JOHN. THE GOSPEL OF. The Gospel of John pre sents a different view of Jesus from the view presented on the whole in common by the three other (Synoptic) Gospels, and it is now almost a commonplace of criticism to say that it represents a distinct and different style of literature. Arno Neumann writes as follows (Jesus): - It cannot be placed earlier than the second century, and arising as it did as a protest against Judaising parties and as a defence of ideas of religion conceived In an unhistorical way, all the details in the story, as regards localities, time, and personal characteristics, have been adapted to the requirements of that Christian philosophy in which the Gospel is steeped, or have been misplaced through its influence. To the author of this Gospel Jesus is the Word of God,' that is to say, the second person of the Godhead, who existed before Abraham. and in fact took part in the creation of the world (i. 1-3; viii. 5. S; xvii. 5). Holding this view. he is naturally obliged to represent the appearance of Jesus as the thinly-veiled manifestation of a Divine being. Thus the Jesus of John is neither baptized nor tempted, does not waver in Geth semane, has foreknowledge of everything, prays only for the sake of the bystanders (xi. 41 f.): when hanging on the cross says ` I thirst,' only in order to fulfil an Old Testament prophecy (xix. 28); calls upon his betrayer to hasten his wicked deed (xiii. 26 f.): and by a brief word ` I am He ' makes 500 Roman soldiers recoil and bend the knee (xviii. 5 f.). The author's conception of the religion of Jesus, pervaded throughout by the spirit we have indicated, is certainly sublime enough, but it is far removed from the simple, sober. naive facts of history as we find them in the Gospels according to Mark. Mat thew, and Luke." This estimate of the Fourth Gospel. however, is perhaps based upon a misunderstanding of its language and purpose. At the beginning of the third century it became known as " the spiritual gospel." That was and is an accurate description. It is a spiritual gospel, and has to be interpreted spiritually. God is Spirit. Jesus. fully understanding the nature of God. Spirit, realized his own eternity, and the closeness of his union with God. It is quite conceivable that there was among the Evangelists one John who penetrated deeper than did the others into the spiritual essence of the gospel of Jesus. It is quite natural that, this being so, he should wish to write a new and rather different account of the work and teaching of Jesus. " He is said to have done so on the entreaty, and with the subsequent approval, of the Apostle Andrew and other leading members of the Church, in order to supplement the teach ing of the three Gospels already published, and to counter act the errors which were beguiling some from the sim plicity of the faith " (M'Clymont). Neumann admits
that at times there are statements in the Fourth Gospel which point us to an original element overlooked by the other Evangelists. Examples are given by O. Boltz mann. It is only in the Fourth Gospel 19) that the saying upon which the accusation M Mk. xiv. 5S and the mockery in Mk. xv. 30 were based is represented as having been actually uttered by Jesus himself and in the right connection. John x. 1-6 it is possible to disentangle a parable of Jesus traditionally handed down to the Evangelist (but no longer to be found in the Synoptic tradition), the genuineness of which can hardly be doubted. The Johannine Gospel Is the only Source, apart from the apocryphal Gospel of Peter, that correctly gives the day of Jesus' death in so far as it places it on the day before the beginning of the Passover festival, while according to Mk. (Mt., Lk.) Jesus was crucified on the first day of the actual festival. The same accuracy characterises the date of the anointing in Bethany (John xii. 1). Irenaeus accepted the Fourth Gospel as the work of the Apostle John. This would suggest that it was accepted also by his teacher, Poly carp, who had been a disciple of John. In a letter to Florinus, Irenaeus writes (177 A.D.) as follows : " I can describe the very place in which the blessed Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed, and his goings out and his comings in, and his manner of life and his personal appearance, and the discourses which he held before the people, and how he would describe his intercourse with John and with the rest who had seen the Lord, and how he would relate their words. And whatsoever things he had heard from them about the Lord and about His miracles, Polycarp, as having received them from eye witnesses of the life of the Word, would relate altogether in accordance with the Scriptures " (after M'Clymont). It has of course been disputed whether the John of the Fourth Gospel was the Apostle John, the son of Zebedee. But the character of the Gospel, with its knowledge of the inmost thought of Jesus, is best explained by accept ing the authorship of this intimate friend of Jesus, who " held most tenaciously to the belief that he had found the Way, the Truth, and the Life " (W. Sanday). See J. A. M'Clymont; Oscar Holtzmann, The Life of Jesus, 1904; Arno Neumann, Jesus, 1906: P. W. Schmiedel, The Johannine Writings, 190S; C. F. Nolloth, The Person of Our Lord and Recent Thought, 190S; W. Sanday, The Life of Christ in Recent Research, 1907: G. Currie Martin; Arthur S. Peake, Intr.; F. C. Conybeare, Hist. of N.T. Crit., 1910.