as it would seem almost
consciously and surely continually, bids defiance to all rules
of grammar. His genders and numbers and cases and tenses
are all faulty on occasion. How is this difference to be
explained? We do not know.
Three reasons have been suggested for the poor grammar
of the Apocalypse: (i) The usual escape from the recog
nized difference in the use of Greek in the Apocalypse and

18 Rev. i. 4, 5,6.

THE APOCALYPSE 233
in the Gospel and the problem which it raised has been
found in the different dates of their composition. We have
been told that the Apocalypse was written fifteen, twenty,"
or thirty years before the epistles or the Gospel and that
John at that time was not the master of the Greek language
which he became in after years. In his long residence in
Ephesus he acquired much in many ways, and it was only
to be expected that his knowledge of the Greek was being
improved all the while. He wrote poor Greek when he
wrote the Apocalypse and he wrote better Greek when he
composed the Gospel in later life. One objection to this
explanation of the facts is that critics are not now disposed
to put so long a period of time between the two books as
they once were ; and if the passage of time is the only solu
tion, that solution of the problem fails when the time be
comes too short for the change to take place. Another ob
jection is that some of these grammatical blunders do not
seem to be the result of ignorance so much as the deliberate
perpetration of one who knew better grammar, but chose
these uncouth forms to be in harmony with some of his
uncouth visions.
(2) Archbishop Benson has written an elaborate defense
of the ungrammatical grammar of the Apocalypse. He
thinks that possibly in every instance the apocalyptist had
a definite reason for his departure from the beaten paths of
composition. When in eighteen passages he uses Spoiog with
the dative, that proves that he knows how to use it correctly.
If, then, in two instances we find that he has used 8/ioiog with
the accusative, we have no right to charge him with igno
rance of the correct usage. We ought, rather, to inquire
what reason he has for departing from the common and
correct usage at these points. Zahn is very much convinced
of this necessity. He says, "When a writer who uses and
with the genitive between thirty and forty times, writes once
and b &v nal b r\v nal 6 ep^djuevoc, it must be because he wants
to indicate that butvarX. is used as an indeclinable proper

234 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
name, as a paraphrase for Yahweh."29 This position is
taken again and again in Robertson's new Grammar of New
Testament Greek. Then, visions are apt to be disjointed
and illogical; why may not the author of the Apocalypse
have chosen this irregular grammar to preserve an impres
sion of the irregularity of the original revelation? There
may be something in these suggestions, but how much no
one ever will be able to tell ; and it is extremely difficult to
apply the suggestion to the explanation of certain individual
cases in any satisfying manner.
(3) Some have thought that John employed different
amanuenses and the differences of style could be accounted
for on that ground. One scribe wrote Greek poorly; and
. John had the assistance of a better man in his further writ
ing. This is pure conjecture. There may be something in
it, but no one knows. We feel sure on other grounds that
the apostle John wrote both the Apocalypse and the other
Johannine books, and we simply refuse to be shaken in that
conviction by this strange dissimilarity of grammar. The
proofs for common authorship are so convincing that we
are willing to allow this difference in the use of the language
to remain a mystery for which we may offer some possible
explanations, but the key for the solution of which has been
lost with the generation in which John lived.
We already have pointed out the similarities of titles,
thought, and phraseology which bind the Gospel and the
Apocalypse together. It would be equally easy to show that
the underlying theology of the two books is the same. There
are differences in the setting and emphasis and expression
of this theology, but they are such differences as would be
inevitable in books treating of such different themes and
belonging to such different departments of literature.
The personality apparent in all these Johannine writings
is one and the. same. The Apocalypse is the book of a

29 Zahn, Introduction, vol. iii, p. 435.

THE APOCALYPSE 235
Boanerges. It seethes with fiery hot indignation against
all the enemies of the Christ and his cause. Are there Jews
in Smyrna and in Philadelphia who have antagonized the
Christian Church in those cities ? What shall we call' them ?
They are blasphemers and liars; they are a synagogue of
Satan, John says.30 Has the power of the Roman empire
been prostituted to the persecution of the adherents of the
Christian faith? What shall we call it? It is "Babylon
the Great, the Mother of the Harlots and of the
Abominations of the Earth," John says.81 Has the Ro
man emperor set up his altars everywhere and demanded
that he himself be worshiped as divine and defied all other
religious powers to wage war with him and his followers?
What shall we call him? He is no God, John says; he is
a monster, a beast.82
What will the Christ do with these hostile powers, now
that he has been exalted to the throne? Let the heavens
be opened and John will show us the King of kings and
Lord of lords, and this is the vision he sees. "Out of his
mouth proceedeth a sharp sword, that with it he should
smite the nations : and he shall rule them with a rod of iron :
and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness of the wrath
of God, the Almighty."33 What will the enemies of the
Lord do then? They will say to the mountains and to the
rocks, "Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that
sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb : for
the great day of their wrath is come; and who is able to
stand ?"34 Only a Boanerges could receive and transmit a
revelation like that.
There are numerous indications of the loving disciple and
saintly soul who delights in fellowship with the Father and
with his Son above all other things. That is his conception
of eternal blessedness. "They shall hunger no more, neither
30 Rev. 2. 9; 3. 9. a Rev. 19. 15.
31 Rev. 17. 5. M Rev. 6. 16, 17.
32 Rev. 13. 1-4.

236 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
thirst any more; for the Lamb that is in the midst of the
throne shall be their shepherd, and shall guide them unto
fountains of waters of life : and God shall wipe away every
tear from their eyes."35 "And I heard a great voice out
of the throne saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with
men, and he shall dwell with them, and they shall be his
peoples, and God himself shall be with them, and be their
God. ... He that overcometh shall inherit these things.
But for the fearful, and the unbelieving, and abominable,
and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and idolaters,
and all liars, their part shall be in the lake that burneth with
fire and brimstone."36
Therein is the paradox of John's character apparent. He
loves with an intensity of affection which cannot brook any
antagonism to the object of his regard. He is one who,
like Dante in Browning's description,
loved well because he hated,
Hated wickedness that hinders loving.87
The fulfillment of his joy is in fellowship with the Father
and with the Son. He sees fire fall from heaven upon
those who refuse to love and serve them.38 This is the
John of the Gospels and the epistles. He displays the same
strange mixture of sternness and gentleness, of hate and
love, of vehemence and diffidence in all these books.
We cannot believe that any other John would have these
characteristics in like measure, and would be of such au
thority in the early church that he would need no other
introduction and guarantee at the opening of his book and
at the close of his visions than the mere mention of his
name would give, and then that he would be utterly lost to
sight in the subsequent history ! Yet that is what the
deniers of the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse would
have us conclude. Some of them think that an unknown

» Rev. 7. 16, 17. " Browning, One Word More, v.
» Rev. 21. 3, 7, 8. « Rev. 8. 7-11.

THE APOCALYPSE 237
John wrote the Apocalypse, and some of them think that
an unknown John wrote the fourth Gospel, and some others
think that an unknown John wrote both the Gospel and
the Apocalypse; and yet, although he thus proved himself
to be the supreme literary genius of the first Christian cen
tury, all record and all memory of him perished from
among men, while the church in some strange and unac
countable fashion came to believe that his books were
written by another man ! Let those believe that who can.
We prefer to agree that the tradition of the church is
the best authority in the matter, and that this greatest of
the New Testament seers and theologians is that apostle of
the loving heart who lay upon the Master's bosom at the
daily meal and came to have the deepest insight into the
Master's mind during the life ministry, and then was
granted the revelation of the Master's ultimate triumph in
the visions of the Patmos exile. We turn now to a review
of the tradition of the ancient church and the criticism
of the modern church concerning the canonicity and the
authorship of the Apocalypse.
II. The External Evidence
1. The Earliest Tradition. (1) Justin Martyr lived and
wrote in the earlier half of the second century. He had
traveled extensively. He was a native of Palestine. He
had visited the churches of Alexandria and Rome, as well
as those in Asia Minor. He knew the universal tradition
of the church in his generation. He gives us his testimony
on the very spot where the Johannine books were composed.
He believed what the church in Ephesus and all the
churches of Asia Minor believed concerning them. He knew
what the African and the European churches as well as
those in Asia said about the Apocalypse, and he writes in
so many words, "There was a certain man with us, whose
name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who proph-

238 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
esied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those
who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in
Jerusalem."39 The reference is to Rev. 20. 4, and the state
ment could not be more explicit that this book was written
by John the apostle, and no more authoritative witness
could be cited from this period. Such definite testimony
from such a source ought to be as unquestioned as it is un
questionable. (2) Melito was bishop of the church in Sardis about
A. D. 170, and he wrote a commentary on the Apocalypse
of John. Sardis was the site of one of the churches ad
dressed in the epistles of the opening chapters of the Apoca
lypse. The tradition here would be likely to be an un
broken and an authoritative one.
(3)Theophilus of Antioch and Apollonius of Ephesus,
also before the close of the second century, quote from the
Apocalypse as the writing of John. All these witnesses are
from Asia Minor where the Apocalypse was composed,
and where the tradition concerning it would be most likely
to be reliable.
(4) Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a
disciple of the apostle John. Irenaeus himself came from
Asia Minor and was bishop of the church in Lyons in the
latter part of the second century. He speaks of the "most
approved and ancient copies" of the Apocalypse, and he
appeals to the testimony of "those men who saw John face
to face" concerning its text.40 We know that Irenaeus
meant John the apostle in this reference because he tells us
explicitly in another passage that John could not endure
the sight of some of the Apocalyptic revelation, "and the
Word revived him, and reminded him that it was He upon
whose bosom he had leaned at supper, when he put the
question as to who should betray Him, declaring, I am the
"Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 81. Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. i,
p. 240. 40 Ag. Heresies, V, 30. 1; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. i, p. 558.

THE APOCALYPSE 239
first and the last, and He who liveth, and was dead, and
behold I am alive for evermore, and have the keys of death
and of hell, 1. 17, 18."41
(5) Tertullian was the great leader in the African
church in this period, and in his writings we find such ex
plicit statements as these, "The apostle John, in the Apoca
lypse, describes a sword which proceeded from the mouth
of God,"42 and "The apostle John beheld a city in heaven."48
(6) Clement of Alexandria was a contemporary of Ter
tullian and Irenaeus and he cites the Apocalypse of John as
sacred and authoritative Scripture, even as they did.
(7) Origen, who succeeded Clement as the head of the
catechetical school at Alexandria and became the greatest
of all the church Fathers in saintly life and preeminent
scholarship, is as clear in his conviction as any who had
preceded him. He says, "John, son of Zebedee, says in his
Apocalypse, And I saw an angel flying in the midst of
heaven having the Eternal Gospel, to preach it to those who
dwell upon the earth, 14. 6, 7."44
(8) The Muratorian Canon, A. D. 170, says, "John, too,
in the Apocalypse, although he writes only to seven
churches, yet addresses all." The John who wrote the
Apocalypse is not distinguished in any way from the author
of the Gospel and the epistle, and the failure to distinguish
is probably an identification. It would seem that the writer
of this Fragment believed that one John, the apostle, wrote
all these books.
(9) Hippolytus, A. D. 200-240, wrote an elaborate de
fense of the Apocalypse against its chief critic in his day,
and his book seems to have established the apostolic and
canonical authority of the Apocalypse in all the Western
church for the succeeding centuries.

41 Op. cit., iv, 20. 11; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. i, p. 491.
42 Ag. Marcion, III, 14; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. iii, p. 333.
43 Op. tit., iii, 25; Ante-Nicene Fathers, p. 342.
44 Commentary on John, I, 14; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. ix, p. 305.

240 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
There are few books in the New Testament which are
as well attested and as widely acknowledged in the second
Christian century as is the Apocalypse of John; and the
Tubingen School is right in declaring that its apostolic
authorship is as well guaranteed as that of any book in the
New Testament canon in all the writings of Christian
antiquity. Samuel Davidson said: "The apostolic origin
of the Apocalypse is as well attested as that of any book in
the New Testament. How can it be proved that Paul wrote
the Epistle to the Galatians, for example, on the basis of
external evidence, if it be denied that the apostle John
wrote the closing book of the canon? With the limited
stock of early ecclesiastical literature that survives the
wreck of time, we should despair of proving the authen
ticity of any New Testament book if that of the Apoca-
laypse be rejected."45 However, there were a few who
denied the authority of the apostle, and we notice these at
this point.
2. The First Opponents. ( i ) Epiphanius mentions some
people whom he calls the Alogi, who declared that the
fourth Gospel and the Apocalypse were to be rejected from
the canon of Scripture because they were written not by
the apostle John but by his enemy and the enemy of the
truth he taught, Cerinthus, the arch-heretic of Ephesus!
The perversity of this view is equal to that of Thomas
Paine's indictment of George Washington when he declared
that Washington's military blunders had nearly ruined the
country and that posterity always would be in doubt as
to whether Washington was more of a fool or a knave.
The character of Washington never was injured by such
criticism. If Cerinthus wrote the Johannine books, then
we can believe that Thomas Paine was a greater patriot
than George Washington; but until the one absurdity is
proven we will refuse credence to the other. Nobody
knows anything about these Alogi. They are merely men-
is Introduction to the Study of the New Testament, vol. i, p. 345.

THE APOCALYPSE 241
tioned by Epiphanius and he tells us nothing of their num
bers or their standing in the church. They possibly were
a mere handful of folk, capable of any perversity of faith.
They do not seem to have had any influence or following in
the next generation.
(2) Caius, a presbyter at Rome, did not belong to the
Alogi, but he adopted their view of the authorship of the
Apocalypse, and he used some of their arguments against
the book. It was in answer to him that Hippolytus wrote
the defense of the Apocalypse which established its stand
ing in the Western church.
(3) We already have mentioned Dionysius of Alex
andria and his objections to the apostolic authorship of the
Apocalypse drawn from the internal characteristics of the
book. We have answered his objections in a manner satis
factory to ourselves. At the same time we acknowledged
that the criticism of Dionysius was both courteous and
scholarly; and we felt sure that Dionysius himself was a
most worthy and honest man. His reasoning seems to have
influenced much of the later thought in the East.
(4) Eusebius evidently is uncertain whether to say that
the Apocalypse was written by the apostle John or by the
presbyter John, and he is just as undecided whether to class
the book among the Accepted or among the Rejected claim
ants to a place in the New Testament canon.46
(5) A little later Cyril of Jerusalem omitted the Apoca
lypse from his list of canonical books. The canon of the
Synod of Laodicea, A. D. 363, did not give it a place. It
is not found in the canon of the Apostolic Constitutions.
Gregory of Nazianzus omitted it from his canon ; and it is
not found in the Synopsis of Chrysostom.
(6) The school at Antioch does not seem to have favored
the use of the Apocalypse. Neither Theodore nor Chrysos
tom nor Theodoret quotes it in his writings, and it is known
that Theodoret rejected it.
48 Church History, iii, 39; iii, 25. 4.

242 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
(7) Amphilochius of Iconium, who died about A. D.
395. says that the majority of men in his day believed that
the Apocalypse was spurious; and even as late as the
beginning of the ninth century Nicephorus ranks the Apoca
lypse of John along with the Apocalypse .of Peter among
the books which are spoken against and doubtful as to their
canonicity. (8) The Jacobite church rejected it. The Nestorian
church refused it. It was not in ecclesiastical use in any
of the Syrian churches for the first four centuries. It
did not have any place in the Syrian New Testament, the
Peshito, in this period.
(9) The first commentary on the Apocalypse in the
Eastern church was written by Andreas in the fifth cen
tury; and the second was written by Arethas in the ninth
century. In all probability the Apocalypse was written in
Asia Minor and received there from the first, and from
Asia Minor it was carried westward to Africa and to
Europe ; but it does not seem to have penetrated the farther
East, and for some centuries it was comparatively unknown
in the churches of those regions. The Eastern church was
disposed to refuse recognition to the Apocalypse in the
beginning; but the Western church came to an established
faith in its apostolicity and canonicity, and in due time the
Eastern church received it into its canon. The Apocalypse
held an undisputed place in the Bible through the Middle
Ages and until the time of the Reformation. Then doubts
concerning it were expressed again.
3. At the Reformation. ( 1 ) Carlstadt divided the books
of the New Testament into three classes of different degrees
of authority, and he put seven books into the third or least
authoritative class, and he put the Apocalypse at the very
end of these, as the least worthy book of the New Testa
ment and almost liable to exclusion altogether. (2) Luther
practically excluded the Apocalypse from his Bible. He
translated it, but put it into the appendix as one of the non-

THE APOCALYPSE 243
canonical and apocryphal books. "My spirit cannot adapt
itself to the book," he said. In his Preface to the New
Testament, 1522, he declared that to him the Apocalypse
had every mark of being neither apostolic nor prophetic.
The apostles spoke clearly, without figure or vision, of
Christ and his deeds ; and no prophet deals so entirely with
visions and figures. It did not seem to be the work of
the Holy Spirit. He did not like the commands and threats
which the writer makes about his book, and the promise
of blessedness to those who keep what was written in it,
when no one knows what that is, to say nothing of keeping
it, and there are many nobler books to be kept.47
(3) Zwingli thought that the Apocalypse was a non-
biblical book, written by some other John than the apostle.
(4) Calvin did not write any commentaries on Second
and Third John and the Apocalypse. However, he used
the Apocalypse in quotation as apostolic and canonical.
(5) Melanchthon had no question about the book. Beza
defended it against all criticism. Bullinger answered all
the objections of Luther concerning it. .So the scholars
and leaders of the Reformation had different judgments
about the Apocalypse; and although at the very beginning
Erasmus and Luther and Zwingli turned the tide against it,
it was not long until the church had restored the book to
its place in the canon and in the regard and the affection
of its membership.
4. In Later Times. Herder and Eichhorn led the church
into a much fuller appreciation of the literary value of the
Apocalypse. At the beginning of the last century Schleier
macher and his school renewed the assault upon the book.
In the middle of the century the Tubingen School warmly
defended its authenticity. Through the whole century of
historical criticism just past there have been advocates of
all the old views concerning it. The final outcome, how
ever, seems to be manifest in a tendency to recognize the
47 Summary in Hastings's Bible Dictionary, vol. iv, p. 241.

244 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
unusual weight of testimony in its favor in the second
century and, in a fuller appreciation of the nature of the
literature it represents, to find an explanation of many of
the difficulties felt by the older scholars concerning it. The
Johannine authorship is ably maintained by scholars differ
ing so widely from each other as E. A. Abbott, C. A. Scott,
W. H. Simcox, V. H. Stanton, Bernhard Weiss, and Theo
dore Zahn. Origen, Hippolytus, the Muratorian Canon,
Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian cite the
Gospel, the epistles, and the Apocalypse as the work of one
person, John ; and we have now seen reason for concluding
that the apostle John is the author of all these books. Those
who attack the Johannine and apostolic authorship of any
one of them must give good reason for setting aside these
chief authorities in the field of original patristic evidence.
These names are sufficient to settle the question as to the
Johannine authorship of all the Johannine books.
The Apocalypse probably is more firmly grounded in the
respect of the general church to-day than it ever has been
since the first half of the second century. It doubtless will
hold its own henceforth against all hostile criticism. It is
a revelation of Jesus Christ, a strange, elusive, alluring
revelation. As the successive centuries unfold its mysteries
and as its interpretation becomes more and more clear it
will be increasingly prized by the increasingly appreciative
church. There has been almost as much disputing about
the date of the writing of the Apocalypse as there has been
about its authorship. We will summarize the facts as
briefly as possible. III. The Date
i. In the case of the Apocalypse many modern scholars
both of the ultra-critical and the more conservative school
have been disposed to date the book much earlier than
church tradition does. The same critics who would put
the composition of the fourth Gospel toward the end of

THE APOCALYPSE 245
the second century, a whole century later than church tradi
tion placed it in ascribing it to the apostle John, when they
came to dating the Apocalypse decided that it must have
been written not at the end of the first century, as church
tradition declared, but at least a whole generation earlier
than that. The internal evidence was of such a character
as to lead many conservative scholars to agree with them
in fixing upon this earlier date. This case probably is
unique in the field of New Testament criticism. In the
case of every other book if the traditionary date was not
accepted, the tendency always has been to bring it down
to some later time.
2. The external evidence for the late date of the Apoca
lypse is stronger than for any other book in the New
Testament. Irenaeus, in speaking of the Apocalypse, says,
"It was seen not long ago, but almost in our own genera
tion, at the end of the reign of Domitian."48 Eusebius
declares, "At that time the apostle and evangelist John, the
one whom Jesus loved, was still living in Asia, and govern
ing the churches of that region, having returned after the
death of Domitian from his exile on the island."49 Vic-
torinus agrees in the same testimony, "When John saw
these things he was in the island of Patmos, having been
condemned to the mines by the emperor Domitian."50 He
repeats this testimony in other passages.
Jerome closes his account of the apostle John with these
words: "Domitian having raised a second persecution, he
was banished to the isle of Patmos, and wrote the Apoca
lypse, on which Justin Martyr and Irenaeus afterward wrote
commentaries. But Domitian having been put to death, and
his acts, on account of his excessive cruelty, having been
annulled by the Senate, he returned to Ephesus under Perti-
48 Quoted by Eusebius, op. tit., iii, 18. 3; Nicene and Post-Niceue
Fathers, vol. i, p. 148.
49 Op. tit., iii, 23. 1 ; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. i, p. 150.
^In Apoc, X, 11.

