The Christology of the Apocalypse is in apparent unison with that of the gospel. As the latter de scribes Jesus as the incarnate wisdom of God, the former uses language of similar tendency (Apoc. 14). His preexistence is asserted in the gospel as it is in Apocalypse (iii. 14). The appellation X6-yos, distinctive of person, occurs only in the gospel, first epistle, and Apocalypse. And as the evangelist says that the Logos was God ; so Jesus bears the name of Jehovah in the Apocalypse.
We find the favourite tca.prupeco and p.aprupla of the gospel in the sense of public profession, or de claration of belief in the Saviour. The use of expressive of overcoming evil, opposition, and enmity in the world, is peculiar to the Apoca lypse, First Epistle of John, and fourth gospel.
Tnpelv Toy Ntrycw, to keep the word, a frequent phrase in the fourth gospel and first epistle, often occurs in the Apocalypse.
Zxnvoilp, to tabernacle, is found only in the fourth gospel besides the Revelation.
72,0dr-re/I.', to slay, appears twice in the first epistle, and frequently in the Apocalypse.
agpor, to have part or share, is in the fourth gospel and the present book. So is reporarcip to walk with Christ.
'Epxerat 1615a, the hour is coming, is frequent in the gospel, and occurs twice in the Apocalypse.
Christ or God is often termed aX570this, the true. So in the gospel Christ is called the true light ; and God is the true God in the first epistle.
In Apocalypse ii. 17, Jesus promises believers the hidden manna ; in the gospel, the true bread from heaven.
Christ is often styled in our book a lamb ; an epithet nowhere else applied to him except in the fourth gospel.
The image of Christ as a shepherd is found in Apoc. vii. 17, and in the gospel, x. 1, etc.
Living water, or the water of life, is promised to the believer in Apocalypse xxi. 6, xxii. 17, and gospel, vii. 38.
The comparison of Christ with a bridegroom in the fourth gospel, iii. 29, should be put by the side of Apocalypse xix. 7 ; xxi. 2 ; xxii. 17 ; on account of the diction. In the Apocalypse it is said of the Jews who do not believe in Jesus that they are not true Jews ; so in the fourth gospel, viii. 39, 40.
In ii. t t a promise is made to him that overcometh that he shall not be hurt by the second death ; in the fourth gospel, it is said of him that keeps 7esus's word that be shall never see death.
In xiv. 15 a call is addressed to the angel to thrust in his sickle and reap, because reaping-time is come and the harvest of the earth is ripe. So in the gospel Jesus says to his disciples, ' Look on the fields, for they are white already to harvest.' In Apocalypse vii. 15, he that sits upon the throne is said to dwell among the saints ; an idea similar to that in the gospel (xiv. 23), where the father and the son are said to take up their abode with the believer. The same thought is in Apoc alypse iii. 20 ; xxi. 22 ; XXII. 5.
In xiv. 4, the hundred and forty-four thousand sealed ones follow the Lamb whithersoever he gots (ecKoNouBeco, iarcfla) ; so Jesus says to Peter, ' Whither I go (fir dyco), thou canst not follow (axoNovOeco) me now,' etc.
The phrase Lord, or sir, thou knowest' Kbpte, at') °Ma:, is common to the Apocalypse and the fourth gospel.
followed by eh before the noun signify ing the object on which the writing is made, is peculiar to the Apocalypse and gospel.
In the gospel there is an account of piercing Jesus's side with a spear ; to which act is applied a prediction in Zechariah (xii. to). In the Apoca lypse, the same version as that of the gospel is exhibited. And as it is a new one not that of the Seventy, it has been inferred that the same hand appears in both passages.
The manner of writing in the Apocalypse often reminds one of that in the fourth gospel and first epistle, where the same idea is expressed both posi tively and negatively ; and where a certain parallel ism of thought and expression may be noticed.
More specimens of resemblance than these have been collected by such writers as Donker-Curtius, Dannemann, and Stuart, to prove identity of authorship in the Apocalypse and fourth gospel. We have given the most striking and plausible ones. The reader must judge of their force, and draw his own conclusion. Some may be thought far-fetched ; though most do not appear in that light. Stuart's list needs sifting, because lie does not scruple to use the 21st chapter of the fourth gospel throughout, as if it were unquestionably a genuine part of the work ; though that position has been ably disputed on critical grounds by Liicke and others. It is easy to see the weakness of Stuart's reasoning when he asserts that John is familiar with the neuter dpviov ; whereas it occurs but once in the gospel, and that too in the 21st chapter. And it is surely a proof of haste to adduce the spurious r John v. 7 as an instance of the application of Logos to Christ. In short, he makes several rash assertions which his examples sometimes fail to support ; as under the head of the omniscience of Christ, where some irrelevant places are given from the gospel and Apocalypse. But after every reasonable deduction enough remains to prove that the correspondences between the Apocalypse and fourth gospel are not accidental. They either betray one author ; or show that the writer of one was acquainted with the other. These cognate phenomena have not been allowed their full force by Lake, Ewald, De Wette, and Diisterdieck. On which side the originality lies appears from the internal relation of the two books to one another, more than from their external form and expression. The Revelation betrays a tendency of mind akin to what is known as Jewish Christianity in its first stage ; whereas a higher degree of re ligious progression belongs to the gospel. The development of the religious conception commonly begins with the sensuous and concrete, which it seeks to spiritualise, and to transform into the ab stract. Now it needs no argument to prove, that the expressions and ideas common to the two works have a more spiritual and abstract bearing in the gospel. The evangelist purposely attaches himself to the forms of the Apocalyptist even after then original signification had been laid aside. Perhaps he wished his work to pass for that of the apostle.