(i.) The Revelation through Christ. — The new disclosure of truths about God ditlered from all previous disclosures, inasmuch as it was no longer conhned to a divine prompting of the minds of men, hut was made through the incarnate presence of the Son of God Himself. After having in time past .spoken to the fathers 'in ' the prophets, God had at last spoken ' in ' One who was not only prophet but Son (He !'■ '). This distinction of the New Covenant is empha.sized most by St. .lolin, but it is also expres.sed unequivocally by St. I'aul, and Ep. to Hebrews, and the Synoptic Gospels refer to it sufficiently to confirm the evidence of the Fourth Gospel that the principle underlying it was bronglit out by our Lord Himself.
We may take two passages of St. John as typical of a great number of otliers: Jn 1" ' No man hatli seen God at any time : God only -begotten [reading wopo7eK7)5 Seis with XBCL, etc., Tregelles, Weiss, WH, RVm] wlio is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him ' ; and 14'-" ' If ye liad known me, ye would have known my Father also: from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. Philip saith unto him. Lord, show us the Father, and it sulHceth as. Jesus saith unto him. Have I been .so long time with you, and dost thou not know me, Philip*? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father : how sayest thou. Show us the Father? Believest tliou not that I am in the Father, and the F'atherin me? the words that I say unto you, I speak not from myself : but the Father, abiding in me, doeth his works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and t lie Father in me : or else believe me for the very works' sake.'
These pass.xsres might be said to be a compendium of a great part of the Gospel, and we may add the Epp. of Jn. This will appear from observing the number ot purallels wliich exist tor almost everj- clause. " No man hath seen ... he hath declared,' * he that hath seen me hath seen ' ; cf. 332 537 646 loffl 1524 1726, 1 Jn ilJ 223. . Who is in the bosom of the Father,' '1 in the Father, and the Father in me' ; cf. SI6 10J8 H20 ifiM 1721-23. 'Not from myself; cf. 619 716 828 i249 ■ Doeth his works ' ; cf. 434 519-21. 38 »4 174.
St. Paul does not enlarge upon this aspect of the Incarnation of the Son to the same extent as St. John. Still, he expresses it quite unam- biguously when he describes Him as €UC>v toO Beov rov doparov (Col I"), a term which he had used in an earlier Epistle (2 Co 4<) in such a way as to show that the conception was even at that date fully established. It is also implied in the ^f /xoptp^ eeoO vrdpxoi" of Ph 2". The fulness of the revelation made through Christ is the subject of 1 Co 1** 5s i^eirfidf) aotpia riiuv dirb deov (cf. 1-' Xpicrbv Beou Swa/uv ml e»oO ao(plav; also 2<'- '), Eph l«-i". Col 2^ {v y
fl<r\v Trdi'Tfj ol Orjuavpol r^s aotpia'i Ktxl yvthacm 6.'t6' Kpvtpot.
In close agreement with the language of St Paul is He P dr a-rairyaa/xa -r^i icijijs Kai xapaicntf TTj^ inrcariaeu^ aiVoO. On the exact force of these expressions (which are paralh^l to if not suggested by Wis 7-^') see Westcott, etc., ad /<ic. Tlie pur- port of them is that Christ, visible and active, tirought home to the sight and minds of men the essential nature of God. This is an expansion in a more ' ontological ' or ' metaphysicil' sense of the opening words of the Epistle. This sense is too deeply ingrained in the langu.'ige of NT to be eliminated.
Although, as has been said, it is the more theological writers who lay the greatest stress ujion this aspect of the Son as revealing the F'ather, tliere is one conspicuous passage of the Sj-noptics in which it is clearly iiiiiilied. The verse Mt 11-'', with its very close parallel in Lk 10-- (both pa.ssages siiould he taken with their full context), is in form so like the characteristic say- ings of Christ ; it hts into and interprets such a number of other passages (.Mt IG'", J\Ik 2'M-" 9' etc.), and, while in remarkable agreement with the general verdict of the primitive Churcli, stands so apart from the particular tendencies of the Synoptic Gosjiels that it would he wanton to doubt its genuineness. To make the picture of Christ on earth consistent, we need to see in it not merely the beneficent Teacher, but the Son of God, as this name is understood by the writers of deepest in- sight.
(ii.) The Revelation through the Uoli/ Ghost. — If we look at the Fourth Gospel from another point of view, we shall hnd it domin.'ited by the con.sciousness of a double revelation. That through the Incarnate Son of which we have just been speaking is one ; that through the Holy Ghost is the otlier. Looking back over the space of time that had elapsed since the Ascension, the writer sees that a great force has been at work in the Church, the effect of which he regards as a direct fulfilment of prophecies by our Lord Him:?e'f before His departure. A second ' Advocate ' (' Comforter' AV, RV) was to come after He was gone. It was to be a dispensation like His own, and was to be characterized by a like dissemina- tion of truth, not so much wholly new truth as a revival and reinvigorating in the minds of the apostles and others who came within its range of truth already taught by Himself: 'These things have I spoken unto you, while yet abiding with you. But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father hath sent in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remem- brance all that I said unto you.' . . . ' Howheit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he sh.all guide j'ou unto all the trutli : for he shall not speak from himself ; but what things soever he shall he.ar, these shall he speak : and he shall declare unto you the things that .are to come. He shall "lorify rae : for he shall take of mine, and shall declare it unto you. AH things that the Father hath are mine : therefore .said 1, that he taketh of mine, and shall declare it unto you ' (Jn 14^' *' 16"''*). There is an accent about all the passages in which the writer refers to this subject wliich is far more like the accent of real experience than a product of pure reflection without concrete ex- perience behind it. The writings of the Fourth Evangelist contain no express reference to the Day of Pentecost and the history recorded in the Acts, but they contain a number of allusions which are well explained by that history. St. Luke in like manner has no express mention of the Para- clete, but both his Gospel and the Acts bear fre- quent testimony to the work of the Paracleta