246 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
nax, and continuing there until the time of the emperor
Trajan, founded and built churches throughout all Asia,
and, worn out by old age, died in the sixty-eighth year
after our Lord's passion and was buried near the same
city."51 Here are the ancient authorities. No one contra
dicts them in the first three centuries of church history.
They all agree that the Apocalypse was written during the
-reign of Domitian, some time in the last decade of the
first century. Can there be any good reason for contra
dicting a tradition guaranteed by such names and by such
unanimity? The cavalier method in which some modern
writers set it aside seems to argue its unfitness to agree
with their theories rather than its own untrustworthiness.
3. The following authorities thought that the Apocalypse
was written in or about the reign of Nero, A. D. 65-69:
Credner, Ewald, Hase, Reuss, Baur, Hilgenfeld, Wieseler,
Beyschlag, Lange, Stuart, Selwyn, Farrar, Lightfoot,
Westcott, Hort, and Henderson.
4. The following authorities date the composition of the
Apocalypse about the year A. D. 70, or in the beginning
of the reign of Vespasian : Eichhorn, Liicke, Bleek, Diister
dieck, Weiss, Mommsen, Bartlet.
5. The present tendency is to go back to the date set
by Irenaeus and the other church Fathers, somewhere be
tween A. D. 90 and 96, in the reign of Domitian. This
was the view of Elliott, Ebrard, Hengstenberg, Hofmann,
Godet, Lee, Milligan, Warfield, Abbott, Arnold, Comely,
Adeney, Belser, Bousset, Forbes, Gloag, Green, Havet,
Hug, Jtilicher, Kreyenbuhl, McGiffert, Mill, Neumann,
Peake, Ramsay, Reville, Salmon, Schafer, Von Dobschutz, t
Von Soden, Weizsacker, Wellhausen, Wernle, Zahn, David
son, Alford, and Trench. It is the view of Harnack and
Bacon. It is the conclusion of Porter in the article on the
Apocalypse in Hastings's Bible Dictionary. It is the date
81 Lives of Illustrious Men, ch. 9; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers,
vol. iii, pp. 364, 365.

THE APOCALYPSE 247
favored by Swete in the latest critical commentary on the
book. If we agree upon this date as the only one supported by
ancient authority and satisfying all the demands of the
most exacting modern criticism, it leaves the problem of
the differences of grammar and Greek in the writing of
the Gospel and of the Apocalypse looming large on our
hands; for these two books must then have been written
within a short period of time. They both must belong to
the last decade of the century, and any difference in vocabu
lary, grammar, doctrine, spirit, or form cannot be accounted
for by any lapse of time between the two. It must be due
either to a different amanuensis or to the inherent difference
in the class of literature represented by the two books. The
Gospel is a biography and history. The book of Revelation
is an Apocalypse. The prophetic literature of the Jews is
unique in the literature of the nations. The apocalyptic
literature is the lineal successor of the Old Testament
prophetic literature, and it in turn is unique, with charac
teristics distinguishing it from the prophets and from all
other literature in the world.
It is but recently that the fact has been recognized that
the Apocalypse of John belongs to a class of literature
and does not stand alone in its period of world history as
it does in our New Testament. There are a number of
other Apocalypses in existence in whole or in part which
belong to the same period of development in Hebrew his
tory, and the study of these has been very helpful in the
understanding and interpretation of our New Testament
book. IV. General Characteristics of the Apocalyptical
Literature
There are Christian Apocalypses belonging to a later
period than that of John and modeled largely upon his

248 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
work. We are not interested so much in these at present,
but, rather, in those Jewish Apocalypses which preceded
him or belonged to the same period with him and with
which he must have been acquainted when he wrote his
book. The Jewish Apocalypses have several characteristics
in common, and we will specify a few of them.
I. They all belong to the period of persecution and na
tional depression. They have been called Tracts for Bad
Times. The enemies of the Lord for the time being seem
triumphant. The voice of prophecy is dumb. No man
stands forth to proclaim in public the will of the Lord. No
authorized messenger declares, "Thus saith Jehovah." In
some secluded corner a scribe meditates upon the evil times
and the mysteries of Divine Providence and the problems
of unfulfilled prophecy; and to him visions of a brighter
future are granted. He is given to see that though the
present may be dark enough, the future holds ultimate
triumph in store. It may not come very soon, and it may
not come in this world ; but in the world which is to follow
this the righteous will find their adequate reward and the
wicked will be overthrown. There will be a new heaven
and a new earth and a new and blessed consummation of
things. This assurance was given to faith, but it was given in
visions, and symbols, and dreams. Dreams come only in
dark days or at night. Apocalypses belong only to troubled
times. Symbols are employed only when clear speech has
failed. When the prophet has ceased to speak, the apoca
lyptist begins to write. He works upon the basis which
prophetic material has furnished him, and he remolds it
into grotesque .and curious forms. He must have been
conscious that there was a difference in the degree of his
inspiration, for he never publishes his visions under his
own name or claims for them his personal authority, as
the prophets did.
2. Pseudonymous Authorship. It is a strange fact that

THE APOCALYPSE 249
all of these Jewish Apocalypses, written after the age of
the prophets in Israel, take shelter behind some one of the
great names of Jewish antiquity, Enoch, Moses, Isaiah,
Baruch, or Ezra, and thus conceal the real author's name.
We know nothing at all about the authors of any of
them to-day. We can decide approximately the date of
their composition, and we know that they all have been
written in the later age of Jewish history; but we find the
names of older heroes and leaders and saints attached to
them and they purport to give the revelations and the
visions granted to these. They are all works of fiction to
that extent.
The reason for this pseudonymous authorship may be
found in the fact that it might have been dangerous to the
life or the liberty of the writer of any one of these half-
political pamphlets if he became known to the authorities.
The Apocalypses all foretold calamity to the world powers.
They all predicted a coming catastrophe and revolution.
They proclaimed the overthrow of the present order of
things. They antagonized the heathen religions and the
heathen regimes. It probably was the part of prudence
for the author to hide his own personality.
Without doubt too the later writers felt that they were
in line with the spirit and the teachings of the older
worthies whose names they chose to give authority to their
books. If these revelations were not given actually to these
men, they would have sanctioned them in both their purpose
and their content if they had been alive when these books
were composed. We are assured by the writers on the
subject that this assumption of an ancient name by a con
temporary writer was a common literary device at this
time, and that there was not the same sense of literary
proprietorship then that we have now, and that this custom
was considered legitimate and thoroughly consistent with
honesty and the highest moral ideals. It is difficult for us
to conceive this; but it is true that the standards in the

250 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
ancient times were different from those to which we are
accustomed. These Apocalypses evidently were written by
religious men for religious purposes, and nevertheless under
assumed names.
3. The purpose of writing seems to have been the same
in all the books of this class of literature. Encouragement
under trial and persecution, and exhortation to patience
in the present distress — these are the two burdens in them
all; and both encouragement and exhortation are based
upon predictions of the coming crisis and the ultimate
triumph of Jehovah in behalf of his people.
4. The form in which these predictions are clothed is
practically the same in all the Apocalypses. Visions and
dreams are vouchsafed to the writer and these visions have
all the grotesqueness and the irregularity of our own inven
tions in troubled sleep. The unexpected always is happen
ing. The most surprising and sudden changes take place.
Unnatural and impossible combinations of incidents and
things occur. We could make nothing out of them, if they
were not interpreted for us. In the Apocalypses an angel
furnishes the interpretation and these strange and mysteri
ous and kaleidoscopic pictures are found to be symbols
of present and future events.
5. The material of which these apocalyptic symbols are
composed is in large measure common to all. Hideous
creatures, whose appearance is distressing to the artistic
mind and whose only excuse for being is that they are
the creations of a dream, represent the world kingdoms.
The successive kings in a nation or in a dynasty are the
many heads of a beast. Certain numbers stand for indi
viduals or for conventional periods or for the antichrist.
There are theophanies and wars and dragons and descrip
tions of heaven and hell. It is surprising to find how much
these books resemble each other in their constituent and
conventional framework and composition. They rest upon
the same portions of the Old Testament as the sources of

THE APOCALYPSE 251
their inspiration, and the originality of each writer is appar
ent only in the differences of combination in this material.
6. It has been thought that some distinctive doctrines
might be predicated of these Apocalypses. ( 1 ) Their con
ception of God seems to be more transcendent than that
of the Old Testament. The God of the Apocalypses is
more sharply distinguished from the ruler of this world
darkness. The separation is almost dualistic in its com
pleteness. God stands outside and above the present world-
order, and he is about to intervene to set it right and
vindicate his power and establish his own authority.
(2) In the Apocalypses there is a wider world- view than
is common in the Old Testament. The kingdom of God
is no longer the kingdom of Israel alone; it is extended
to include all the kingdoms of the world.
(3) The eschatology of the Apocalypses is much more
definite than that of the Old Testament. The hope of
immortality shines only dimly in the pages of the older
book ; but it comes out into the clear light in the apocalyptic
literature. The general scheme of the last things appears
to be the same in all of them. There is to be a final assault
of the powers of evil upon the righteous and their King,
but they are to be completely vanquished. Some great crisis
is at hand, but out of its culmination of catastrophe for
the wicked a new order of things will arise. There will
be a Judgment Day, and the good will be gathered from
out their great tribulation to their eternal blessedness in
the presence of Jehovah, their glorious King.
These six things seem to be true of all of the Jewish
Apocalypses. They are all of pseudonymous authorship.
They spring out of similar circumstances. They have a
like purpose. They have much the same form and much
of the same material. They represent the same general
type of doctrines. It may be worth our while to glance at
a few of these Apocalypses which preceded the publication
of the Apocalypse of John.

252 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
V. The Jewish Apocalypses
All of these have come to us through Christian hands,
and some of them have been revised rather radically for
the use and the reading of Christians. Some have been
changed more than others, and sometimes it is difficult
to determine how much of a book is Jewish and how much
of it is due to Christian editors and revisers.
I. The Book of Enoch. This book seems to have been
esteemed very highly by both the Jews and the Christians
of the first century. It is quoted by name in the Epistle of
Jude in our New Testament, and by the Epistle of Barnabas
which belongs to the apostolic age. Tertullian thought it
was an inspired book. He says, "These things the Holy
Spirit, foreseeing from the beginning -the entrance of super
stition, foretold by the mouth of Enoch." Irenaeus refers
to it as an authority. Clement of Alexandria and Origen
knew it, and refer to it in their writings. The Jews were
the first to decide that the book was not authoritative, and
the Christians came more slowly to the same conclusion.
Augustine says : "There is some truth in these apocryphal
writings, but they contain so many false statements that
they have no canonical authority. We cannot deny that
Enoch, the seventh from Adam, left some divine writings,
for this is asserted by the apostle Jude in his canonical
epistle. But it is not without reason that these writings
have no place in that canon of Scripture which was pre
served in the temple of the Hebrew people by the diligence
of successive priests; for their antiquity brought them
under suspicion, and it was impossible to ascertain whether
these were his genuine writings, and they were not brought
forward as genuine by the persons who were found to have
carefully preserved the canonical books by a successive
transmission."52 Augustine evidently is misled by the
82 De Civit., XV, 23; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series,
vol. ii, p. 305.

THE APOCALYPSE 253
pseudonym, but is content to abide by the Jewish canon as
comprising the only genuine Jewish Scripture.
When the Book of Enoch thus had fallen into disrepute
among both the Jews and the Christians it disappeared from
sight. All copies seemed to have been lost or destroyed.
All that the Middle Ages or the more modern times knew
of it was to be found in the references to it in Jude and
in the writings of the church Fathers. In the year 1773
the African explorer Bruce found an Ethiopic version in
the Ethiopic Bible in Abyssinia. He brought three copies
back to Europe with him, and thus this book, which had
been lost for a thousand years, came again into the posses
sion of Christian scholars. It was found to contain the
words quoted by Jude.
It is written in the name of Enoch and purports to give
a series of visions granted to him. Under the guidance of
an angel Enoch travels through heaven and hell and has
many mysteries explained to him. All the coming history
of Israel is shown to him under the form of a series of
conflicts between various animals. All time is divided into
Ten Weeks, in the first of which Enoch himself was living,
in the ninth of which would be the general judgment, and
the tenth of which would introduce the final blessedness.
The inscription to the book itself states that Moses in his
one hundred and twentieth year handed it to Joshua with
the Pentateuch ; but all modern scholars agree that it must
have been written some time in the second or the first cen
tury B. C, while some even put its date into the beginning
years of the first Christian century.
A recent commentator upon the Apocalypse thus ap
praises the book: "It is quite plain that this apocalypse
either exerted a considerable influence on the generations
immediately before and contemporary with Jesus, or at
least reflects a large number of ideas which were in the
minds of men of these generations, and are not accounted
for by the Old Testament. Such, for example, is the de-

254 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
veloped doctrine of Angels which meets us at the very
outset of the New Testament, the developed doctrine of
the Resurrection, and of the Day of Judgment. It is very
significant too that no fewer than four titles of the Messiah
are used for the first time of a personal Messiah in this
Book of Enoch : Christ or the Anointed One ; the Righteous
One ; the Elect or Chosen One ; and the Son of Man. And
in our Lord's own words, 'when the Son of man shall sit
on the throne of his glory,' there is an echo, it may be a
deliberate quotation, of the words of this book."53 Jude
was the brother of our Lord ; and he knew and quoted the
Book of Enoch. It would seem altogether likely that Jesus
had read it and he may have quoted from it too. .
Mr. Charles, who is- a leading authority upon this apoca
lyptic literature, thinks that phrases, clauses, or thoughts
derived from the Book of Enoch are to be found not only
in the Epistle of Jude and in the Apocalypse of John, but
also in the Gospels according to John and Matthew and
Luke, and in the book of Acts, and in the Epistles of Paul
to the Romans and to the Ephesians, and in the Epistle to
the Hebrews.54 If he is right in this conclusion, the influ
ence of the Book of Enoch is to be traced through nearly
the whole of our New Testament ; and it furnishes a model
and some of the material of John's Apocalypse. Jesus
and Jude and John must have had considerable respect for
this revelation, and they probably considered it a genuine
work of the patriarch Enoch himself.
2. In the Epistle of Jude we read that Michael contended
with the devil about the body of Moses.55 The Old Testa
ment tells us nothing about this. Where did Jude read
about it? Origen and Didymus and Apollinaris of Laodicea
all vouch for the fact that Jude is referring to an account
given in another of the Jewish Apocalypses, The Assump-
83 C. Anderson Scott, The New Century Bible, Revelation, p. 16.
84 Op. tit., note, p. 16.
68 Jude 9.

THE APOCALYPSE 255
tion of Moses. Not much is known about this book, for
it seems almost entirely to have perished. Nicephorus in
cludes it in his stichometry, and he gives it fourteen hun
dred stichoi, which would make it a book about the size
of the Apocalypse of John. In 1861 a fragment of the
book was discovered in a Latin version in the Ambrosian
Library at Milan. On the basis of the estimated size given
by Nicephorus, we conclude that this fragment represents
about one third of the original work. It does not include
the closing portion, and therefore it does not have the inci
dent referred to by Jude; and we are still dependent upon
the authority of the church Fathers for believing that Jude
quotes from this source. The fragment shows, however,
that this work belongs to the Apocalypses. It is supposed
to be addressed to Joshua by Moses, and it contains a pre
diction of all the Jewish history down to the year B. C. 4.
The end of all things is to follow close upon that date.
The book is of special interest to us because it seems to
have been written at some period during the lifetime of
Jesus, and some of the phrases used by Jesus may have
been quoted from its pages, and Stephen seems to have
followed its account of the history of Moses in his speech
before the Sanhedrin, and the Second Epistle of Peter
makes use of it as well as the Epistle of Jude.
3. The Apocalypse of Baruch purports to be a revelation
granted to Baruch, the faithful friend of the prophet Jere
miah. It is supposed to have been written shortly after
the destruction of the city of Jerusalem in the year A. D.
70, and its purpose is to comfort the Jews depressed by
that great disaster. According to its representation Baruch
gathers the elders of the people into the valley of the
Kidron, and there announces to them all the coming disas
ters of the city of Zion, and then predicts the Messianic
reign in which it would be restored and crowned with glory
forever. Swete says that this Apocalypse "approximates
to the nearly contemporary Christian Apocalypse not

256 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
merely in verbal coincidences and the use of similar
imagery, but in some important lines of thought."56
4. "In some respects the closest parallel to our Apoca
lypse is provided by the strangely named Fourth Book of
Ezra, or Esdras, a Jewish apocalypse which had a wide
circulation and enjoyed great esteem in the Christian
Church, and may be found to-day in the English Apoc
rypha. It is quoted as a genuine work of prophecy by
many of the early Fathers, finds a place in several Latin
manuscripts of the Bible, and appears with Third Esdras
as an Appendix to the Roman Vulgate. In its original form
it appears to have consisted of seven visions which purport
to have been seen by Ezra in Babylon, beginning in the
thirtieth year of the captivity. But the actual period of
the book's composition is to be found somewhere in the
first century A. D., either in the reign of Titus, as Ewald
thought, or under Nerva, as Hausrath thought, or in the
time of Domitian, as Schiirer concluded. The limits thus
suggested being practically those which are open for the
Apocalypse of John, the two books may be regarded as
contemporary productions, the one proceeding from a
Jewish, the other from a Christian, pen."57
Both books postpone the solution of the problem of evil
to the fast-approaching end of all things. Both describe
the glorious reign of the Messiah, the judgment, and some
thing of the intermediate state. Both have angelic inter
preters. Both represent the world kingdoms by living crea
tures — in Ezra by an eagle with three heads and twelve
wings and eight secondary wings, and in John by a beast
with many heads and many horns. In both books the
Messiah appears in the form of a lion, and in both the lion
appears for judgment. In both a woman and a city are
identified, and the one fades away into the other like a
dissolving view.
88 Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John, p. xxii.
87 Scott, op. tit., p. 18.

THE APOCALYPSE 257
5. There are other books belonging to this department
of literature which may have influenced the imagery and
the thought of John's Apocalypse, such as The Ascension
of Isaiah, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the
Psalms of Solomon, and the Sibylline Oracles. We will
mention only one more, The Book of the Secrets of Enoch,
which was translated into English by Mr. Charles in 1896.
Its editor decides that it belongs to the first half of the
first Christian century, but contains fragments of still older
Jewish apocalypses.
VI. The Apocalypse of John and the Jewish
Apocalypses
1. Their likeness. Our study thus far has made one
thing clear — the Apocalypse of John belongs to a class of
literature which had sprung up among the Jews after the
prophetic inspiration had ceased in their nation. John has
not originated this form of writing. He must have known
some if not all of these books we have mentioned. They
furnished him a pattern, which he more or less closely has
followed. We must remember, as Moffatt suggests, "That
some of the very features which have lost much, if not
all, of their significance for later ages, ornate and cryptic
expressions, allusions to coeval hopes and superstitions,
grotesque fantasies and glowing creations of an Oriental
imagination, the employment of current ideas about anti
christ, calculations of the immediate future, and the use
of a religious or semimythical terminology which was evi
dently familiar to some Asiatic Christians in the first cen
tury — these more or less ephemeral elements combined to
drive home the message of the book. They signify to us
the toll which had to be paid to contemporary exigencies ;
without them the book could not have made its way at all
into the conscience and the imagination of its audience."58

88 Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. v, p. 298.

258 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
The Pauline epistles mark the beginning of a new form
of literature; and Christian letter-writing has continued
through all the centuries to our own day. The Gospels
and the book of Acts are the first church histories and
biographies, and Christian histories and biographies will be
written to the end of time. The Apocalypse of John more
nearly marks the end than the beginning of a species of
literature. It is "the final and brilliant flash of the red light
which had gleamed from Amos down to the Maccabees."59
There were Christian Apocalypses written later than our
Apocalypse, but they were by unknown authors and never
were recognized as authoritative in the general church and
soon fell into disrepute and consequent neglect, and for
centuries now no Christian has thought of composing an
Apocalypse. The Apocalypse of John is the only Christian Apocalypse
read in the church to-day, and it stands as the last in the
series of Apocalypses we have been studying. It is like
these other Apocalypses (i) in the general situation and
historical background to which it makes response, and (2)
in the general purpose of consolation in distress which it
answers, and (3) in the general doctrines, especially in the
field of eschatology, which they represent, and (4) in much
of the imagery and component material which they contain.
For example, the Book of Enoch has a Tree of life and a
Book of life, heavenly beings clothed in white, stars falling
from heaven, horses wading through rivers of blood, spirits
presiding over the winds and the waters, and a fiery abyss
awaiting notorious sinners. All of these things reappear
in the Apocalypse of John.
In the Book of the Secrets of Enoch there is a great
sea above the clouds, and in the third heaven there is a
paradise stocked with fruit trees bearing all manner of
ripe fruits, and in the midst of it the tree of Life. "Faces

88 Moffatt, op. tit., p. 298.

THE APOCALYPSE 259
are seen shining like the sun, and eyes as lamps of fire;
there are angels set over seasons and years, over rivers and
the sea, over all the souls of men; six- winged creatures
overshadow all the throne, singing, Holy, Holy, Holy; the
world week is of seven thousand years ; Hades is a fortress
whose keys are committed to safe keeping."60 This is
sufficient to suggest that there is much of common material
in all these apocalyptical books. However, the Apocalypse
of John differs most radically from all these other books
in some respects, and we turn next to the enumeration of
these. 2. Their Unlikeness. (1) The Apocalypse of John car
ries the real author's name on its forefront; and this dis
tinguishes it from all the Jewish Apocalypses which had
preceded it. They are pseudepigraphic, and it is not.
(2) They conceal not only the real author's name but
his whereabouts and all facts concerning him. On the
contrary, the Apocalypse of John tells us that its author
was in exile on the isle of Patmos, and he writes to seven
churches of Asia Minor in such a way that we know at
about what time he is writing.
(3) The Apocalypse of John is a Christian book. The
glorified Jesus is the Messias to whom all the Jewish writers
had looked forward. He is the central and commanding
figure throughout. There is a new spirit of certainty and
prophetic inspiration and apostolic assurance in this Apoca
lypse of Jesus which the older books of necessity lacked.
The Apocalypse of John is easily distinguished from all
other books of the class, and vindicates its right to a place
in the sacred canon from which they have been excluded.
It is the consummate flower of their series, and there is a
tone of divine authority about it which has spoken to the
heart of the church through all time. It is the prophetic
book of the New Testament. It unites the prophetic

80 Swete, op. tit., p. xxi.

260 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
element of the Old Testament with the imagery of the
Jewish Apocalypses in the proclamation of the Christian
faith and truth. Let us turn now to the closer study of
the book itself. VII. A Mysterious Revelation
The Bible and the Apocalypse are alike in this respect
that they are both mysterious revelations. The Bible itself
is a book of revelation, and the revelation of divine truth
in the Bible is so clear that even a child can understand it.
He who runs may read. The essential truths of the Bible,
once heard, never are forgotten. Even a wayfaring man,
though he be laboring under the severest subjective dis
abilities, need not err therein. At one time Jesus answered
and said, "I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and
earth, because thou hast revealed these things unto babes.
Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight."61
The Bible is a revelation unto babes, a book for the kinder
garten, a religious primer in words of one syllable.
Listen to its proclamation. "God is love. . . . Ye must be
born anew. . . . Come to me, . . . and I will give you
rest."62 There is the heart of the whole thing. A revelation
could not be put more simply. Anybody can understand
that, and anybody who understands and appropriates these
simple truths can become a Christian. Our Bible revelation
of truth is in truth a revelation. Benjamin Whichcote was
warranted in his profession of faith, when he said, "This
for my part I do believe, that the Scripture is clear and full
of light, as to all matters of conscience, as to all rules of
life, as to all necessary matters of faith, so that any well-
minded man that takes up the Bible and reads may come
to understanding and satisfaction."
Yet while this is true that the revelation of the essentials

81 Matt. n. 25, 26.
82 1 John 4. 16; John 3. 7; Matt. 11. 28.

THE APOCALYPSE 261
of salvation in the Bible is so clear and so plain that even
a child can comprehend or apprehend it, it is equally true
that there are other portions of this revelation which are
so difficult of exegesis that they tax the utmost powers
of the greatest minds to master them. There are problems
in the Bible so difficult of understanding that even the wise
and the prudent, after years of investigation and after a
lifetime of study, declare that the Book is not a revelation
but a sealed book to them. The Bible is no shallow urn
whose treasures can be easily exhausted. It is like that
cup given the young god Thor to drink in the city of
Utgard. It could not be emptied at one draught, for all
the exhaustless depths of the ocean were filling it. Great
scholars have grown gray in the study of the book and
still have felt, like Sir Isaac Newton, that they were but
children picking up pebbles on the shore of the boundless,
fathomless deep. Every book in the Bible has its problems.
Every book is a book of revelation, filled with mystery.
Now, what is true of every other book in the Bible and
of the Bible as a whole is still more true of the last division
of the volume, as we have it to-day. We call it, the last
book of the Bible, the book of Revelation; as though it,
above all the other books, would be characterized by per
spicuity, as though this crowning and closing book of the
series would be easiest of exegesis and clearest and most
open to every understanding. Is that true of it? The book
begins, "The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave
him to show unto his servants, . . . and he sent and signi
fied it by his angel unto his servant John. . . . Blessed is he
that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy,
and keep the things that are written therein: for the time
is at hand."63 Then we read through its twenty-two chap
ters, and we find ourselves overwhelmed with questionings.
What is this book anyway? Is it contemporaneous his-
88 Rev. 1. 1, 3.

262 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
tory? Is it the history of the end of all things? Is it a
history of the successive world kingdoms? Is it a history
of the church? Is it history at all? Is it history or
prophecy? Is it a prophetic drama?64 Is it a dramatic
poem? Is it pure Apocalypse? It has been called all of
these things. It declares itself to be the Revelation of the
Lord Jesus Christ, but it turns out to be the great enigma
of the New Testament.
Dionysius of Alexandria says that there were those in
the church even before his time who maintained that the
title of the book was a fraudulent one, for the book was
without sense or argument, and it was not a revelation, be
cause it was covered thickly and densely by a veil of ob
scurity.65 Jerome in the fourth century wrote to Paulinus
that the Apocalypse of John had as many mysteries as
words, tot verba, tot mysteria; and he added: "In saying
this I have said less than the book deserves. All praise of
it is inadequate; manifold meanings lie hid in its every
word."66 Many modern scholars have agreed with these
conclusions. Robert South asserts that "the more the book
is studied, the less it is understood," and in his usual blunt
fashion he went on to say that it generally found a man
cracked or it left him so.67 Luther said that Christ could
neither be learned nor recognized in the book, and he de
clared that no one knew what was in it, "Niemand weiss
was darinnen steht."
Zwingli refused to quote it for doctrinal proof of any
thing. De Wette declared that there were whole chapters
in it which were like empty vials ; empty bottles, nothing in
them.

84 So Eichhorn, Commentary, Chapter IV, Milton, Palmer, and
Benson. "Eusebius, Eccles. Hist., VII, 25. 1, 2; Nicene and Post-Nicene
Fathers, Second Series, vol. i, p. 309.
86 Letter LIII, op. cit., vol. vi, p. 102.
87 Serm. XXIII, vol. i, 377.

THE APOCALYPSE 263
Possibly these scholars are right and we cannot under
stand or profit much by this revelation. Possibly these
scholars are wrong and have been misled by the enemy
of their souls whose constant endeavor it is to deceive men
to their spiritual loss. Moody seemed to think so, for he
said that this is the only book in the Bible which tells about
the devil being chained, and the devil knows it and he
goes up and down Christendom saying: "It is no use your
reading the book of Revelation. You cannot understand
that book. It is too hard for you," while the fact is that he
does not want men to understand about his own defeat.
If Moody is correct in that suggestion, it also may be true
that the devil is responsible for some of the exegesis of this
book. Bengel,68 careful critic and commentator, devout and
earnest student of the Word, learned from this book that
the world was to come to an end on the eighteenth of June,
1836. We who live in the twentieth century are ready to
say either that that revelation was a false one or that that
revelation is not to be found in the book. Hengstenberg69
in his commentary declared that the millennial reign began
in the year A. D. 800 and closed in the year A. D. 1800,
and that now we live in the times of Gog, Magog, and
Demagogue! That is a revelation we have failed to find
in these pages. Most of us think that the millennial age
is still to come.
Garratt70 found in the book prophecies of gunpowder
and cannon and steamboats and railroads; but we doubt
if the book was intended to be a revelation of these. Hunt-
ingford71 made of the book a complete church history,
coming down to the time of the French Revolution, and he
thought that the best commentary upon John's vision is
88 Erklarte Off. Joh., 1740.
89 Erlauterung. 2 vols., 1849, 1850.
70 Commentary on the Revelation, 1878.
71 The Apocalypse, with Commentary, etc., 1881.

264 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire; but we
have read Gibbon and have found in it no key to the prob
lems which this book presents. We do not need to go
through the long list of commentaries on the Apocalypse.
The one thing they all very clearly prove is that the book of
the Revelation of Jesus Christ is a book very difficult to
understand, a book of great mystery, which does not reveal
the same things to all minds and does not reveal much to
some of the most profound minds among them.
Here, then, are two facts concerning the closing book
of our canon. Like the Bible itself, it is, first, a book of
blessed revelation and, second, a book of profound mystery.
Possibly better than any other single book in the Bible
collection of books, it illustrates this double characteristic
of the Book as a whole, the combination of promise and
puzzle which makes this volume the delight of both the
child and the sage, which reveals enough to satisfy the babe
in Christ while at the same time it conceals enough to make
it an inexhaustible source of perplexity and subject of study
to the maturest scholar and saint.
The book of Revelation is an Apocalypse, and the Apoca
lypse is to us a book of mystery. The Greek words for
"Apocalypse" and "Mystery," dnoicdXwpig and fjvorfjpiov, had
meanings directly opposed to each other. The New Testa
ment usage of these words has interchanged their meanings
in the most extraordinary fashion. Paul calls the gospel
a mystery,72 but he does not mean to suggest that it is so
mysterious as to be incomprehensible. He means, rather,
that it was once a secret, but now it is manifested and easily
understood by anyone who would hear it. It was unknown,
but now it is a revelation, an open secret to all the world ;
that is Paul's meaning of the word "mystery" in his discus
sion of the Christian faith. Apocalypse meant a revelation
too, an uncovering, an unveiling, a disclosing of all that
78 Eph. 6. 19.

THE APOCALYPSE 265
was secret and making it public property. However, the
Apocalypse in the New Testament is such a mysterious
book that that fact almost has made us lose sight of the
first meaning of the word. The New Testament "mystery"
is a revelation, an Apocalypse. The New Testament Apoca
lypse has come to stand in our minds for a mystery, a
secret undisclosed. It is a mysterious revelation whose
meaning eludes us at many points and whose interpreta
tion baffles us again and again. This is a surprise and a
disappointment because no book in the Bible raises our
hopes so high and gives us reason for so great expectation
in the beginning.
VIII. The Fourfold Assurance of the Beginning and
the Fearful Threat at the End
We note, first, the Personal Presence of the Revealer in
the first chapter. No other book in the New Testament
has such a solemn beginning. Some of the books of the
New Testament almost seem to have been written by acci
dent. At least they were called forth by certain things
which had happened. They were written to meet certain
occasions; and there is no slightest indication in the books
themselves that the authors of them ever expected them
to serve any other than temporary need or to be read by
any more than a single individual or a single church. This
might be true of the Second and the Third Epistle of John;
but it is not so with the Apocalypse. The Christophany of
the beginning is like the Theophanies given to Isaiah and
Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Solemn, majestic, awe-inspiring,
the Revealer is seen first in his divine glory; and then
comes the Revelation.
We note, second, the Pleading of the book itself. In the
second and third chapters of the book we have seven
epistles addressed to seven churches of Asia Minor. It has
been suggested that in these seven epistles we have an

266 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
epitome of the contents of the entire book. At the close
of each of these epistles we come upon that exhortation,
"He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith
to the churches."73 In this seven-times repeated cry we
are told that the Spirit is speaking to the churches in this
book, and we are exhorted to hear what the Spirit has
to say. We note this seven-times repeated Pleading found
in the beginning summary of the book; and we are im
pressed with the unusual importance of the message we
are about to receive.
We notice, in the third place, the Purpose for which the
book was written, as announced by the author himself.
He tells us that he was a brother and partaker with those
whom he addressed in the tribulation and kingdom and
patience which are in Jesus;74 and he declares that he
purposes to show unto these the things which must shortly
come to pass.75 Bearing in mind this Purpose of spiritual
and valuable revelation and the sevenfold Pleading that
we may hear what the Spirit has to say to the churches,
and the guarantee of authority in the Personal Presence
of the Revealer in the opening vision of the book, we note,
in the fourth place, the Promise prefixed to this volume.
There we read, "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that
hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things which
are written therein: for the time is at hand."76 This is
the only book in the Bible which has any explicit promise
of that sort attached to it. It may be that we will be
blessed in reading some or all of these other books in the
Bible. We take it for granted that we will be; but here
assurance is rendered doubly sure by this explicit promise
put into our hands as we open the book.

73 Rev. 2. 7, n, 17, 29; 3. 6, 13, 22.
74 Rev. 1.9.
76 Rev. 1. 1.
78 Rev. 1. 3.

THE APOCALYPSE 267
Corresponding to this promise in the preface, there is a
solemn Threat at the close. "I testify unto every man that
heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man
shall add unto them, God shall add unto him the plagues
which are written in this book: and if any man shall take
away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God
shall take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the
holy city, which are written in this book."77 Both at the
beginning and at the end of his book John seems to be con
scious of the supreme importance of what he is writing and
to expect it to be read in wide circles and to be heard by
multitudes and to be a blessing to all to whom it may come.
He seems anxious to preserve the text intact, so that even
if it is copied again and again, the last to receive it in
the farthest remove of territory or among the latest genera
tions of men may be sure of having the original truth. The
language he uses is taken from two passages in Deuter
onomy, and in the adoption of these words John seems
to put his writing upon a par with that of Moses and to
claim for it a place in sacred Scripture for all time.
The Personal Presence there at the beginning of the
book, the Purpose of the book, the Pleading of the book,
the Promise of the book, and the Threat at the end lead
us to think that this will be a book of clearest and invaluable
revelation, and having finished the first three chapters, we
are ready to read on with four times the confidence with
which we would approach any other pages of the Bible.
Then as we plunge on from chapter to chapter we find
ourselves getting farther and farther out of our depth, the
puzzles and problems multiply on every hand, and while
there are passages here and there which are beautifully
simple and blessedly clear, we soon see that the book as
a whole is the most difficult to comprehend in the whole
Bible.

77 Rev. 22. 18, 19.

268 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
IX. Two Reasons Why the Inspiration of the Book
has Been Doubted
i. One critic has said, "Here all is dark and perplexing —
an extravagance of figure such as was never before wit
nessed, and an irregularity of language such as has no
parallel in any ancient writing, either sacred or profane."
Augustine was of the same opinion: "Though this book is
called the Apocalypse, there are in it many obscure passages
to exercise the mind of the reader, and there are few pas
sages so plain as to assist us in the interpretation of the
others, even though we take pains; and this difficulty is
increased by the repetition of the same things, in forms
so different that the things referred to seem to be different,
although, in fact, they are only differently stated."78
A modern scholar refuses to accept various theories of
interpretation of the Apocalypse and then confesses: "I
am unable to give any better solution of my own, feeling
like one of Cicero's disputants, 'facilius me, talibus de
rebus, quid non sentirem, quam quid sentirem, posse
dicere.' "79 It is small wonder then that there always have
been those who have doubted whether this book was in
spired and who have been ready to ask, "If the other books
of the Bible are inspired books, how can this book be in
spired? If they are adapted to the revelation of the new
dispensation, how can it be adapted to the same end? Is
it possible that this book can be from Him who leads in
a plain path and has promised his clear teaching and the
sure knowledge of his truth?"
2. Many of the interpreters of this book have helped
to bring it into disrepute. They are so sure, each of them,
that they are right. They are equally sure that all others
are radically wrong. They differ with each other as widely

™De Civit. Dei, XX, 17; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. ii,
p. 436. 78 Salmon, Introduction to the New Testament, p. 224.

THE APOCALYPSE 269
as possible both in their systems of interpretation and in
the results of their research. The same figures represent
to different exegetes characters as different as could be
imagined and the same forms of expression furnish them
with dates which differ from each other by centuries. We
are apt to conclude that every man makes the book mean
just what he desires it to mean, and we can make it mean
whatever we choose.
The book has been grossly misused by those who have
endeavored to discover in it a chronology either of world
history or of the end of all things. Jiilicher is surely right
when he says, "It is unreasonable to treat the detail of
its imageries as an authentic source for a history of the
past or the future."80 This is especially true of the at
tempts to figure out from its data the exact time for the
end of the world. Those who waste their time in this
effort seem to have forgotten what the Lord said, "Of
that day or that hour knoweth no one, not even the angels
in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father."81
John had no thought of prying into the secrets of the
Most High. He believed, like all the other writers of the
New Testament, that the end of the world would come
unexpectedly, like a thief in the night. In view of that
fact he has scattered exhortations to watchfulness through
all his book. At the Lord's command he wrote to the angel
of the church in Sardis, "If therefore thou shalt not watch,
I will come as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour
I will come upon thee."82 In one of the later visions of
the great day of God, the Almighty, he interrupts the
narrative to insert the statement, "Behold, I come as a
thief. Blessed is he that watcheth."83 Watchfulness was
necessary because neither John nor any man knew the hour
of the Lord's approach.
80 Julicher, Introduction, p. 168.
81 Mark 13. 32.
82 Rev. 3. 3. " Rev. 16. 15.

270 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Philip Schaff has well said: "All mathematical calcula
tions about the second advent are doomed to disappoint
ment, and those who want to know more than our blessed
Lord knew in the days of his flesh deserve to be disap
pointed. 'It is not for you to know times or seasons, which
the Father hath set within his own authority,' Acts I. 7.
This settles the question."84 However, many of the com
mentators do not have his common sense, and when we
turn to them we find many of their books filled with the
most absurd conclusions, based upon the most extravagant
exegesis. They are impositions, rather than expositions.
X. Some Curiosities of Exegesis
1. Take that problem of the antichrist as one example.
Bishop Raineri of Florence figured it out on the basis of
the data furnished him in this book that the antichrist was
to be born in the year A. D. 1080. Fifty years after that
date we find Saint Norbert, in 11 30, telling Saint Bernard
the same thing. A century after this, in 1227, Peter the
Minorite was preaching that the antichrist was then ten
years old. Two hundred years later, in 1412, Vincent of
Ferrara told Pope Benedict VIII that the antichrist was
nine years old at that date. Bengel declared that the be
ginning of the conflict with the antichrist would come in
the year 1790. Hengstenberg decided that Satan was set
loose in the year 1848. You can take your choice. If one
of these men is right, the others are wrong. Who can tell
which one of them is right? Who knows but that all of
them are wrong? We think that the latter supposition
represents the largest probability and, indeed, the certainty
in the case. These conclusions evidently are not based
upon general principles, but upon the individual environ
ment. They are the results of personal prejudice rather
than of preeminent spiritual insight.
2. Notice the different conclusions as to the human in-
84 Schaff, op. tit., p. 850.

THE APOCALYPSE 271
carnations of the antichrist. Amalrich of Bena said in
his day that the power and the spirit of the antichrist was
represented by John Wiclif and the heterodox Mystics.
Later, the Roman Catholic theologians were sure that the
personality of the antichrist was incarnate in Martin Luther
and the other Reformers. On the other hand, the leaders
of the Protestant Reformation were sure that the papacy
was the great whore and the pope was the antichrist.
3. Bellarmin, the Jesuit, said the hellish grasshoppers of
the ninth chapter were the Reformers. Nicolas Vignier
said the hellish grasshoppers were the monks.
4. Bugenhagen, in 1546, said that the angel with the eter
nal gospel, in 14. 6, was Martin Luther. Calovius went a step
farther and said that the three angels mentioned in this chap
ter were Luther, Chemnitz, and himself. Such a conclusion
is liable to the suspicion that it is the result of personal bias
and that it has been based upon personal prepossessions.
5. As a sample of one of the apocalyptic problems and
a good example of radically differing and mutually exclu
sive interpretations, look at the number of the beast. We
read, "He that hath understanding, let him count the num
ber of the beast; for it is the number of a man: and his
number is Six hundred and sixty and six"; and in the
margin we find, "Some ancient authorities read, Six hun
dred and sixteen."85 Then we turn to the commentators
and the exegetes to see who among them has understanding
and can interpret the number of the beast and give us the
name of the man. We find a host of them with rival
explanations, and each of them is sure he is right. They
prove to us, each in turn, that the beast is Caligula, Nero,
Titus, Trajan, Julian the Apostate, Genseric the Vandal,
Pope Benedict IX, Pope Paul V, Louis XV, Mohammed,
Martin Luther, John Calvin, Beza, Archbishop Laud, the
Duke of Reichstadt, and Napoleon Bonaparte.88
86 Rev. 13. 18.
86 Salmon, Introduction to New Testament, p. 230.

272 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
It was in the nineteenth century that the famous dis
covery of the long-sought-for true and indisputable ex
planation of that mysterious number six hundred and sixty-
six took place. It seems to have been made simultaneously
and independently by Fritzche in Rostock, Benary in Berlin,
Reuss in Strassburg, and Hitzig in Zurich. Each of these
claims to have hit upon it first; just as there are many
rival claimants for the first invention of the telephone.
Each of these men tells us that the name is Nero Caesar,
written in Hebrew letters. The Hebrews and Greeks had
no figures like ours. They gave a numerical value to the
letters of their alphabet, and thus made them do double
service in mathematics and in literature. Every man's
name, therefore, represented a certain number, found by
adding together the numerical equivalents of the various
letters by which it was spelled.
In the Epistle of Barnabas we are told that the name
"Jesus," 'iTjoovg, is expressed by the number eight hundred
and eighty-eight, and we obtain that number by adding to
gether the numerical equivalents of the Greek letters.87 In
the Pseudo-Sibylline verses, written by Christians, probably
toward the end of the second century, there are enigmas
giving a number and requiring a name. One on the name
"Jesus," 'Irjoovg, reads as follows : "He will come on earth
clothed with flesh like mortal men. His name contains four
vowels and two consonants; two of the former being
sounded together. And I will declare the entire number.
For the name will exhibit to incredulous men eight units,
eight tens, and eight hundreds." Now as the number of
Jesus is eight hundred and eighty-eight, John tells us that
the number of the beast is six hundred and sixty-six, and
this is also the name of a man. This name, the scholars
tell us, is Nero Caesar.
When we add together the numerals represented by the
wI = io; v = 8; <r = 2oo; 0 = 70; 11 = 400; <r = 200.

THE APOCALYPSE 273
Hebrew letters spelling the name and title, Nero Caesar,
we have a total of six hundred and sixty-six.88 In this
explanation that alternate number, six hundred and sixteen,
found in the margin, is accounted for. If we spell Nero
without a final Nun that drops fifty out of the sum total
and leaves us, instead of six hundred and sixty-six, only
six hundred and sixteen. This solution of the mystery
has been adopted by Baur, Zeller, Hilgenfeld, Volkmar,
Hausrath, Krenkel, Renan, Sabatier, Davidson, Farrar,
Stuart, Cowles, and many others. The great objection to
it is that it seems so easy and self-evident and yet nobody
seems to have suspected it in the early church or for the
first eighteen centuries of church history. It would be
marvelous indeed if, having remained hidden from all the
scholars and saints of the church through so many cen-~
turies, the correct interpretation should suddenly and
simultaneously become manifest to four German professors.
Caligula in Hebrew and in Greek, either as -iDp DJi>pDJ or
TAIOS KAICAP, by gematria is equivalent to 616, and so
is KAIOAP 6E0C, the Emperor (is) God!
Salmon in his Introduction says: "A man must know
very little of the history of the interpretations of this num
ber if he can flatter himself that because he has found a
word the numerical value of whose letters makes the re
quired sum he is sure of having the true solution. . . .
There are three rules by the help of which I believe an
ingenious man could find the required sum in any given
name. First, if the proper name by itself will not yield it,
add a title; secondly, if the sum cannot be found in Greek,
try Hebrew, or even Latin ; thirdly, do not be too particular
about the spelling. The use of a language different from
that to which the name properly belongs allows a good deal
of latitude in the transliteration. For example, if Nero will
not do, try Caesar Nero. If this will not succeed in Greek,

"iDp jm 2 = 50; T = 20o; 1 = 6; 3=50; p=ioo; D = 6o; T = 200.

274 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
try Hebrew; and in writing Kaisar in Hebrew be sure to
leave out the Jod, which would make the sum too much
by ten." And then Salmon concludes, "We cannot infer
much from the fact that a key fits the lock if it is a lock
in which almost any key will turn."89
Then he quotes with approval the way in which Irenaeus
sums up the whole situation. Irenaeus had made at least
three guesses himself at this number. He had suggested,
evdvdag, "the Golden-haired," Xarelvog, "the Latin," and
reirav, "the Titan." All of these words will count up that
number, six hundred and sixty-six ; but there were so many
words which would do that that Irenaeus said, "It is safer,
therefore, and less hazardous to await the event of the
prophecy than to try to guess or divine the name, since
haply the same number may be found to suit many names.
For if the names which are found to contain the same
number prove to be many, which of them will be borne
by the coming one will remain a matter of inquiry."90
It may be interesting to notice in this connection that
Heumann, Herder, Volkmar, and Godet suggest that the
number six hundred and sixty-six, which in Greek letters
is £fCj consists of the usual abbreviation of the name of
Christ, xg, and then between these two letters, thrusting
them asunder, that other letter is inserted, which is a fit
symbol of the serpent in form and in sound, to represent
the power of the antichrist in its endeavor to break asunder
and scatter abroad the representatives of the Holy Name.
Godet puts it thus: "Observe, first, that in the Greek it is
written, not with the same figure three times repeated, but
with three letters of different shapes, the mutual relation
of whose values (six hundreds, six tens, six units) is not
at first sight clear. . . . Next, observe that these three
Greek letters have a peculiarity which is not reproduced in
our numerical writing." He then gives the explanation of
89 Salmon, Introduction, pp. 230, 231.
80 Against Heresies, V, 30; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. i, p. 559.

THE APOCALYPSE 275
the letters just mentioned, and adds, "Now, as the name
which John commonly gives to Satan in the Apocalypse is
the old serpent, in allusion to the story of the temptation in
Gen. 3, one is naturally disposed to see in these three let
ters, so arranged, a figurative sign of the Satanic Messian-
ism, substituted for that of the Divine Messianism, or
Christianity."91 All of which is very ingenious; but we are still of the
opinion of Irenaeus that it will be best to await the solution
of the mystery in the light of better data than we now have.
Swete, one of the latest commentators on the Apocalypse,
says, "It is possible that the Number of the Beast holds
its secret still. Although the challenge b !#6w vovv ^T^iaaTti
rbv dgtOuov has been accepted by the scholars of many gen
erations, no solution hitherto offered commands general
assent."92 Many incline to think that the number six hundred and
sixty-six was purely symbolical in the mind of John, to
represent the one who continuously fell short of perfection,
6 — 6 — 6 never becoming seven. Or, the three sixes represent
worldly glory, worldly wisdom, worldly civilization which
when joined together still fall short of divine perfection.
Such or similar views were held by Herder, Auberlen,
Hengstenberg, Maurice, Wordsworth, Vaughan, Carpenter,
and others. A symbolical interpretation would either pre
clude an individual appropriation of this number or it
would allow many such individual appropriations and thus
could be made the peculiar property of none. We have
cited these as curiosities of exegesis, nothing more. They
are samples of interpretations which might be paralleled
and multiplied on almost every page of the book. The only
safe way in studying the book of Revelation is to get one
commentator and read him and believe everything he says.

•l Biblical Studies, New Testament, pp. 388, 389.
n Swete, op. cit., p. cxxxiii.

276 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
If we read another commentator, we will find him contra
dicting the conclusions of the former, and we will be more
or less thrown into confusion; and if we read twenty com
mentators, we are likely to end by being in a state of abso
lute uncertainty about everything.
XI. Best General Attitude Toward the Book
The man who knows what everything in this book means
is the man of narrow outlook and meager information.
Adam Clarke said he could not pretend to explain this book,
for he did not understand it. John Wesley said: "How
little do we know of this deep book! At least how little
do I know. I can barely conjecture, not affirm, any one
point concerning that part of it which is yet unfilled."93
Men of the mental caliber of these giants of the faith will,
as a general rule, come to the same conclusion. Est etiam
nesciendi quccdam ars.
There are some people who do not like to come to that
conclusion. They never get over the feeling that they ought
to know all of everything. They rather resent the fact that
God does not choose to make them equi-omniscient with
himself. They complain of Bible obscurities as though in
some fashion they constituted a personal affront. They
chafe under the limitations of their finite, if not infinite,
ignorance ; and are ready to lose their temper if you suggest
that their proposed solution of any problem is not assuredly
and infallibly correct. Anyway, they prefer to worry about
dark passages rather than to walk in the light of the clear
ones. There are difficulties in the Bible which probably
will be to us forever insurmountable, problems which will
be to us insoluble, many things which we would like to know
but possibly never will be able to know with all our study
and endeavor.
When Talmage was a student he persisted in posing his
88 Journal, December 6, 1762.

THE APOCALYPSE 277
professor with questions about the great Bible mysteries;
asking things which no man could answer. One day the
professor turned upon him with this retort, "Mr. Talmage,
you will have to let God know some things you don't."
Those were wise words written in the Preface to the
Authorized Version in the Address of the Translators to
the Reader: "It hath pleased God in his divine providence
here and there to scatter words and sentences of that diffi
culty and doubtfulness, not in doctrinal points that concern
salvation (for in such it hath been vouched that the Scrip
tures are plain), but in matters of less moment, that fear-
fulness would better beseem us than confidence." We
might as well recognize that fact first as last.
There are some things in the Bible we cannot know.
Possibly there never was a more vigorous intellect wrestling
with the great problems of the Christian faith than that of
Martin Luther, the great Reformer. What does Luther
say? "If a difficulty meets thee which thou canst not solve,
so let it go." We do not like to do that. We feel like say
ing to ourselves, "Here is a difficulty, a stone wall we can
not see through or climb over. What shall we do about
it? Forsooth against it we will proceed instanter to beat
out our brains !" Luther knew better. He was great enough
to know that he could not know all things. He was humble
enough to believe that there were some mysteries he must
be content to leave unsolved. He was great enough and
wise enough to say, "So let it go." Now, if there is any
book in the Bible in the study of which it would be wise
for us to follow Luther's advice, it is this book of the
Revelation of John.
XII. Different Schools of Interpretation
Having said so much by way of preface to this sub
ject, let us glance at some of the different systems or
schools of interpretation.

278 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
i. There is the Preterist School, represented more or
less faithfully by Grotius, Hammond, Bousset, Clericus,
Wetstein, Herder, Hug, Eichhorn, Ewald, De Wette,
Liicke, Baur, Bleek, Volkmar, Diisterdieck, Reuss, Renan,
Cowles, Krenkel, Weizsacker, Weiss, Moses Stuart, Mau
rice, Davidson, Farrar, and others. This school holds that
all these prophecies refer to events which are now past,
and have been long fulfilled.
2. Then there is the Futurist School, represented by.
Ribera, De Burgh, Maitland, Benj. Newton, Todd, Isaac
Williams, W. Kelly, Hofmann, Fuller, Kliefoth, Zahn, and
others. These believe that the prophecies relate to events
which lie in the future, probably in the far future, and
which will be fulfilled only at the coming of the Lord,
usually conceived as a catastrophic parousia.
3. Then there is the Historical School, which partly
agrees with each of the schools preceding. The representa
tives of this school think that some of the prophecies have
been fulfilled, and some are to be fulfilled, and some are
being fulfilled. In the Apocalypse, that is to say, they find
a history of events extending from the beginning of the
Christian era to the end of the age. Luther, Bullinger and
many of the Reformers belonged to this school, as do also
Mede, Vitringa, Sir Isaac Newton, Whiston, Bengel, Bishop
Newton, Hengstenberg, Ebrard, Auberlen, Elliott, Faber,
Bishop Wordsworth, Dean Alford, Barnes, Bickersteth,
Birks, Gaussen, Godet, Lee, Vaughan, Benson, Boyd-Car-
penter, Milligan, Scott, Swete, and others. Among these
Weiss and Holtzmann and others have suggested sub
divisions. There is the Church-historical School, which
thinks that all these visions and apocalyptic pictures are to
be interpreted of the events of church history alone. There
is the Imperial-historical School which makes them refer
to the rise and fall of world-kingdoms, the development
and the decline of great world-powers as they successively
influence the life and growth of the church.

THE APOCALYPSE 279
XIII. Best System of Interpretation
In which of these shall we enroll ourselves? We are
tempted to say, As far as possible, in all. They each have
some good in them, and we are inclined to think that in
some things each of them may be right. However, we think
that all are wrong who limit the application of these
prophecies and the fulfillment of these apocalyptic visions
to any particular time in the past, the present, or the future,
or to any particular event or series of events in church or
world history, either in time or at the end of time.
We believe that the apostle John was more nearly a poet
and a philosopher than any other of the twelve. "Our
author is a poet," says Porter, "whether consciously or not,
since, whether taken as word-pictures or as actualities his
visions were to him, as they are to us, symbols of spiritual
realities, of Christian faith and hopes." And again : "There
was something of a poet in the apocalyptical seer. He was
seldom simply a scribe and a literalist."94 We believe that
John saw into the heart of things. He had a most ex
traordinary gift of loving intuition. He always was more
interested in the underlying principles of things than he
was in any surface facts. In the fourth Gospel we saw
how John went deeper than the synoptics into the heart
of the beginnings of Christian history and how he gave us
a spiritual interpretation^of the mysteries of the Messianic
career. In the First Epistle we found him interested in
the broad and general principles of Christian conduct and
their application to specific cases was left to the individuals
concerned. So now in the Apocalypse, upon the basis of
visions divinely granted him, he has wrought out in epic
grandeur a panorama of the great principles which have
controlled, and do control, and forever will control all
history. These principles have displayed themselves, and
do display themselves, and will display themselves in various
94 Hastings's Bible Dictionary, vol. iv, pp. 248, 265.

280 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
forms. The Preterist is right in thinking that some of
these principles have been seen in events which are past.
Some of these apocalyptic figures, great panoramic pictures
of the principles which are in continuous conflict through
all time, great dramas of spiritual victories and fiendish
defeat, have had their partial if not final fulfillment again
and again in Christian history; and what has been true
of them in the past is true of them now and will be true of
them again and again in the future days.
Dr. Vaughan, in his Lectures on the Revelation, in dis
cussing the apocalyptic language of Jesus and John, says:
"These words are wonderful in all senses, not least in this
sense that they are manifold in their accomplishment.
Wherever there is a little flock in a waste wilderness ; wher
ever there is a church in a world ; wherever there is a power
of unbelief, ungodliness, and violence, throwing itself upon
Christ's faith and Christ's people, and seeking to overbear,
and to demolish, and to destroy: whether that power be
the power of Jewish bigotry and fanaticism, as in the days
of the first disciples ; or of pagan Rome, with its idolatries
and its cruelties, as in the days of John and of the Revela
tion; or of papal Rome, with its lying wonders and its
anti-Christian assumptions, in ages later still; or of open
and rampant atheism, as in the days of the first French
Revolution; or of a subtler and more insidious infidelity,
like that which is threatening now to deceive, if it were
possible, the very elect ; wherever and whatever this power
may be — and it has had a thousand forms, and may be
destined yet to assume a thousand more — then, in each suc
cessive century, the words 'of Christ to his first disciples
adapt themselves afresh to the circumstances of his strug
gling servants; warn them of danger, exhort them to
patience, arouse them to hope, assure them of victory; tell
of a near end for the individual and for the generation;
tell also of a far end, not forever to be postponed, for
time itself and for the world; predict a destruction which

THE APOCALYPSE 281
shall befall each enemy of the truth, and predict a destruc
tion which shall befall the enemy himself whom each in
turn has represented and served; explain the meaning of
tribulation, show whence it comes, and point to its swallow
ing up in glory ; reveal the moving hand above, and disclose,
from behind the cloud which conceals it, the clear definite
purpose and the unchanging loving will. Thus understood,
each separate downfall of evil becomes a prophecy of the
next and of the last; and the partial fulfillment of our
Lord's words in the destruction of Jerusalem, or of John's
words in the downfall of idolatry and the dismemberment
of Rome, becomes itself in turn a new warrant for the
church's expectation of the Second Advent and of the day
of judgment."95
John primarily had in mind the conditions of his own
day, the conflict then waging, and the judgment then sure.
His symbols refer in the first instance to these: but they
are not exhausted in their first application. History has
fulfilled them again and again. History repeats itself in
many ways. There was a close parallel between the heathen
arrogance and antagonism of the Caesar-worship in Asia
Minor in John's day and the tyrannies and impostures and
persecutions of papal Rome in later days. The Protestants
could show good reason for their application of the Apoca
lyptic symbols to the exactions and the anti-Christian prac
tices of the priesthood and the pope.
There was a judgment day upon pagan Rome: and the
ancient world with its idolatries came to an end and a new
world freed from heathen superstitions took its place.
There was a judgment day upon papal Rome; and it was
deposed from its high seat of power and the day of its
exclusive sovereignty came to an end; and a new era of
intellectual liberty and of religious freedom dawned on
the race. There was a judgment day in France, and the
* P. 170.

282 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
heartless extravagance of the aristocratic classes at last
was called to account, and in the French Revolution that
condition of affairs in which their iniquity had flourished
came to an end and modern Democracy was born in its
funeral flames. Another judgment day is set in all Europe
now and militarism is doomed and a new social revolution
is well on its way. After the great war, in Europe and
America and in all the world the predatory rich must give
an account of their methods and the downtrodden poor
must be granted their rights: and there will be an end of
the old order of things and there will be a new earth in
which righteousness reigns.
In all these succeeding cycles of church and world his
tory the symbols of John's Apocalypse find new realization.
Their first application broadens out into greater significance
and finds completer fulfillment, and their eternal verity
becomes increasingly apparent as the centuries roll by.
John must have had some sense of this fact when he
opened his book with such a sweeping promise to those
who read it and heard it, and closed it with such a sweep
ing curse upon those who added to it or took from it any
thing at all.
Irenaeus suggested that the name of the beast might be
Aarsivog96 representing the Latin or Roman empire. This
solution of the puzzle has been adopted by Hippolytus,
Bellarmin, Eichhorn, Bleek, De Wette, Ebrard, Diister
dieck, Alford, Wordsworth, Lee, and others. Then the
Protestants went a step farther and declared that this name
of the beast might stand for the papal power or the Holy
Roman Empire as well. Luther, Vitringa, Bengel, Auber-
len, Hengstenberg, Ebrard, and others held this view.
Dean Alford agrees in giving it the double signification.
He says, "This name describes the common character of
the rulers of the former Pagan Roman Empire; and, what
t6X = 30 + 0 = 1 +t = 3oo + «= 5 + t = io + y=5o + 0 = 70 + 0-= 200=
total 666.

THE APOCALYPSE 283
Irenaeus could not foresee, unites under itself the character
of the later Papal Roman Empire also, as revived and
kept up by the agency of its false prophet, the priesthood.
The Latin Empire, the Latin Church, Latin Christianity,
have ever been its commonly current appellations : its lan
guage, civil and ecclesiastical, has ever been Latin: its
public services, in defiance of the most obvious requisite for
public worship, have ever been throughout the world con
ducted in Latin ; there is no one word which could so com
pletely describe its character, and at the same time unite
the ancient and the modern attributes of the two beasts,
as this. Short of saying absolutely that this was the word
in John's mind, I have the strongest persuasion that no
other can be found approaching so near to a complete
solution."97 It is the double solution, the proof of manifold
fulfillment in history, which leads him to this certainty of
conclusion. John's inspiration is as apparent in this as in anything
else. He was little concerned about any temporal phe
nomena. He was interested in eternal principles. He was
the great prophet of the New Testament times ; but at the
same time he was the great poet and philosopher of the
early church. His deep insight gave him great foresight;
but the foresight of the Apocalypse is not so much that of
particular events or actual things as it is an ideal unfolding
of the general principles which would be active in all future
time. This book is a book of visions; it "requires for its
interpretation some measure of idealistic power." These
men who have turned the book into a time-table and have
figured out prophetic forecasts of church and world-history
which they insist we shall accept without question as a
divine revelation, given of God through the apostle John
as interpreted by them, these are the men who have brought
this book into a disrepute it does not deserve.

97 Compare Schaff, op. tit., pp. 844, 845.

284 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
The Apocalypse is no almanac of dates. It is no chart
of consecutive events. It is a book of poetic-prophetic
revelation, of beautiful symbolism, of magnificent imagery,
of eternal principles, of divine truth. Says Weiss, "From
the religious point of view it is a kind of philosophy of
history to which Apocalyptic prophecy gives birth, though
not in the form of calm reflection, but in imaginative intui
tion."98 We believe, therefore, that the ideal commentator
upon the Apocalypse will be a deeply emotional and reli
gious philosopher, a philosopher not so shallow as to be
prosy in his style and his outlook, but profound enough to
be poetic in his insight and prophetic in his intuition. We
need a John to interpret John. From the devotional stand
point Christina Rossetti comes nearest the apostle in her
religious fervor and her poetic power.99 Robert Browning
would have made a . magnificent commentator upon the
Apocalypse. For the correct interpretation of this book we would
prescribe the following general principles : i. The scope of
the book in its primary and secondary fulfillments covers
the whole of the Christian era, from the first coming to the
last coming and the final triumph of the Lord. Its his
torical horizon, very definite and limited in John's own
day, may be an ever shifting and an ever advancing one as
the successive ages roll by ; but these two great events, the
first and second coming of the Lord, are the two limits
within which the whole action lies. 2. The book is chiefly
concerned with the setting forth of the great principles, in
view of which the church is to preserve its patience and
make persistent preparation for the ultimate triumph of
its faith. It ought to be studied as apocalypse rather than
prophecy, not for the discovery of successive future events
but for the unfolding of the principles and powers under
lying and overshadowing all events from the beginning to
98 Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii, p. 62.
99 See her devotional commentary, The Face of the Deep.

THE APOCALYPSE 285
the end. 3. The visions of this book are symbolical ; their
interpretation ought to be spiritual; the best interpreter
will combine within himself the powers of the prophet,
poet, and philosopher, the powers of abstraction, intuition,
and imagination. 4. The symbols of the book are capable
of manifold fulfillment. No single series of events will
exhaust their meaning. Having decided their primary
application, the way is open to a study of their significance
in the light of all history.
XIV. General Characteristics
The reasons for these principles of interpretation will
be more apparent, if we glance at the general characteristics
of the book.
1. First among these we notice its dependence upon the
visions and the prophecies and the phraseology of the.
Old Testament for both the subject matter and the formal
setting of its thought. We are reminded of the parallel
visions in Ezekiel when we read in the fourth chapter
of the four living creatures and the sealed book; in the
tenth chapter, of the little book to be eaten ; in 7. 3 and 9. 4,
of the sealing on the forehead of the servants of God; in
20. 8, of Gog and Magog and the armies they gather to
gether; in 11. 1 and 21. 15, of the measuring of the temple
of God and the city of gold; and in 22. 1, the river of life
with its unfailing fullness and its banks with trees filled
with foliage and fruit. The weird and wonderful visions
of Ezekielj unique in the Old Testament, reappear here in
the Apocalypse. They belong now to the church of the
new covenant as well as to the church of the old dispensa
tion. There are fully as many parallels with the book of Daniel.
Notice among others, in 1. 1, the sending of the angel; in
10. 6, the swearing of the angel; in 12. 7, Michael the
archangel; in 1. 13, the name and the description of the

286 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Son of man; in 13. 1, the beast with his many heads and
horns; in 19. 20, the lake of fire. There are forty-five
references to the book of Daniel in the Apocalypse.
Stalker thinks that the apostle John must have had the book
of Daniel with him on the island of Patmos, and that he
must have been reading and studying it on that Lord's Day
when the Spirit came upon him and these visions were
given him. We think it is just as likely that he had the
entire Old Testament : and if he did not happen to have it
in his hand that day, we know that he had it in his heart
always. There is no direct quotation of the Old Testament any
where in this book; not one! Yet the mental equipment
and the literary furnishing of the writer of the Apocalypse
evidently is based wholly upon the Old Testament. There
are reminiscences of its sayings everywhere. Dr. Terry
said, "There is scarcely a vision or symbol in the whole
book which is not to some extent modeled after something
similar in the Old Testament." Milligan, in his Lectures
on the Revelation of John, goes even farther than this, and
asserts, "It may be doubted whether it contains a single
figure not drawn from the Old Testament, or a single com
plete sentence not more or less built up of materials brought
from the same source." See, for instance, Balaam, Jezebel,
Michael, Abaddon, Jerusalem, Mount Zion, Babylon, the
Euphrates, Sodom, Egypt, Gog, and Magog. Similarly,
the tree of life, the scepter of iron, the potter's vessels,
the morning star. Heaven is described under the figure
of a tabernacle in the wilderness. The song of the redeemed
is the song of Moses. The plagues of Egypt appear in
the blood, fire, thunder, darkness, and locusts.
"The great earthquake of chapter six is taken from
Haggai; the sun becoming black as sackcloth of hair and
the moon becoming blood, from Joel; the stars of heaven
falling as a scroll, from Isaiah; the scorpions of chapter
nine, from Ezekiel ; the gathering of the vine of the earth,

THE APOCALYPSE 287
from Joel ; and the treading of the wine-press in the same
chapter, from Isaiah." So too the details of a single vision
are gathered out of different prophets or different parts of
the same prophet. For instance, the vision of the glorified
Redeemer, 1. 12-20. The golden candlesticks are from
Exodus and Zechariah ; the garment down to the foot, from
Exodus and Daniel; the golden girdle and the hairs like
wool, from Isaiah and Daniel ; the feet like burnished brass
and the voice like the sound of many waters, from Ezekiel ;
the two-edged sword, from Isaiah and Psalms; the coun
tenance like the sun, from Exodus ; the falling of the seer
as dead, from Exodus, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; the
laying of Jesus' right hand on the seer, from Daniel.
"Not, indeed, that the writer binds himself to the Old
Testament in a slavish spirit. He rather uses it with
great freedom and independence, extending, intensifying,
or transfiguring its descriptions at his pleasure. Yet the
main source of his emblems cannot be mistaken. The
sacred books of his people had been more than familiar to
him. They had penetrated his whole being. They had
lived with him as a germinating seed, capable of shooting
up not only in the old forms, but in new forms of life and
beauty. In the whole extent of sacred and religious litera
ture there is to be found nowhere else such a perfect
fusion of the revelation given to Israel with the mind of
one who would either express Israel's ideas, or give utter
ance, by means of the symbols supplied by Israel's history,
to the present and most elevated thoughts of the Christian
faith."100 John's spirit and style are saturated with the influence
of the Old Testament images and allusions, language and
thought. Diisterdieck declares that there is no other New
Testament book which is so Old Testamental in tone.101
m The above quotations and condensations from Milligan found in
Vincent's Word Studies, vol. ii, pp. 450, 451.
101 Meyer's Commentary, p. 64.

288 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
In Westcott and Hort's Appendix to the Greek New Testa
ment a table is given,102 which shows that in the four hun
dred and four verses of the Apocalypse there are about
two hundred and sixty-five which contain Old Testament
language and about five hundred and fifty references are
made in them to Old Testament passages.103
An examination of these references shows that in pro
portion to its length John has made more use of the book
of Daniel than of any other of the Old Testament books.
More, than half of his Old Testament references are to
the Psalms, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel. Next in frequency
of use come Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Jeremiah,
Joel, and Zechariah. He uses every book of the Law,
Judges, i and 2 Samuel, i and 2 Kings, Proverbs, the
Song of Songs, Job, all of the major prophets and seven
of the minor prophets. He evidently knew his Bible from
cover to cover. The names of God in the Apocalypse are
all Old Testament names. There is no "Abba, Father" in
this book: but "the Lord God Almighty" and "the Lord
God of the holy prophets." There is a sense in which the
Apocalypse is not an original production. It is made up
of visions and teachings of an earlier date.
2. We notice as a second characteristic of the Apocalypse,
the unity and symmetry, the beauty and power of its
composition. Weiss speaks of "its fullness of dramatic
life" and "wealth of poetic imagery."104 Jiilicher mentions
the "erhabenen Ausdruck," the elevated expression, and
"das Grossartige," the great and grand in this half prophetic
and half poetic literature.105 Donald Fraser says: "The
book is most carefully constructed, curiously wrought,
nicely arranged, and skillfully balanced. ... It has a per-

108 Pp. 184-188.
108 Hastings's Bible Dictionary, vol. iv, p. 254. Compare Swete,
p. cxxxv. 104 Introduction to the New Testament, p. 64.
108 EinUitung, p. 162.

THE APOCALYPSE 289
feet internal order and, if one may use such an expression,
artistic symmetry. . . . Only the most careless reader can
suppose the book to be tangled or confused. It is a master
piece of construction, fitted and bound together by wisdom
from above."106 Milligan declares, "No book probably
ever proceeded from the pen of man all the parts of which
were so closely interlaced with one another." Holtzmann
affirms, "Its inner unity is the foundation of all more
recent work on the Apocalypse."
However, many attempts have been made in the last
half-century to prove that this book is a compilation from
different written sources or a revision by a Christian hand
of a Jewish Apocalypse, or several Jewish Apocalypses, of
an earlier date. Many combinations of previous sources have
been suggested, but a half century of such effort has made
it clear that the critics can come to no agreement among
themselves at this point. No man has been able to furnish
convincing proof that his analysis of the contents of the
Apocalypse into its component sources or elements is a
self-evidencing or a legitimate one. Vogel, Volter, Vischer,
Weyland, Weizsacker, Spitta, Simcox, Briggs, and others
have proposed elaborate schemes of dismemberment; but
the general feeling at present seems to be one of reaction
against such treatment, together with a growing sense of
the literary beauty and unity of composition in the book.
These are recognized by Weizsacker, Sabatier, Julicher,
Gunkel, Bousset, Scott, Moffatt, and others, even while
most of these feel sure that John has incorporated in his
book certain portions of previous works. We agree with
E. A. Abbott, who concludes, "Its peculiarities stamp the
whole work — barring a few phrases — as not only conceived
by one mind but also written by one hand,"107 and with
Moffatt, who declares, "The Apocalypse is neither a liter-

108 Lectures on the Bible, vol. ii, pp. 327, 322.
107 Diatessarica, 2942.

290 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
ary conglomerate nor a mechanical compilation of earlier
shreds and patches. There is sufficient evidence of homo
geneity in style and uniformity in treatment to indicate that
one mind has been at the shaping of its oracles in their
extant guise."108 This seems to be a rather grudging ad
mission, but an admission forced by the facts.
The literary unity of the Apocalypse is a most surprising
fact, when we stop to think of it. We already have seen
that the constituent materials of the book are drawn largely
from various sources in the Old Testament. Surely, great
genius was required to weld these various ingredients to
gether into such literary symmetry and into a single product
of such poetic and artistic power. This is the highest proof
of originality, not the invention of absolutely new and un
heard of things, but the transfiguration of old materials into
higher potencies and more abundant life than they had
known before. That was the originality of Shakespeare,
touching up and working over the plays he found on the
boards in his day. The plots were old, the characters had
beai seen before; but they were given new and immortal
life at his touch. That was the originality of Christ, ful
filling every jot and tittle of the old law, but filling every
letter of it full of new spirit and life. That was the origi
nality of the apostle John in the composition of the Apoca
lypse. These characteristics we have mentioned seem very puz
zling and inconsistent to many people. This literary finish
of the Apocalypse seems to be the product of the study
or the cloister and hardly to be expected in an honest record
of the revelations made to an ecstatic spirit, hardly such as
would be written down by a rapt seer as he was borne on
from vision to vision of things beyond the veil. Then if
these are in reality revelations divinely given,, why should
they be so dependent for framework and phraseology upon

108 Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. v, p. 291.

THE APOCALYPSE 291
the Old Testament? Could not angelic messengers reveal
something new ? Could not God be absolutely original ?
The answer to these questions is clear enough. God is
unconditioned as to the subject matter or the manner of
his revelation ; but when he desires to make a revelation to
man that revelation always is conditioned by the human
personality. An apocalyptic vision is a psychological
phenomenon; it is conditioned by the laws of the mind. A
revelation to John can come to John only through the con
ceptions possible to him, the ideas of his age and race, the
thought-materials found in his brain. As our dreams are
made up of combinations of conceptions furnished us in
our waking hours, and, however weird and unusual they
may be in combination, every material constituent of them
can be traced back to something which we have seen or
heard or known before; so in the divinely granted visions
of prophecy and apocalypse, by natural means as far as the
human personality is concerned, following the laws of the
mind, the man, still human and never for a moment lifted
out of the laws of his human being, is given to know new
truth through images already familiar, by methods which
his training and environment make possible, in conceptions
necessarily conditioned by his individuality.
Then we may look for the constituent elements of these
apocalyptical visions in anything John has read or seen,
anything which has come into his own previous experience.
( 1 ) Take those visions of 14. 14-20 for example : "On the
cloud I saw one sitting like unto a son of man" (14. 14).
Had not John heard the Master's saying, "Henceforth ye
shall see the Son of man . . . coming in the clouds of
heaven" (Matt. 26. 64) ? Does the Lord wait for the
angel's message before he begins to reap (14. 15) ? Had
not John heard his Master say, "Of that day [when the
harvest of the earth is ripe] knoweth no man, . . . neither
the Son, but the Father" (Mark 13. 32) ? Does the angel
send forth his sharp sickle to gather the clusters of the

292 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
vine of the earth (14. 18) ? Had not John heard the Mas
ter say, "The reapers are angels" (Matt. 13. 39) ? Here
are reminiscences of the Master's sayings at -every turn.
The whole figure of the vine of the earth may have been
suggested by the Lord's discourse concerning the vine and
its branches (John 15), but it is more likely that Isaiah's
great parable-prophecy concerning the vineyard of the Lord
of hosts (Isa. 5) was the source of this imagery.
When we come to the twentieth verse, however, we meet
details for which we have no parallel in the sayings of
Jesus or in the Old Testament. Where did John get this
conception of blood rising to the bridles of the horses?
(2) We are inclined to think he had read the book of
Enoch, for there we find the picture, "The fathers will
be smitten with their sons in one place . . . until it streams
with their blood like a river . . . and the horses will walk
up to the breast in the blood of sinners, and the chariot
will be submerged to its height" (1. 3). It looks as if
Jesus and Isaiah and Enoch all had had a share in furnish
ing John with the elements of this vision.
(3) Dean Stanley is sure that the natural scenery at
Patmos has had its influence upon the Apocalypse. He
says: "The Discourses of the Gospels and the Epistles of
Paul are raised, for the most part, too far above the local
circumstances of their time, to allow of more than a very
slight contact with the surrounding scenery. It is only
when the teaching assumes a more directly poetic or pic
torial form, as in the parables of the Gospels, or the Athe
nian speech of Paul, that the adjacent imagery can be ex
pected to bear its part. But this is precisely what we might
expect to find in the Apocalypse. The 'Revelation' is of
the same nature as the prophetic visions and lyrical psalms
of the Old Testament, where the mountains, valleys, trees,
storms, earthquakes of Palestine occupy the foreground
of the picture, of which the horizon extends to the unseen
world and the remote future.

THE APOCALYPSE 293
"For this reason I had always eagerly desired to visit
the island of Patmos. I was not disappointed. The stern
rugged barrenness of its broken promontories . . . and the
view from its summit, with the general character of its
scenery, enter into the figures of the vision itself.
"John stood on the heights of Patmos in the center of
a world of his own. . . . The view from the topmost peak,
or, indeed, from any lofty elevation in the island, unfolds
an unusual sweep, such as well became the 'Apocalypse,'
the 'unveiling' of the future to the eyes of the solitary seer.
It was 'a great and high mountain' (21. 10), whence he
could see things to come. Above, there was always the
broad heaven of a Grecian sky; sometimes bright, with
its 'white cloud' (14. 14), sometimes torn with 'lightnings
and thunderings,' and darkened by 'great hail' (4. 3 ; 8. 7 ;
11. 19; 16. 21), or cheered with 'a rainbow like unto an
emerald.' . . . Around him stood the mountains and the
islands of the Archipelago — 'every mountain and island
shall be moved out of their places' (6. 14) ; 'every island
fled away, and the mountains were not found' (12. 3, 9;
16. 20).
"At his feet lay Patmos itself like a huge serpent, its
rocks contorted into the most fantastic and grotesque forms,
which may well have suggested the 'beasts' with many
heads and monstrous figures (13. 1, 21; 17. 3), the 'huge
dragon,' struggling for victory — a connection as obvious
as that which has often been recognized between the strange
shapes on the Assyrian monuments and the prophetic sym
bols in the visions of Ezekiel and Daniel. When he stood
'on the sand of the sea' (13. 1), the sandy beach at the
foot of the hill, he would see these strange shapes 'rise out
of the sea' (13. 1), which rolled before him.
"(4) When he looked around, above, or below, 'the sea'
would always occupy the foremost place. He saw 'the things
that are in the heavens and in the earth and in the sea' (5.
13 ; 10. 6 ; 14. 7) . The angel was 'not to hurt the earth or the

294 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
sea' (7. 1-3), nor 'to blow on the earth or on the sea.' 'A
great mountain,' like that of the volcanic Thera, 'as it were
burning with fire,' was to be 'cast into the sea' (8. 8). The
angel was to stand with his right foot upon the sea, and
his left foot on the earth' (10. 2, 5, 8) ; 'the vial was to be
poured out upon the sea' (16. 3) ; 'the millstone was cast
into the sea' (18. 21) ; 'the sea was to give up the dead
which were in it' (20. 13) ; and the time would come when
this wall of his imprisonment, which girdled round the deso
late island, should have ceased ; 'there shall be no more sea'
(21. i)."109
(5) A more recent writer has developed the volcanic
theory suggested by Stanley in considerable detail.110 He
thinks that the tales told John of the eruption of the island
volcano, Santorin, explain the pictures of Rev. 6. 12-17;
8. 7-12; 9. i, 17, 18; 16. 2-7, 17-21. "Nothing could be
more like the pit of the abyss than the crater of this volcano,
and nothing better fitted to suggest demonic agency than
the smoke darkening sun and air, the sulphurous vapors
which killed the fish in the sea, and blinded and even killed
men, the masses of molten rock cast up and falling into
the sea like a great mountain or the star Wormwood, the
reddening of the sea, the rise and the disappearance of
islands."111 (6) Farrar thinks that the markets of Ephesus, "glitter
ing with the produce of the world's art, and the Vanity Fair
of Asia, furnished to the exile of Patmos the local coloring
of those pages of the Apocalypse in which he speaks of
'the merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones,
and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and
scarlet, and all thyine wood, and all manner vessels of
ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and
of brass, and iron, and marble, and cinnamon, and odors,
109 Sermons in the East, pp. 268-270.
uo J. T. Bent, Nineteenth Century, pp. 813-821, 1888.
m Hastings's Bible Dictionary, vol. iv, p. 260.

s

THE APOCALYPSE 295
and ointment, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and
fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses,
and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men' (18. 12, 13). "112
All of this may be possible. The visions of the Apoca
lypse may owe something to the sights in the city of
Ephesus, the volcanoes and earthquakes of Asia Minor and
the Archipelago, the appearance of the ^Egean Sea, and
the scenery at the island of Patmos. They may owe some
thing to what John had read in previous Apocalypses or
(7) in other books, such as Tobit and the Psalms of Solo
mon. Moffatt says, "There are also elements akin to
Zoroastrian, Babylonian, Greek, and Egyptian eschatology
and cosmology not altogether derived indirectly from the
apocalyptical channels of the later Judaism."113 They may
contain reminiscences of the sayings of the Master. Yet
the chief source of the inspiration of the Apocalypse is still
to be found (8) in the books of the Old Testament. Its
language is so palpably dependent upon the Old Testament
books, because it is a revelation given John, whose daily
diet from his earliest youth had been these same Scriptures
of God. If this revelation had been given to Plato, the
images and allusions in it would have been Greek. Given
to John, it is Hebrew in spirit and its formulation is in the
phrases and images of the sacred books of the Hebrew race.
As many of the prophecies of the Old Testament doubt
less were written months or years after their first oral pro
duction and delivery, these visions of the Apocalypse doubt
less were arranged in symmetrical order and given their
careful literary finish in the leisure of exile or official retire
ment; and they are not the product of the moment of
ecstasy and revelation, but the matured memory of these
put into writing after they had been meditated upon until
their meaning had become comparatively clear. Jiilicher
says, "Ein in der Studirstube gefertigtes Kunstproduct ist
«* Life and Works of Paul, p. 355.
118 Moffatt, Introduction, p. 493.

296 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
auch diese Apokalypse," This Apocalypse is a product of
art, polished in the study of the seer.114 Moffatt agrees,
"The material to be interpreted includes the reflective work
ing of the prophet's mind upon a previous mental condition,
the literary presentment (with some expansions, rearrange
ment and embellishment) of what he remembers to have
seen in the exalted moments of rapture, together with the
impressions produced by these upon his later conscious
ness."115 The wonder of it all is that John has succeeded
in putting his own stamp upon materials so variously com
piled. His work is a unit and it has the stamp of genius
throughout. 3. Having noticed its literary finish and dependence, we
come to a third characteristic of the Apocalypse, a charac
teristic which it shares with the book of Daniel and other
apocalyptical portions of the Old Testament. From begin
ning to end this book is filled with religious symbolism.
(1) First, there is the symbolism of numbers. Seven is
the sacred number among the Hebrews. We remember
how often this number recurs in the Old Testament: the
Sabbath on the seventh day, circumcision after seven days,
Hannah's praise that the barren had borne seven (1 Sam.
2. 5), the blood sprinkled seven times before the veil of
the sanctuary (Lev. 4. 6, 17), the seven days of consecra
tion (Lev. 8. 33), purification on the seventh day (Num.
19. 12), the prophecy that enemies shall flee in seven ways
(Deut. 28. 7), the punishment of seven times more plagues
(Lev. 26. 21, 24, 28), the promise of sevenfold vengeance
(Gen. 4. 15), the seven years of plenty and the seven years
of famine in Egypt (Gen. 41. 53, 54), the Nile smitten
for seven days (Exod. 7. 25), Jericho compassed seven
days and on the seventh day seven times, and the walls
falling at the signal of the seven priests blowing upon the

114 Einleitung, p. 168.
m Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. v, p. 300.

THE APOCALYPSE 297
seven trumpets (Josh. 6. 3, 4), Naaman dipping in the
Jordan seven times (2 Kings 5. 10). The whole system of
Jewish feasts, the Passover, the Feast of Weeks, the Feast
of Tabernacles, the Sabbath-year, the year of Jubilee, was
built up on the number seven and its multiples.
This sacred number is carried over into the New Testa
ment where we find in the Sermon on the Mount the seven
beatitudes, and the seven petitions of the Lord's Prayer,
the seven successive parables of the Kingdom in Matt. 13,
the seven words from the cross, the seven deacons in Jeru
salem, the seven gifts of grace (Rom. 12. 6-8), the seven
characteristics of wisdom (James 3. 17). But it is in the
Apocalypse that the symbolic use of the number seven be
comes most apparent. It underlies the whole construction
of the book.
There are seven clear divisions in the Introduction of the
first chapter ; the Inscription, 1-3 ; the Address, 4-6 ; the
Parousia, 7; the Attestator, 8; the conditions of composi
tion, Author, Time, and Place, 9; the Vision, 10-16; the
Voice or the Command, 17-20. There are seven descriptive
statements touching the Christophany ; concerning the
clothing, girdle, head, hair, eyes, feet, and voice. Also,
there are seven different sayings of the Living One him
self. Seven characteristics of the scourging locusts are
mentioned. We are sure that there is a sevenfold division
of the book as a whole. Weiss finds that there are seven
distinct visions in the body of the book. There are seven
beatitudes in the Apocalypse: 1. 3; 14. 13; 19. 9; 20. 6;
22. 7, 14.
There are the seven churches, the seven seals, the seven
trumpets, the seven vials, the seven Spirits, the seven stars,
the seven candlesticks, the seven lamps of fire, the seven
horns and seven eyes of the Lamb, the seven heads of
the dragon and the seven heads of the beast, the seven
diadems, the seven names of blasphemy, the seven plagues,
the seven angels, the seven thunders, the seven hills of

298 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
mystic Babylon, the seven kings, the seven thousand men.
The number seven occurs fifty-four times in the book.
We are told that the number seven is the sacred number,
the perfect number, the number of completeness or rest;
and that it represents the Divine or the perfectly complete.
Milligan says, "It is the number of unity in diversity, of
unity in that manifoldness of operation which alone entitles
it to the name of unity."116 Upon this basis he goes on
to declare that "the seven Spirits of God are his one Spirit ;
the seven churches, his one church; the seven horns and
the seven eyes of the Lamb, his one powerful might and
his one penetrating glance. In like manner the seven Seals,
the seven Trumpets, and the seven Bowls embody the
thought qf many judgments which are yet in reality one."117
This number seven sometimes breaks up into three and
four or four and three. In the seven epistles, in the first
three the exhortation, "He that hath an ear, let him hear
what the Spirit saith to the churches," comes in the middle
of the letter, and in the last four it comes at the very close.
The first three are closer to the Divine; and the last four
are closer to the world. In the first four seals, a rider
appears when each seal is broken; in the breaking of the
last three no rider appears and the vision passes from the
visible into the spiritual world. There are seven seals, and
after the breaking of each of the first four the seer is sum
moned to come near, but in the last three this summons
fails. The seven trumpets are distinguished in the same
two groups, and the last three are expressly called Woes.
The first four affect nature, and the last three affect men.
The seven bowls fall into the same divisions; the plagues
of the first three are received in silence, while after the
pouring forth of the last four there are voices and blas
phemies and unclean spirits from the mouths of God's foes.
We read that the broken seven, three and one half, is
118 Expositor's Bible, p. 28.
m Op. tit., p. 136.

THE APOCALYPSE 299
the symbol of the confusion and trouble of the last age;
and that the number of the beast, six hundred and sixty-six,
is the symbol of protracted labor, never reaching rest.
The number four is the cosmic number, the number of
the world and of creation, represented in the Apocalypse
by the four living creatures of 4. 6, and the four angels
and four winds of 7. 1, the four angels of death in 9. 15,
and the four-square cube of the New Jerusalem.
The number three occurs in the trinitarian greeting of
1. 4, the three woes of 11. 14, the three angels of 14. 6, the
three unclean spirits of 16. 13, the three divisions of the
great city, 16. 19, and the three portals in each wall of the
heavenly city.
Ten with its multiples is the symbol of abundance. It
equals 1 +2 —(-3 +4, and is found in the ten days of tribula
tion (2. 10), the ten horns of the dragon and of the beast
(13. 1 and 17. 3) ; and the millennium (20. 4).
Twelve with its multiples is the number of the church,
and we find it recurring in the twelve stars in the woman's
crown (12. 1), the twelve apostles, the twelve foundations,
the twelve gates of the New Jerusalem, the names of the
twelve tribes upon these gates and the twelve angels to
guard them (chapter 21), the twelve manner of fruits on
the tree of life (22. 2), the twenty-four elders (4. 4), and
the one hundred and forty- four thousand of those who
were sealed, twelve thousand for each of the twelve tribes
of Israel (7. 1). Each side of the heavenly city is twelve
thousand furlongs in length, and its wall is one hundred
and forty- four cubits high.
This symbolism in the use of numbers is so plain that
it cannot be denied; and the moment it is recognized all
attempts to figure out any definite dates for the end of the
world or the millennium or the great tribulation or the
second coming of the Lord become at once both useless
and absurd. The Apocalypse never was intended to serve
as an Adventist's almanac. Its figures are symbolic, and

30O JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
do not represent any definite dimensions of space or any
definite periods of time. They are to be interpreted as
ideas, and are not to be disposed of by a school-boy's
arithmetic. The thousand years of the millennium "express no
period of time. They are not a figure for the whole Chris
tian era, now extending to more than nineteen hundred
years. Nor do they denote a certain space of time, longer
or shorter, it may be, than the definite number of years
spoken of, at the close of the present dispensation, and to
be in the view of some preceded, in the view of others
followed, by the second Advent of our Lord. They embody
an idea; and that idea, whether applied to the subjugation
of Satan or to the triumph of the saints, is the idea of
completeness or perfection. Satan is bound for a thousand
years; that is, he is completely bound. The saints reign
for a thousand years; that is, they are introduced into a
state of perfect and glorious victory."118
Does any one think of the new Jerusalem as a real city,
fifteen hundred English miles long and fifteen hundred
miles wide, and fifteen hundred miles high? John says,
"The length and the breadth and the height thereof are
equal, twelve thousand furlongs each."119 Some of
the commentators have tried to picture it as a city built
about a mountain with a base of these dimensions and
the tiers of streets and houses rising to that height on
the mountain sides; but that is not John's picture. He
makes the city a perfect cube; for the holy place in the
temple at Jerusalem was a perfect cube and it was the place
of the immediate manifestation of God. Every part of
the heavenly city would be equally filled with the revealed
presence of the Most High. It was to be a holy place
throughout. The cube symbolized that, and its size sug
gested that the holy city would be one of almost incredibly
n» Milligan, op. tit., p. 337.
"•21. 16.

THE APOCALYPSE 301
ample proportions, from which no one need be excluded
for lack of room.
Does anyone think that a real city seven million feet in
height would have a wall about it only two hundred and
sixteen feet high?120 Such a wall would be utterly in
significant in comparison with such a city. These are only
symbols ; and if a wall about a city was a symbol of defense
there was no need of even the most insignificant wall about
this city. God was its sure defense: and all its enemies
had been overcome. Were its gates open all the day
and was there no night there?121 The open gates were
the symbol of perfect security and peace. All danger was
at an end: all darkness had passed away for evermore.
Does any one think that the number which John heard
of the cavalry which served the four angels loosed at the
Euphrates is to be taken literally ? They were two hundred
million in number, twice ten thousand times ten thou
sand.122 The number symbolizing abundance was multi
plied by itself until the sum had reached an inconceivable
total. Is any one disposed to believe that when the great
winepress of the wrath of God is trodden without the
city there will flow from it a literal river of blood so deep
that it will reach to the bridles of the horses and so long
that it will extend to two hundred miles? The picture is
that of immeasurable destruction, a punishment thorough
and complete.
Does any one think that in the new heaven and the new
earth there will be no ocean and no salt sea, because John
says, "The first heaven and the first earth are passed away ;
and the sea is no more"?123 We would sympathize with
the wail of Kipling's mariners, if that were true. To
John the sea was a symbol of unrest, of storm and ship
wreck, and of separation. He looked away across the
troubled waves which lashed his island of exile, and
»>2i. 17. mRev. 9. 16.
13121.25. M*2I. 1.

302 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
dreamed of the good time coming when no such barrier
would keep the saints of God from the enjoyment of com
munion with each other. In the new heaven and the new
earth there would be no shipwrecks and there would be
union and communion and perfect peace.
Where do the waters of the river of life flow, if not
into the sea ? How could the renewed earth maintain itself
without the gracious ministries of the sea? Do not the
heavenly victors with their harps of gold stand by the
crystal sea, as they sing the song of Moses and the
Lamb ?124 The sea is a symbol to John, now of the spiritual
barrenness of the heathen world,125 and now of the separat
ing barrier between brethren beloved,126 and now again of
the resplendent glories of heaven.127
He had stood upon some cliff at Patmos and heard
the roar of the breakers as they shattered themselves upon
the rocks; and in his visions he had been reminded of it,
for the voice of his risen Lord reverberated through all
the chambers of his soul even as that sea music had, and
he wrote that his voice was as the voice of many waters.128
He had stood upon the sandy shore and looked off toward
the setting sun, until the reflected glories had dazzled his
eyes and the quiet expanse of waters had burned as with red
flame to their translucent depths ; and when he came to see
the throne of God there stretched between him and it that
same sea as of glass, clear as crystal, and mingled with
fire.129 The sea is a symbol of sorrow and sin: and as
such the time is coming when it shall be no more. The
sea is a symbol of divine majesty and of the unspeakable
glories of heaven; and as such it has an abiding place in
John's visions of the future world.
(2) This symbolism in the Apocalypse is equally appar
ent in the use made of colors. White is the color of purity
m 15- 2. >» 15. 2.
m 13- 1. M 1. 15.
"•21. 1. m4. 6; 15.2.

THE APOCALYPSE 303
in the white garments of the redeemed; of righteousness
as well as purity in the white throne; of righteousness,
purity, and victory in the white horse of the Conqueror
near the end of the book. Red is the symbol of bloodshed ;
purple, of imperial power ; black, of mourning and distress ;
paleness, of fear.
(3) There are symbolic creatures all through the book.
The living creatures of the fourth chapter symbolize the
redeemed creation. The Lamb is the symbol of the Suf
ferer for the sins of the world. Frogs represent unclean
spirits. Locusts are the symbols of all things which waste
and destroy. The wild beast is incarnated cruelty, an
apotheosis of diabolical power.
(4) There are symbolic acts, such as the sealing and
the unsealing, the blowing of trumpets, and the pressing
out of the wine.
(5) "All that is brilliant in nature — the glitter of the
sun or of gold, the luster of precious stones or of pearls —
becomes an emblem of the divine glory; all that is terrible
in nature — lightning and thunder, the roar of the tempest
and the whirlwind, hail and earthquake — emblems of divine
justice."130 "The horns are symbolical of power, the eyes
of omniscience, the diadem of supremacy, garlands and
palms of victory, incense of prayer."
XV. Salient Features of Its Teaching
The Apocalypse, then, is a book full of poetic imagery
and symbolism. We have said that it was at the same
time a book of profound philosophy and full of religious
truth. Let us glance at some of the salient features of
its teaching.
1. First of all it is a revelation of heavenly powers.
What would we know of heaven without this book? The
best way to realize the value of a book is to think how
m Weiss, p. 65.

304 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
much we would lose if we were deprived of it. We would
have some gleams of light from beyond the veil without
the Apocalypse, but our conceptions of the heavenly happi
ness and home would be very misty indeed. Our knowledge
of the life after this is meager enough as it is, but without
the Apocalypse it would be much more meager than now.
Heaven would have seemed far removed without the revela
tion of this book. Now we know that heaven is very near
to earth; and the gates of heaven are open; and the eternal
interests of heaven and earth are seen to be one.
The inhabitants of heaven are supremely interested in the
fortunes and fate of the citizens of earth. They have one
book to study, a book sealed with seven seals, and each seal
represents a stage of development in the advancing history
of the redemption of earth. Heavenly powers pass to and
fro between earth and heaven. Spiritual agencies are
active in shaping the course of things and determining the
final outcome of events. With the revelation of this book
the eye of faith can see the whole earth filled with horses
and chariots of fire, like the mountain there at Dothan;
and, like Elisha, the believing soul always can say, "They
that are with us are more than they that are with them."131
We need the inspiration of this revelation; for the powers
of evil assuredly are at hand. It is a comfort to know
that the powers of heaven are here too; and in our hour
of greatest need they are pledged to intervene in our behalf.
Luther did not much like the Apocalypse: but even he
acknowledges this good in it. He said, "We need not doubt
that Christ is near and with us, even if matters go hardest ;
as we see in this book that through and above all plagues,
beasts, evil angels, Christ is still near and with his saints,
and at last overthrows them."
2. In the second place, this book is the clearest revelation
in the Bible of the essence of evil, the powers of evil, and

1)1 2 Kings 6.TI6.

THE APOCALYPSE 305
the final judgment of the devil and sin. Bishop Warren
has told us, "Anyone who needs to realize that sin is a
horrible, ghastly, hideous, and unnamable thing, that has
taxed and will tax the highest energies of the universe to
manage and control it, will find his needed aid in this
book."132 Here is "the wrath of God and the Lamb against
it. . . . Our age has weakened on the vivid idea of the
Judgment. Here is the tonic. . . . See the plagues, noi
some and grievous sores, rivers of blood, men scorched
with fire, gnawing their tongues with pain as they blas
pheme God. . . . Perdition and damnation welter over
these pages, for sin is and always must be accursed."183
It is a characteristic of the apostle John's style that he
always arranges his matter into antithetic parallelism. Over
against the hosts of heaven he has put the powers of hell
in this book. Over against the adorable and Divine Trinity
he has placed the "Triad of Anti-Christianity," as it has
been called, the blasphemous Trinity of the pit. He gives
us the two sides of the picture: heaven and the abyss, the
heavenly city and the harlot city, the armies of the saints
and the armies of the idolaters, Michael and the dragon,
the Spirit of truth and the spirit who deceives, the Lamb
and the wild beast, the Father of lights and the father of
lies. 3. We scarcely need to say, in the third place, that the
Apocalypse is a picture of ceaseless conflict between these
two. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit with their
followers are on the one side; the dragon, the wild beast,
and the false prophet with their followers are on the other.
There is no truce between these hosts. It is a long and
desperate struggle which John sees in the visions of this
book, a struggle which he pictures in war and desolation,
famine and pestilence, tempest and earthquake. John is
a Boanerges here. It is the Son of Thunder who indites
188 Ihff School Studies, p. 38.
m Idem., p. 37.

306 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
these magnificent revelations. De Wette said that it was
the Old Testament spirit of wrath and punishment which
filled the book. We think rather that it is an appreciation
of the eternal truth that there can be no peace nor com
promise in earth or heaven, in time or in eternity, between
righteousness and unrighteousness, light and darkness,
Christ and Belial. The noun "war" occurs in the Apoca
lypse nine times and in the rest of the New Testament only
seven times. The verb "to war" occurs in this book six
times; and in the rest of the New Testament only once.134
4. We want to say next that the conflict of this book
ends in glorious victory for the right and the good. Milton
describes the book as "the majestic image of a high and
stately tragedy, shutting up and mingling her solemn scenes
and acts with a sevenfold chorus of hallelujahs and harp
ing symphonies." Dean Farrar has written: "It is a book
of war, but the war ends in triumph and peace. It is a book
of thunder, but the thunder dies away into liturgies and
psalms." The Lamb in this book is a Conqueror. The
followers of the Lamb at last are Overcomers. The word
is characteristic of John's usage. It is found once in the
Gospel, six times in the First Epistle, and sixteen times in
the Apocalypse, and elsewhere in the New Testament only
three times.135 The promises of this book are made to
Overcomers alone; the realization of the promises is enjoyed
only by these.136 The struggle of earth is followed by
triumph in heaven. Christ is the Great Overcomer. The
redeemed are soldiers, fighters, Overcomers too. They
have faced the foe, borne the toil, endured the pain, and
conquered in the glorious war. Here all the armies shine
in robes of victory through the skies. "The panorama of
each individual that overcometh and of the church as a
whole, is sketched in advance. And the last picture is of
m James 4. 2.
185 Luke 11. 22; Rom. 3. 4; 12. 21.
138 2. 7; 2. 11; 2. 17; 2. 26; 3. 5; 3. 12; 3. 21; 21. 7; 12. 11.

THE APOCALYPSE 307
complete, splendid, unthinkably glorious and eternal vic
tory."1*7 5. Shall we add that this book teaches very definitely
that this final triumph is made possible only through the
shed blood of the Lamb? The doctrine of redemption by
blood does not seem to have been revolting to John. Saints
sing of it. Angels speak of it. Redemption, cleansing,
victory is all through the blood.
XVI. How to Read the Apocalypse
Now let us recall what was promised there in 1. 3,
"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words
of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written there
in." Let us read this book, as Dr. Alexander said he read
it, for the promised and realized blessing; though he did
not pretend to understand it. I am no professional astron
omer. I know very little indeed of the mysteries of the
heavens above me. Yet I enjoy the starlight and moon
light and sunlight just as surely as if I understood all about
them. I walk beneath the stars until their light breaks in
upon my soul ; I stand beneath the silent heavens until their
peace fills my heart. I am blessed by communion with
these things on high, even though I do not comprehend
them. You remember Victor Hugo's picture of the good bishop
in his garden at night: "He was there alone with himself,
collected, tranquil, adoring, comparing the serenity of his
heart with the serenity of the skies, moved in the darkness
by the visible splendors of the constellations, and the in
visible splendor of God, opening his soul to the thoughts
which fall from the Unknown. In such moments, offering
up his heart at the hour when the flowers of night exhale
their perfume, lighted like a lamp in the center of the starry
night, expanding his soul in ecstasy in the midst of the
1* Bishop Warren, op. tit., p. 36.

308 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
universal radiance of creation, he could not himself per
haps have told what was passing in his own mind ; he felt
something depart from him, and something descend upon
him; mysterious interchanges of the depths of the soul
with the depths of the universe. He contemplated the
grandeur and the presence of God; the eternity of the
future, strange mystery; the eternity of the past, mystery
yet more strange; all the infinities deep hidden in every
direction about him; and, without essaying to comprehend
the incomprehensible, he saw it."138
It is exactly in this spirit that I would read the Apoca
lypse. Here are infinite depths, heavenly splendors, daz
zling revelations of truth; strange mysteries of eternity
future and eternity past; incomprehensible, but incom
parably blessed. The chapters of this book are like the
heaven studded with stars; in their presence I am exalted,
quieted, comforted, made a partaker in the tribulation and
kingdom and patience which are in Jesus, my Lord. This
book is a perfect arsenal of inspiration for the sturdily
striving saint. It gives no sanction to dreaminess, luke-
warmness, or inaction. One reason why it has failed of
appreciation with some people is that they were too much
at ease in Zion. Its message is to the struggling and aspir
ing soul. To the Christian warrior it gives the stimulus of
hope and the assurance of present divine aid and future
eternal victory.
The church has passed through periods of great persecu
tion, when under the stress of its fiery trial all hope
would have died, if it had not been for this book. Martyrs
could go to the stake with the book of Revelation in their
hands. Despair was impossible with the promises of the
Apocalypse. Dr. Chambers has said, "The scope of this
mysterious book is not to convince unbelievers, nor to illus
trate the divine prescience, nor to minister to men's

w Les Miserables, p. 37.

THE APOCALYPSE 309
prurient desire to peer into the future, but to edify the
disciples of Christ in every age by unfolding the nature
and character of earth's conflicts, by preparing them for
trial as not a strange thing, by consoling them with the
prospect of victory, by assuring them of God's sovereign
control over all persons and things, and by pointing them
to the ultimate issue when they shall pass through the gates
of pearl never more to go out."139
Benjamin M. Adams was one of the saints of the last
generation. We are told that when he had to preach on
Sunday morning he usually spent two hours in prayer and
in reading the book of Revelation through from beginning
to end, and in that way he read the book through nearly
twelve hundred times in the course of his ministry. He
said he wanted to see how the fight was coming out, how
the conflict was to end, before he went into the pulpit. He
said the city of the rainbows and the hallelujahs inspired
him for his pulpit work. The Apocalypse of John is full
of inspiration for such spirits as his. Our greatest need is
the need of spiritual help. The whole Bible was intended
to furnish that. No book in the Bible is richer in its supply
of spiritual inspiration and aid than is this last book in the
list. The Bible is a revelation of God. No book in the
Bible gives a clearer revelation of the God of eternity who
fights for and with his people through time and dwells with
them in heaven.
We ought not to abuse this book by forcing its immensi
ties into our finite measures. Its events are not to be
calendared by years and months and days; its imagery is
not to be reduced by mathematical calculation to any simple
sum of aeons, periods, centuries. John was in the Spirit
when these revelations were made to him. We must be in
the Spirit before the revelation can come to us. It is a
revelation to spiritual need. It is a book for devotional

189 Schaff, Apostolic Christianity, p. 831.

310 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
use. As Herder says, it has "manna for all hearts and
all ages." It is "a book of instruction and comfort for all
churches in which Christ walks." Bengel said we ought
to read it "as candidates for eternity."
We ought not to neglect it, as too many Christians in
these days do. We always will find perplexities in it.
There are some passages which will be made plain only
when we get to heaven. Yet we ought to read it for present
spiritual admonition and inspiration ; and we will find it an
inexhaustible source of spiritual blessing. We might put
that motto on the front flyleaf of our Bibles, as applicable
to the whole book, "Blessed is he that readeth, and they
that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things
that are written therein"; but let us remember that what
is true of the whole book is said explicitly and directly to
be true of this last book of the Bible. Let us believe it
true of this revelation; let us read and remember, let us
hear and keep the words of this prophecy, and we will find
them words of spiritual life.
XVII. A Fitting End of the Bible
Let us notice in closing that this book forms a fitting
end of the Bible. It was not the last book written, but it
was one of the last books to be admitted to our New Testa
ment list and it stands last in our English canon; and we
are glad to acknowledge that it is most suitable that a book
with these characteristics should occupy this place. We
suggest three reasons why the Apocalypse fitly stands in
this position in our Bible and in our New Testament.
i. We already have seen that the warp and woof of the
material form and substance of the Apocalypse is furnished
by the Old Testament Scriptures. Its images and allusions,
its framework and phrases are to be traced to the visions
and prophecies, the histories and hymns of the Hebrew
Holy Book. This fact is so evident that this book has been

THE APOCALYPSE 311
called "a rhetorical resume of previous Scripture." It is
a prophetic summary of all which has been said by holy
men of old as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. "While
the eagle mind of John soars with apparent license, his
track through the azure is found to be as carefully selected
as that of the ox lining the furrow. The sacred poet is
also the plodding student, picking his way through pre
scribed data. The rein of restraint and guidance is always
tight upon the neck of his Pegasus. He seems at every
moment conscious that he is making what mankind will
come to use as the closing book of the Sacred Canon — a
volume that must fit, in order to finish, the whole scheme
of revealed truth. So he gathers up the threads of proph
ecy, spun through various ages, and from varying minds,
and combines them all into one glowing node.
"What impressiveness does this fact give to all the words,
the warnings, the appeals, the promises, in this closing
book! John does not speak from himself alone, from his
own heart, swelling with solicitude and love for his fellow
men, from his own heaven-filled spirit ; but his human voice
commingles with the voices of holy men of all ages. When
he warns, it is with the alarum which has shaken men with
fear in all generations. When he pleads, it is with the love
of all the grand hearts that have ever loved their kind and
given their lives for love's sake. When he promises, he
brings together — as it were, melts together — the many seals
of certainty which God has set to his truth in the conscious
ness of his prophets from the beginning of the world."140
The book of Revelation represents the last residuum of
the inspiration and revelation of the whole Bible. It is the
Elisha upon whom the mantle of previous prophecy has
fallen; a double portion of the Spirit of prophecy which
is the testimony of Jesus is in it. It fitly crowns the revela
tion of the entire Scripture ; and from the topmost pinnacle

""James M. Ludlow, Homiletic Review, vol. ix, p. 214.

312 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
of outlook found in the book it unfurls its banner with the
last inscription, the final prayer and praise of the strug
gling, suffering, believing, and triumphant church, "Even
so, come, Lord Jesus." The whole continuity of Scripture
in this final revelation finds its summarization, its magnifi
cent and appropriate close.
2. The book of Revelation is not only a Ruth gleaning
through all the fields of gold belonging to the family in
heritance in the past. It is also a Ruth who goes on from
the heat and burden and privation of the former days to
the marriage supper and the rejoicing in the full possession
of the inheritance in the harvest home. It is a fitting close
to the Bible because here, as Donald Fraser has said, "At
last the patience of patriarchs and saints is rewarded; the
longings of Israel and the church are fulfilled; and the
glory of God shines unhindered on a scene of righteousness
and peace."
Canon Bernard, in his Bampton Lectures, has suggested :
"Take from the Bible the final vision of the heavenly Jeru
salem, and what will have been lost? Not merely a single
passage, a sublime description, an important revelation, but
a conclusion by which all that went before is interpreted
and justified. We should have an unfinished plan, in which
human capacities have not found their full realization, or
divine preparations their adequate result. . . . Revelation
decrees not only the individual happiness, but the corporate
perfection of man, and closes the book of its prophecy by
assuring the children of the living God that he hath pre
pared for them a city."141
This last book of prophecy In the Bible justifies and ex
plains some of the unfulfilled prophecies of the older books.
These prophecies are not null and void. They but wait
for the fullness of time. The first three chapters of Genesis
demand the last three chapters of Revelation. They are

M The Progress of Doctrine, pp. 219, 220.

THE APOCALYPSE

313

complementary to each other. The one is needed for the
justification and explanation of the other. In Genesis we
read of the creation of the heaven and the earth, and then
of the marriage of Adam and Eve, and then of the serpent
and the temptation and the fall. In the closing chapters of
Revelation we come upon the complementary events, fol
lowing each other in the reverse order. First, the old
serpent is fitly punished, for he is chained and cast into the
bottomless pit. He is rendered harmless forever; for he
never can get loose from his chains and he never will reach
the bottom of the pit. Then we read of the marriage of
the Lamb and the Bride, the second Adam and the church
redeemed by his blood. Then there is that most sublime
vision of the new heaven and the new earth, in which God
dwells with the saints and the saints dwell in eternal life
and light and love. If we had only the revelation of the
first three chapters of Genesis, we might well despair. But
with the revelation of the last three chapters of the Apoca
lypse we live in hope. The Divine Book finds here its fitting
close ; for now the divine plan is manifest in its concluded
symmetry. 3. We notice last how this book terminates. In the last
chapter and the last verse, we read, "The grace of the Lord
Jesus be with the saints. Amen."148 It is the fitting bene
diction, not for this book only but for the whole Word of
God. The last word in the Old Testament canon was that
word "curse"; "lest I come and smite the earth with a
curse."143 The New Testament closes with a sweeter
word, the word "grace." As the book forms a fitting close
to the canon of the Covenants, Old and New, so this sen
tence forms a fitting close to this book and all the books.
148 Rev. 22. 21.
143 Mai. 3. 6.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
We give an alphabetical list of a few good books on each of these
subjects, and we star some of the best of these.
I. On the Johannine Literature
Abbott, E. A. Johannine Vocabulary; Johannine Grammar.
Baldensperger, W. Der Prolog des vierten Evangeliums.
Frommann, K. Der Johanneische Lehrbegriff.
*Gloag, P. J. Introduction to the Johannine Writings.
Hilgenfeld, Adolf. Das Evangelium und die Briefe Johannis nach
ihrem Lehrbegriff.
Jones, Maurice. The New Testament in the Twentieth Century.
Karl, W. A. Johanneische Studien.
Koestlin, K. R. Der Lehrbegriff des Evangeliums und der Briefe
Johannis.
Schmiedel, P. W. The Johannine Writings.
Stevens, G. B. The Johannine Theology.
Weiss, Bernhard. Der Johanneische Lehrbegriff in seinen Grundzu-
gen untersucht. II. On Johannine Authorship
Abbot, Ezra; Peabody, A. P., and Lightfoot, J. B. The Fourth
Gospel.
Bretschneider, K. G. Probabilia de evangelii et epistolarum Joannis
Apostoli.
Burkitt, F. C. The Gospel History and its Transmission.
Delff, Hugo. Das vierte Evangelium wiederhergestellt; Neue Bei-
trage zur Kritik und Erklarung des vierten Evangeliums.
Drummond, James. An Inquiry into the Character and Authorship
of the Fourth Gospel.
Ebrard, J. H. A. . Das Evangelium Johannis und die neueste Hypo-
these uber seine Entstehung.
Evans, H. H. St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel.
Evanson, Edward. The Dissonance of the Four Generally Received
Evangelists.
Ewald, Paul. Das Hauptproblem der Evangelienfrage und der Weg
zu seiner Losung.
Grill, Julius. Untersuchungen uber die Entstehung des vierten
Evangeliums.
Holtzmann, Otto. Das Johannesevangelium.
Jackson, H. L. The Fourth Gospel and Some Recent German Criti
cism. 315

316 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Leathes, Stanley. The Witness of St. John to Christ.
Lepin. L'origine du quatrieme Evangile; La Valeur Historique du
Evangile.
Lightfoot, J. B. Biblical Essays; Essays on the Work entitled "Super
natural Religion."
Loisy, Alfred. Le Quatrieme .Evangile.
Luthardt, C. E. St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel.
Martineau, James. The Seat of Authority in Religion.
McDonald, J. M. Life and Writings of St. John.
Norton, Andrews. The Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels.
Orr, James. The Authenticity of St. John's Gospel Deduced from
Internal Evidence.
Robinson, Armitage. The Historical Character of St. John's Gospel;
The Study of the Gospels.
*Sanday, William. The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel; Authorship
and Historical Character of the Fourth Gospel.
Scott-Moncrief, C. E. St. John, Apostle, Evangelist, and Prophet.
Stanton, V. H. The Gospels as Historical Documents.
Tayler, J. J. An Attempt to Ascertain the Character of the Fourth
Gospel.
Thoma, Albrecht. Die Genesis des Johannes Evangeliums.
*Watkins, W. H. Modern Criticism Considered in its Relation to the
Fourth Gospel.
Wendt, H. H. The Gospel According to St. John.
Westcott, B. F. Introduction to the Four Gospeb.
Wrede, W. Charakter und Tendenz des Johannesevangeliums.
III. On the Fourth Gospel
Askwith, E. H. The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel.
Bacon, B. W. The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate.
Bengel, J. A. Gnomon of the New Testament.
Brooke, A. E. "The Historical Value of the Fourth Gospel," in Cam
bridge Biblical Essays.
Brown, David. Commentary on St. John.
Calvin, John. Commentarius in Evangelium eecundem Ioannem.
Chrysostom, John. Homilies on the Gospel of St. John.
Dods, Marcus. Expositor's Greek Testament.
Gardner, Percy. The Ephesian Gospel.
•Godet, Frederic. Commentary on the Gospel of St. John.
Green, A. V. The Ephesian Canonical Writings.
Heitmuller, Wilhelm. Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments.
Hengstenberg, E. W. Commentar zum Evangelium Johannes.
Holtzmann, H. J. Hand-Commentar.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 317
Johnston, J. S. The Philosophy of the Fourth Gospel.
Kreyenbuhl. Das Evangelium der Wahrheit.
Lticke, G. C. F. Commentar uber die Schriften Johannis.
Luthardt, C. E. St. John's Gospel.
Maurice, F. D. The Gospel of St. John.
McClymont, J. A. The New Century Bible.
*Moulton, W. F.; and Milligan, William. Schaff 's Popular Commentary.
Origen. Commentaru in Evangelium Joannis.
Plummer, A. Cambridge Greek Testament.
Reville, Jean. Le quatrieme evangile.
*Reynolds, H. R. The Pulpit Commentary.
Scott, E. F. The Fourth Gospel, its Purpose and Theology.
Spitta, Friedrich. Das Johannes-Evangelium als Quelle der Geschichte
Jesu.
Tholuck, A. The Gospel of John.
Warschauer, J. The Problem of the Fourth Gospel.
Weiss, Bernhard. Meyer's Commentary.
Wellhausen, J. Erweiterungen und Anderungen im vierten Evan
gelium; Das Evangelium Johannis.
*Westcott, B. F. The Speaker's Commentary.
Zahn, Theodor. Das Evangelium Johannis.
IV. On the Johannine Epistles
Alexander, William. The Speaker's Commentary; The Expositor's
Bible.
Barrett, G. S. The Devotional Commentary.
Baumgarten, Otto. Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments.
Brooke, A. E. International Critical Commentary.
Cox, Samuel. Private Letters of St. Paul and St. John.
*Findlay, G. G. Fellowship in the Life Eternal.
Haupt, Erich. The First Epistle of St. John.
Holtzmann, H. J., in Hand-Commentar.
*Law, Robert. The Tests of Life
Plummer, Alfred, in Cambridge Greek Testament.
Rothe, R. Exposition of the First Epistle of John.
Watson, Charles. The First Epistle of St. John.
Weiss, Bernhard, in Meyer's Commentary.
•Westcott, B. F. The Epistles of St. John.
V. On the Johannine Apocalypse
Benson, E. W. The Apocalypse.
Berg, H. The Drama of the Apocalypse.

318 JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS
Bleek, Friedrich. Vorlesungen uber die Apocalypse.
Bousset, Wilhelm, in Meyer's Commentary.
Brown, Charles. Heavenly Visions.
Charles, R. H. Studies in the Apocalypse.
Davidson, S. Outlines of a Commentary on Revelation.
Dean, J. T. Visions and Revelations.
Elliott, E. B. Horae Apocalypticae.
Forbes, H. P., in International Handbooks to the New Testament.
Gebhardt, Hermann. The Doctrine of the Apocalypse.
Gibson, E. C. S. The Revelation of St. John the Divine.
Gunkel, H. Schopfung und Chaos.
Holtzmann, H. J., in Hand-Commentar.
Hort, F. J. A. The Apocalypse of St. John, Chapters 1-3.
Jowett, G. T. The Apocalypse of St. John.
Laughlin, T. C. The Solecisms of the Apocalypse.
Lucke, G. C. F. Versuch einer vollstandigen Einleitung in die Offen-
barung Johannis.
•Milligan, William. The Revelation of St. John; Lectures on the
Apocalypse; Discussions on the Apocalypse; Commentary in The
Expositor's Bible.
•Moffatt, James, in The Expositor's Greek Testament.
Palmer, F. The Drama of the Apocalypse.
Porter, F. C, in Messages of the Bible.
Ramsay, A., in Westminster New Testament.
Ramsay, W. M. The Letters to the Seven Churches.
Scott, C. A., in The New Century Bible.
Scott, J. J. The Apocalypse.
Selwyn, E. C. The Christian Prophets and the Prophetic Apocalypse.
Simcox, W. H, in Cambridge Greek Testament.
Smith, H. A. The Divine Parable of History.
Spitta, Friedrich. Die Offenbarung des Johannes.
Strange, Cresswell. Instructions on the Revelation of St. John the
Divine.
Stuart, Moses. A Commentary on the Apocalypse.
•Swete, H. B. The Apocalypse of St. John.
Terry, M. S. Biblical Apocalyptics.
Trench, R. C. Commentary on the Epistles to the Seven Churches.
Vischer, Everhard. Die Offenbarung Johannis.
Volter, Daniel. Die Entstehung der Apocalypse; Das Problem der
Apocalypse; Die Offenbarung Johannis.
Weiss, Bernhard, in Das Neue Testament.
Weiss, Johannes. Die Offenbarung Johannis.
Wellhausen, J. Analyse der Offenbarung Johannis.

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Abraham, 117
Abruptness in style, 52, 160
Aim of Fourth Gospel, 113, 114
Alogi, 240, 241
Andrew, 23, 24, 26, 107, no, 112
Anger, righteous, 55-58
Anointing, Christian, 181, 182
Anonymity in Apocalypses, 225
Antichrist in First John, 184
Antinomianism combated, 174,
175
Apocalypses, pseudonymous, 248-
250
Apostolic Comment, Gospel of,
97-99
Aristion, 138, 139
Artistic form of Gospel, 94
Assumption of Moses, 254, 255
Atonement in First John, 186-188
Authenticity of the Apocalypse,
240, 244
Authenticity of Gospel defended,
153-155
Barnabas, Epistle of, 272
Baruch, Apocalypse of, 255, 256
Bethsaida, 26
Bible revelation, 260, 261
Boanerges spirit in John, 44-58,
160, 167, 168, 190, 235-237, 305,
306
Brevity of Gospel* 81
Central Thought, of Gospel, 114
Cerinthus, 174, 175, 240
Church calendars, 135
Clementine Homilies, 128
Concentration of action, in Gos
pel, 94, 95 , , . , . _ .
Confessions of faith, m Gospel,
107, 108
Contrasts, in John, 93, 95. i65. l66
Convictions and compromise, 51
Curiosities of exegesis, 263, 270-
275
Daniel and the Apocalypse, 285,
286, 287 319

Dependence of Apocalypse on Old
Testament, 285-288
Diatessaron of Tatian, 127, 128
Didactic purpose, in John, in,
112
Dionysius of Alexandria, 223-231,
241
Diotrephes, 215, 216
¦¦ Distinctive doctrines of Apoca
lypses, 251
Docetism combated, 174, 175
Early Christian literature, trust
worthy, 142, 143
Enoch, Book of, 252-254, 258, 292
Ephesus, 36, 72
Eschatology of Apocalypses, 251
Esdras, Fourth Book of, 256
Estimates of Gospel, 77-80, 92, 93
External evidence for John, 141-
149
Ezekiel and the Apocalypse, 285,
286, 287
Faces of flint, 47
Fellowship, conditions of, 190, 191
Form of Apocalypses, 250
Fourth Gospel, no romance, 10, n
Futurist school, 278
Georgius Hamartolus, 131-134
Greek of the Apocalypse, 230-234,
247
Heaven, in Apocalypse, 303, 304,
3°6, 307
Hebraisms in John, 108-110
Historical school, 278
Historicity of Gospel, 100-102
Holy Spirit, 90, 91
Incarnation real, 173, 174, 184-
186
Internal evidence for John, 149-
I5I
Irenasus-tradition, 143-145
James, brother of Jesus, 26
James, brother of John, 22, 23, 27,
44. 45. 49

320

JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS

John, a Boanerges, 44, 55
a seer, 66-68
and Bethsaida, 26, 27
and New Testament types
of literature, 12
and Plato, 10, n
denouncing sin, 53
disliked, 21
family not poor, 27, 28
in art, 48, 49
in the Book of Acts, 25, 26
in the Fourth Gospel, 23-25
in Galatians, 26
in the synoptic Gospels, 22,
23 • «
meanmg of name, 27
rebuked, 22
the Eagle-Evangelist, 67, 68
the theologian, 68, 69
John the Baptist, 15, 16, 25, 45,
46, 63, 82, 106, 107
John the Presbyter, 136-142
esus and John, 20, 21, 24, 25, 63-
66
Joseph, 194, 195
Judas, 53, 95, 106
Judas, not Iscariot, 24, 90
Knowledge, in First John, 180-184
Lamb, name for Jesus, 227, 228
Lazarus, 90, 95
Letters, religious, 217, 218
Lord's Prayer in John, 90
Love, in First John, 177-180
Luther, on Apocalypse, 242, 243,
262
Malchus, 90, 91
Manifold fulfillment, in Apoca
lypse, 279-283
Martyrdom of John?, 129-136
Mary Magdalene, 29, 30
Mary, mother of Tames, 30
Mary, mother of Jesus, 18, 214
Mary, wife of Clopas, 29
Material of Apocalypses, 250
Millennium, 300
Miracles, in John, 90, 107
Modesty of John, 17-20, 59-62,
137, 167, 168
Muratorian Fragment, no, 172,
205, 207, 239, 244
Mysterious revelation, 261

Nathanael, 23, 90, 95, 107
New Jerusalem, 300, 301
New material, in Gospel, 91
Nicodemus, 23, 90, 91, 96
Number of the beast, 271-275,
282, 283
Omissions, of Gospel, 80-88
Outline, of Gospel, 115
Outline by chapters and para
graphs, 116-119
Papias-tradition ?, 130-135
Paraclete, 90
Parallelism, in John, 108
Patmos scenery, in Apocalypse,
292-294, 302
Paul and Luke, 21
in contrast with John, 9, n,
12, 18, 19, 31, 32, 69-71,
72,73
Persons peculiar to John, 90
Peter and Jesus, 65
and John, 22, 23, 25, 26, 63,
65, 66, 69-71, 72, 73
and Judas, 95
and Mark, 20
beloved, 20, 21
garrulous, 16, 17
Philip, 25, 90
Philip Sidetes, 134
Philosophumena of Hippolytus,
128
Phrases characteristic of John,
229, 230
Phrases peculiar to John, 228, 229
Pilate, 91
Polemic purpose, in John, in
Preterist school, 278
Principles of interpretation, 284,
285
Purpose of Apocalypses, 250
Refrains, in John, 105, 106
Repetition, in John, 164, 165
Reticence of John, 17-20
Ritual ignored in John, 83, 86, 99,
100
Saintliness of John, 58, 59
Salome, her character, 31
her work, 17, 18, 28-30,
214
related to Mary, 28-30

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

321

Salvation from sin, 192-196
Sea, in Apocalypse, 301, 302
Secrets of Enoch, Book of, 257-
259
Sevens, in John, 107, 108, 297, 298
Sources of visions in Apocalypse,
291-295
Spirituality of Gospel, 99-102
Style of John, 92-97, 102-110,
163-166
Supplementary purpose, in John,
112, 113
Symbolism, in Apocalypse, 296-
303
Symmetry, of Gospel, 95
Theology, Johannine, 9

Thomas, 90, 131
Three Factors of Gospel, 114
Threes, in John, 106, 163, 299
Titles peculiar to John, 90, 227,
228
Tracts for Bad Times, 248
Traditions concerning John, 34-44
Tubingen or Tendency school, 125,
126, 240
Unity of Apocalypse, 288-291
Variety in Gospel, 95, 96
Victory, in First John, 196-202
Vocabulary of John, 104, 105, 165
Witnesses, in John, 107

INDEX OF TEXTS

Genesis 4- 15. 296; 39- 9, 194; 41- 53, 54,
296
Exodus 7-. 25, 296
Leviticus 4. 6, 17, 296; 8. 33, 296; 26. 21,
24, 28, 296
Numbers 19. 12, 296
Deuteronomy 28. 7, 296
Joshua 6- 3, 4, 297
1 Samuel 2. 5, 296
2 Kings 5. 10, 297; 6. 16, 304
Psalms 139. 8-10, 200
Isaiah 5. 292; 50. 7, 47
Darnel 12. 2, 167
Malachi 3- 6, 3"
Enoch 1. 3, 292
Matthew 4. 21, 22, 23; 9. 30, 56; 10. 2-4,
23; n. 25, 26, 260; n. 28, 260;
13, 297; 13- 12, 29; 13. 39, 292;
17. 21, 219; 17. 24, 25, 65; 20.
20-24, 22, 28, 35, 50, 130; 23.
13-33, 56; 26. 64, 291
Mark 1. 19, 20, 23; 1. 20, 27; 1. 43, 56;
3- 5,56;3. 16-19,23:5. 37,22;
9. 2, 22; 9. 38, 22; 10. 35-41, 22;
10. 39, 129, 130; 13. 3-5, 23;
13. 32, 269, 291; 14. 33, 22;
15. 40, 29; 15. 41, 27
Luke 5. 8-n, 23; 5. 10, 26; 5. 32, 87;
6. 14-16, 23; 8. 3, 27; 9. 49, 22,
54: 9- 52-55, 22, 54; 22. 18, 22
1. 1, 227; 1. 1-4, 169; 1. 1-3,

108; 1. 5, 108, 109; 1. 7, 107;
1. 10, 108, 109; 1. 14, 114, 227;
1. 17, 101; 1. 18, 166, 169; 1. 20,
108; 1. 29, 107, 227; 1. 38, 24;
1. 41, 107; 1. 44, 26; 1. 49, 108;
2. 13-22, 56; 2. 19, 90; 3. 3, 90;
3. 7, 260; 3. 11, 109; 3. 16, 98,
166; 3. 18, 166; 3. 36, 166, 169;
4. 10, 90; 4. 32, 90; 5. 31-39,
164; 5- 33, 107; 5- 34. 107; 5- 36,
107; 5- 37, 107; 5. 39-46, 107;
6. 34, 90; 6. 48, 107; 6. 70, 53;
7. 20, 85; 7. 37, 229; 7. 46, 107;
8. 12, 107; 8. 14, 107; 8. 20, 109;
8. 44, 53; 8. 48, 85; 8. 51, 52,
55, 229; 8. 52, 85; 9. 38, 108;
10. 7, 107; 10. 11, 107; 10. 20,
85; 10. 25, 107; 10. 28, 108;
11. 25, 107; 11. 27, 108; 13. 16,
108; 13. 25, 24; 13. 36, 90; 14. 5,
90; 14. 6, 101, 107; 14. 16, 166;
14. 23, 24, 229; 14. 27, 108;
15, 292; 15. 1, 107; 15. 20, 229;
15. 26, 107; 15. 27, 107; 16. 13,
101; 16. 14, 107; 17. 6, 229;
17. 12, 53; 17. 17, 101; 18. 15,
16, 27; 18. 37, 101, 107; 19. 25,
29; 19. 27, 28; 19. 34, 228; 19.
35, 66, 107; 20. 2, 63; 20. 4-6,
66; 20. 17, 83; 20. 28, 108;
20. 30, 31, 113, 169; 20. 31, 88;
21. 2, 23; 21. 20, 63; 21. 23, 43;
21. 24, 102, 150, 151
Acts 1. 7, 270; 1. 13, 23; 3. 1 to 4. 22,
25; 8. 14-25, 25; 12. 2, 49; 20.
28, 187
Romans "3- 4. 306; 3. 25, 187; 5. 9, 187;
12. 6-8, 297; 12. 21, 306; 16. 13,
209
2 Corinthians n. 22-31, 19
Galatians 2. 9, 26; 6. 10, 39
Ephesians I. 7, 187; 2. 13, 187; 4. 26, 55,
57; 6. 19, 264

322

INDEX OF TEXTS

323

Philippians„ 2,- 5' 57
Colossians 1. 20, 187
James 3. 17, 297; 4. 2, 306
1 Peter 1. 2, 187; 1. 18, 19, 187; 5. 1,
137, 208; 5. 13, 210
1 John 1. 1, 224, 227; 1. 1-4, 169; 1. 3,
189; 1. 5, 163, 166; 1. 6, 10, 53,
166; 1. 7, 188; 1. 7 to 2. 1, 193,
194; 1. 10, 166; 2. 1, 166, 192;
2. 1-3, 163; 2. 2, 188; 2. 4, 166;
2. 5, 194, 229; 2. 6, 184; 2. 11,
164; 2. 12-14, l6i; 2. 13, 199,
229; 2. 14, 200; 2. 15, 164; 2. 19,
161; 2. 20, 180; 2. 21, 22, 19;
2. 22, 53, 184; 2. 26, 161; 2. 27,
166; 3. 2, 183; 3. 3, 194; 3. 5,
182; 3. 6, 194; 3. 7-10, 190;
3. 8, 10, 53, 192, 196; 3. 9, 194;
3. 10, 19; 3. 14, 182; 3. 15, 53;
3. 19, 182; 3. 23, 163; 3. 24, 182;
4. 2, 186; 4. 3, 184, 186; 4. 4,
196, 200, 229; 4. 7-12, 164; 4. 9,
166; 4. 12, 169; 4. 16, 260; 5. 4,
200, 229; 5. 7-1 1, 165; 5. 11,
163; 5. 12, 166, 169; 5. 13, 169;
5. 18-20, 183, 201, 202; 5. 20,
189; 5. 21, 202
2 John 1, 137, 208; 10, 11, 53, 212^214
3 John 1, 137, 208
Jude „ 9, 254
Revelation 1. 1, 225, 266, 285; 1. 1, 2, 223;
1. 3, 225, 297, 307; 1. 1, 3, 260,
266; 1. 4, 223, 299; 1. 4-6, 232;
1. 5, 187; 1. 7, 228; 1. 9, 224,
266; 1. 13, 285; 1. 15, 302; 2. 7,
306; 2. 7, 11, 229; 2. 7, ii, 17,

29, 266; 2. 9, 235; 2. 10, 299
2. n, 306; 2. 17, 306; 2. 26, 306
3- 3, 269; 3. 5, 229, 306; 3. 6
13, 22, 266; 3. 8, 10, 229; 3. 9
235: 3- 12, 306; 3. 21, 306; 4. 3;
293; 4. 4, 299; 4. 6, 299, 302
5. 9, 188; 5. 12, 228; 5. 13, 293
6. 12-17, 294; 6. 14, 293; 6. 16
228; 6. 16, 17, 235; 7. i, 299
7. 1-3, 294; 7. 3, 285; 7. 9, 231
7. 14, 188, 228; 7. 16, 17, 236
7. 17, 228; 8. 7, 293; 8. 7-11
236; 8. 7-12, 294; 8. 8, 294
9.1, 17, 18, 294:9.4, 285:9. 15
299; 9- 16, 3°i; i°- 2, 5, 8, 294
10. 6, 285, 293; 10. 11, 225
n. 1, 285; 11. 14, 299; 11. 19
293; 12. 1, 299; 12. 3, 9, 293
12. 7, 285; 12. n, 188, 229, 306
13. 1, 286, 299, 302; 13. i-4:
235; 13. 1, 21, 293; 13. 18, 271
14. 6, 299; 14. 7, 293; 14. 13
297; 14. 14, 291, 293; 14. 15
291; 14. 18, 292; 14. 20, 292
15. 2, 302; 16. 2-7, 294; 16. 3:
294; 16. 13, 299; 16. 15, 269
16. 17-21, 294; 16. 19, 299
16. 20, 293; 16. 21, 293; 17. 3.
293, 299; 17. 5, 235; 17. 14
228; 18. 12, 13, 295; 18. 21, 294
19. 7, 230; 19. 9, 228, 297
19. 13, 227; 19. 15, 235; 19. 20.
286; 20. 2, 231; 20. 4, 238, 299
20. 6, 297; 20. 8, 285; 20. 13
294; 21, 299; 21. I, 294, 3OI
302; 21. 2, 230; 21. 3, 7, 8, 236
21. 7, 229, 306; 21. 9, 211; 21
IO, 293; 21. 15, 285; 21. 16, 300
21. 17, 301; 21. 23, 228; 21. 25,
301 ; 22. I, 285; 22. 2, 299; 22. 3
228; 22. 7, 225, 297; 22. 7, 8
224; 22. 7, 9, 229; 22. 9, 225
22. 10, 225; 22. II, 313; 22. 14
297; 22. 17, 230; 22. 18, 225
266; 22. 19, 225, 266

INDEX OF NAMES

Abbot, 127, 154, 317
Abbott, 135, 153, 244, 246, 289,
317
Adam of Saint Victor, 67
Adams, 309
Adeney, 246
^Eschylus, 94
Alexander, Bishop, 161, 170, 172,
209,319
Alexander, Dr., 307
Alexander the Great, 65
Alford, 112, 209, 246, 278, 282
Allen, 81
Andreas, 242
Amalrich, 271
Amphilochius, 242
Apollinaris, 148, 254
Apollonius, 35, 238
Arethas, 242
Arnold, 246
Askwith, 101, 318
Athanasius, 209
Auberlen, 275, 278, 282
Augusti, 171
Augustine, 34, 43, 52, 67, 93, 134,
177, 179, 217, 252, 268
Ayasalouk, 36
Bacon, 130, 135, 141, 145, 152,
153, 246, 318
Baldensperger, 317
Ballenstedt, 122
Barnes, 278
Barrett, 319
Bartlet, 246
Basil, 217
Basilides, 128, 148
Bauer, 151
Baumgarten, 319
Baur, 68, 124, 125, 127, 128, 151,
152, 170, 171, 173, 210, 246, 273,
278
Baxter, 217
Bellarmin, 271, 282
Belser, 246
Benary, 272
Benedict IX, 271
Bengel, 33, 52, 99, 162, 209, 217,
263, 270, 278, 282, 310, 318

Bent, 294
Benson, 233, 262, 278, 319
Berg, 319
Bernard, 270, 31 1
Bertholdt, 154
Beyschlag, 81, 113, 154, 246
Beza, 44, 211, 243, 271
Bickersteth, 278
Biedermann, 77
Birks, 278
Bleek, 101, 154, 162, 171, 208, 209,
246, 278, 282, 320
Boswell, 81
Bousset, 129, 246, 278, 289, 320
Boyd-Carpenter, 278
Boyle, 103
Bretschneider, 122, 123, 138, 171,
317
Briggs, 289
Brooke, 101, 318, 319
Brooks, Phillips, 81
Brown, 318, 320
Browning, 236, 284
Bruce, 253
Bruckner, 153, 209
Bugenhagen, 271
Bullinger, 243, 278
Burkitt, 130, 134, 317
Caius, 241
Caligula, 271, 273
Calovius, 271
Calvin, 34, 177, 243, 271, 318
Candhsh, 57
Carlstadt, 242
Carpenter, 275
Cassian, 40
Cerinthus, 36, 54, 112, 174, 175
Chambers, 308
Chapman, 141
Charles, 254, 257, 320
Chemnitz, 271
Chrysostom, 52, 58, 92, 176, 177,
J**}' 318
Clarke, 276
Claudius, 78
Clement of Alexandria, 35, 37, 99,
134, 145, 147, 148, 172, 206, 209,
239, 244, 252

324

INDEX OF NAMES

325

Clericus, 278
Cludius, 122
Cone 153
Comely, 246
Cowles, 273, 278
Cowper, 217
Cox, 319
Credner, 138, 175, 208, 209, 246
Crome, 123
Culross, 50, 77
Cyprian, 173, 207
Cyril of Jerusalem, 241
Dante, 236
Davidson, 125, 152, 173, 209, 240,
246, 272, 278, 320
Davison, 71, 78, 120, 135, 155
Dawson, 81
Dean, 320
De Burgh, 278
Dellf, 141, 152, 317
De Wette, 112, 124, 154, 162, 171,
!75, 209, 262, 278, 282, 306
Didymus, 254
Dionysius Bar Salibi, 127
Dionysius of Alexandria, 140, 206,
223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 229, 230,
231, 232, 241, 262
Dobschutz, 141, 153, 246
Doddridge, 217
Dods, 155, 318
Dollinger, 60
Domitian, 41, 131, 245, 246
Drummond, Henry, 81
Drummond, James, 79, 80, 88,
135, 149, 154, 317
Duncan, 52
Diisterdieck, 162, 175, 208, 209,
246, 278, 282, 287
Ebrard, 112, 138, 148, 154, 162,
171, 175, 209, 246, 278, 282, 317
Eckermann, 122
Edersheim, 81
Eichhorn, 171, 243, 246, 262, 278,
282
Elliott, 246, 278, 320
Ephraim of Edessa, 127, 207
Epiphanius, 40, 240
Erasmus, 112, 138, 243
Ernesti, 68
Eusebius, 35, 112, 113, 131, 133,
134, 138, 140, 148, 207, 224, 241,
245

Evans, 154, 317
Evanson, 121, 122, 153, 317
Ewald, no, 112, 147, 154, 210,
246, 256, 278, 317
Faber, 278
Farrar, 81, 106, 141, 160, 161, 162,
211, 246, 272, 278, 294, 306
Findlay, 319
Fisher, 154
Florinus, 144
Forbes, 246, 320
Fraser, 99, 168, 217, 288, 312
Fritzsche, 138, 272
Frommann, 317
Fuller, 278
Gardner, 153, 318
Garratt, 263
Gaussen, 278
Gebhardt, 320
Geikie, 81
Georgius Hamartolus, 131, 132,
133, 134, 136, 138, 145
Genseric, 271
Gibbon, 264
Gibson, 320
Gloag, 154, 246, 317
Godet, 72, no, 154, 246, 274, 278,
318
Green, 246, 318
Gregory the Great, 217
Gregory of Nazianzus, 207, 217,
241
Gregory of Nyssa, 217
Grill, 153, 317
Grotius, 65, 1 12, 138, 209, 278
Guericke, 209
Gunkel, 289, 32©
Hammond, 210, 278
Harnack, 126, 127, 135, 141, 142,
153, 216, 230, 246
Harris, 218
Hase, 126, 154, 246
Hauff, 123
Haupt, 162, 171, 172, 175, 198,
199, 319
Hausrath, 171, 175, 256, 272
Havet, 246
Heidegger, 160
Heitmuller, 318
Henderson, 246

326

JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS

Hengstenberg, 112, 154, 246, 263,
270, 275, 278, 282, 318
Heracleon, 148
Herder, 77, 243, 274, 275, 278, 310
Heumann, 274
Hilgenfeld, 125, 126, 128, 152, 171,
173, 188,210,246,273,317
Hippolytus, 128, 239, 241, 244, 282
Hitzig, 272
Hofmann, 171, 210, 246, 278
Holsten, 125
Holtzmann, H., 81, 106, 152, 170,
171, 175, 205, 210, 278, 289, 318,
319, 320
Holtzmann, O., 152, 317
Hopkins, 103
Hort, 246, 288, 320
Hug, 112, 171, 246, 278
Hugo, 307
Huntingford, 263
Huther, 141, 162, 171, 175, 210
Ignatius, 148
Iliad, 94
Inge, 101
Irenaeus, 34, 36, 80, 112, 133, 134,
139. 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, H8,
173, 206, 238, 244, 245, 252, 274,
275, 282, 283
Iverach, 148
Jackson, 317
Jerome, 35, 39, 40, 77, in, 130,
134, 138, 140, 173, 205, 207, 210,
217, 245, 262
Johnson, Samuel, 81
Johnston, 319
Jones, 317
Jowett, 320
"ulian, 271
Julicher, 89, 93, 129, 153, 170, 246,
269, 288, 289, 295
Justin Martyr, 127, 128, 148, 237,
245
Karl, 317
Kaufmann, 97
Keim, 81, 106, 126, 128, 141, 175
Kelly, 278
Kingsley, 49
Kipling, 301
Kliefoth, 278
Knox, 48
Kostlin, 125, 151, 317

Krenkel, 40, 272, 278
Kreyenbuhl, 153, 246, 319
Lange, 80, 112, 154, 246
Lardner, 211
Laud, 271
Laughlin, 320
Law, 169, 170, 171, 319
Leathes, 154, 318
Lee, 246, 278, 282
Leonardo da Vinci, 49
Lepin, 318
Liddon, 154
Lightfoot, 126, 135, 141, 154, 171,
210, 246, 317, 320
Lincoln, 48
Lipsius, 175
Loisy, 129, 153, 318
Louis XV, 271
Lucke, 123, 154, 171, 173, 175, 208,
]209, 246, 278, 319, 320
Ludlow, 311
Lunemann, 210
Luthardt, no, 114, 149, 154, 162,
165, 210, 318, 319
Luther, 34, 48, 77, 177, 211, 217,
242, 243, 262, 271, 276, 282, 304
Macdonald, 154
Macknight, 211
Maitland, 278
Mangold, 175
Martineau, 318
Maurice, 49, 275, 278, 319
Mayer, 154
McCheyne, 217
McClymont, 319
McDonald, 318
McDowell, Bishop, 168
McGiffert, 141, 153, 246
Mede, 278
Melanchthon, 33, 243
Melito, 148, 238
Menzies, 129
Michaelis, 113, 160, 171, 175, 210
Middleton, 209
Mill, 211, 246
Milligan, 62, 246, 278, 286, 287,
289, 298, 300, 319, 320
Milton, 262, 306
Moffatt, 129, 134, 135, 141, 145,
, 153, 257. 258, 289, 295, 296, 320
Mohammed, 271
Mommsen, 246

INDEX OF NAMES

327

Moody, 263
Moulton, 319
Napoleon, 271
Neander, 124, 154, 175, 209
Nero, 271, 272
Nerva, 131
Neumann, 246
Newman, 146
Newton, 217, 261, 278
Newton, Benjamin, 278
Newton, Bishop, 278
Nicephorus, 242, 255
Niebelungenlied, 94
Norbert, 270
Norton, 154, 318
Oecumenius, 210
Olshausen, 123, 209
Origen, 33, 35, 77, 100, 130, 131,
132, 133, 173, 206, 223, 239, 244,
252, 254, 319
Orr, 154, 318
Palmer, 262, 320
Pantaenus, 146
Papias, 130, 131, 132, 133, 135,
136, 137, 138, 139, 141, 172, 208
Paul V, 271
Paulinus, 262
Peabody, 317
Peake, 246
Pfleiderer, 125, 129, 153, 170, 171
Philip Sidetes, 134, 136, 138, 145
Pierson, 79, 80
Plato, 10, 97, 295
Plummer, 60, 141, 211, 319
Plutarch, 65
Polycarp, 36, 133, 139, 143, 144,
145, 147, 148, 172, 238
Polycrates, 35, 59
Porter, 246, 279, 320
Pothinus, 144, 145
Pressense^ 154
Raineri, 270
Ramsay, A., 320
Ramsay, W. M., 135, 172, 246, 320
Renan, 35, no, 125, 126, 128, 272,
278
Reuss, 126, 160, 171, 175, 246, 272,
278
Reville, 153, 246, 319
Reynolds, 319

Ribera, 278
Ritschl, 147, 154
Robinson, 79, 80, 102, 135, 318
Robertson, A. T., 234
Robertson, F. W., 217
Romaine, 217
Rossetti, Christina, 284
Rothe, 319
Rutherford, 217
Sabatier, 272, 289
Salmon, 35, 113, 141, 210, 246,
268, 271, 273, 274
Salmond, 162, 175, 206, 207, 211
Sanday, 141, 150, 155, 318
Saphir, 103
Schafer, 246
Schaff, 68, 80, 103, 108, no, 270,
309
Schenkel, 80, 126, 152, 171
Scherer, 125, 152
Schmidt, 81
Schmiedel, 129, 145, 152, 210, 317
Scholten, 125, 126, 152
Schurer, 141, 256
Schwartz, 129
Schwegler, 125, 128, 152
Schweitzer, 152
Scott, C. A., 153, 244, 254, 256,
278, 289, 319, 320
Scott, J. J., 320
Scott-Moncrief, 155, 318
Selwyn, 246, 320
Shakespeare, 169
Sheldon, 70
Simcox, 104, 244, 289, 320
Smith, David, 81
Smith, G. A., 81
Smith, H. A., 320
Sophocles, 94
South, 262
Spitta, 289, 319, 320
Stalker, 69, 286
Stanley, 53, 292, 294
Stanton, 135, 155, 244, 3i8
Steele, 218
Stevens, 317
Storr, 171
Strachan, 155
Strange, 320
Strauss, 81, 103, 123, 151
Strong, 155
Stuart, 246, 273, 278, 320
Suidas, 40, 42

328

JOHN AND HIS WRITINGS

Swete, 247, 255, 256, 259, 275, 278,
320
Talmage, 276, 277
Tatian, 127, 148
Tayler, 152, 318
Tauler, 180
Terry, 286, 320
Tertullian, 35, 134, 146, 147, 148,
172, 207, 239, 244, 252
Theodore of Mopsuestia, 207, 241
Theodoret, 207, 241
Theophilus, 148, 238
Theophylact, 210
Thiersch, 171
Tholuck, 78, 123, 124, 154, 319
Thoma, 152, 318
Thomas a Kempis, 33
Thomasius, 133
Todd, 278
Valentinus, 148
Vaughan, 275, 278, 280
Victor, 59
Victorinus, 245
Vincent, 270, 287
Vischer, 289, 320
Vitringa, 278, 282
Vogel, 122, 289
Volkmar, 125, 126, 152, 273, 274,
278
Volter, 289, 320
Von Soden, 170, 246
Warfield, 141, 246
Watkins, 155, 318

Warren, Bishop, 186, 305, 307
Warschauer, 319
Watson, 319
Weiss, Bernhard, 81, 113, 123, 154,
162, 175, 208, 210, 244, 246, 278,
284, 297, 303, 317, 319, 320
Weiss, Johannes, 129, 320
Weizsacker, 126, 152, 246, 278,
289
Wellhausen, 129, 246, 319, 320
Wendt, 102, 318
Wernle, 152, 170, 246
Wesley, 33, 48, 181, 217, 276
Westcott, 93, 103, 107, 113, 141,
148, 155, 160, 162, 169, 170, 171,
189, 246, 288, 318, 319
Wetstein, 209, 278
Weyland, 289
Whedon, 175
Whichcote, 260
Whiston, 210, 278
Whitby, 210
Wiclif, 271
Wieseler, 138, 210, 246
Williams, 278
Wolf, 210
Wordsworth, 210, 275, 278, 282
Workman, 135
Xenophon, 10
Zahn, 135, 140, 154, 233, 244, 246,
278, 319
Zeller, 125, 126, 128, 151, 171, 273
Zinzendorf, 33
Zwingli, 243, 262

:-:V=RSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 05118 3276

Jl

• . ; iS'i! ; ' :

(iHlltiMli tl' 11