II. The Theoloov of St. John.
A. The Gospel and Epistles.— In the writ- ings ascribed to St. John there is more of a com- plete and reasoned theology than is to be found in any of the other NT writers. It is therefore a comparatively simple task to indicate the lines of the author's theological thought. It must, how- ever, always be remembered that in the Gospel the theological positions are placed in close relation with the history. So that, in some sense, a historical evolution is traceable in the doctrine described. The prologue to tlie Gospel (!'■") may be regarded as summing up the doctrine of the book ; and, in like manner, many of the state- ments in the Epistles are of the nature of in- ferential doctrinal affirmations. It seems best, therefore, to describe a-s shortly as possible the progress in doctrine in relation to the history, and then to discuss the conclusions which result.
(1) The Gospel professes to be a selection of anecdotes, out of a large number not recorded, de- scribing the sU/ns which Jesus did before His disciples. By signs are meant acts which convey a certain teaching, indicate a particular truth or reality. These jiarticular signs are recorded in order to produce a particular belief — 'that ye may believe tJiat Jesus is the Christ the Son of God"' (2U*'"). The main part of the Gospel describes the growth of this idea in the minds of the apostle.s, and, at the same time, the growth of hostility on the part of the Jews. The iiioile in which the conviction is brought home to tlio minds of Christ's followers is ctilled witness (iiaprvpia), and is characterized in various ways. The first stage in the process is the witness of Jolin the
• It is not quite clear what is meant by Polyerates" phrase iyit>.dti iietli ri TirdcX*> <ri;«^i:«A^. 1Iit.iX«i is the wiinl used lor the hiph-priestly mitre ; and therefore the adoption of it by St. John must have tiieant either that he olaiiuetl that the old'cvclusive liiL'h prie.ithoixi was at an end, or, more proliably, that hs asserted its fulfilment in the Christian priesthooi). lielll ('fVscVi. dfr Ilahlii Jrtut r. X(uarfth, p. 71) a.sserts that llio phrase means that St. John was of the family of the hi^h priest, and had actually performed hitrh-priestlv functions in Jerusalem, wearing the nu'tro for the purpose, "^his interi>rotation of tha wonts of Polyerates is only jfcart of a complicated theory as to theautlionshipof the Fourth CiosncI with which we have nothing to do. Put it should be olvierveil (1) that this is not the natunu interpretation of the [uusa^ ; (2) that it assumes a dei:ri-e of ignorance and confusion on the {tart of Polyerates which ia unjustitlalile, St. James is also said to have worn the nrjtJi*? (Kpiph. liirr, Ixxili. c 14, where he follows the lanirun^'e of llcgesippo" closely; but this particular stateiuent is absent from the {Msaa^e of HcKesippus quoted in Kum. UK u. uiiLX
684
JOHN, APOSTLE
JOHN, APOSTLE
Baptist. He first denies to the deputation of priests and Levites tliat he is the Christ, ami then points definitely to Jesus as the Lanil) of Goil, the person on whom the Spirit descended and ahode. In consequence of the repetition of this witness on the following' day, two of the disciides of John — Andrew and, iirouably, John himself — are detached from the Baptist and follow Jesus. The result of a day's colloquy is that Andrew announces to his brother Simon, We have found the Messiah. In like manner Nathanael is attracted by the .same promise, tliou;;li he seems to have had a stronger and loftier view of the personality of the Messiah than we usually iind (l"). The newly- won dis- ciples besin, therefore, with a conviction th.at Jesus is Messiah. The ' siyn ' at Cana of Galilee gives them new thou<;ht8. John had done no sign (10")i but in this scene at Cana the dis- ciples perceived what St. John, in the reflective language of his latrr life, calls the manifestation of the glory of Clirist (2"). This phrase seems to mean tlie specially Divine powers and character- istics wliidi the l.onl displayed upon earth; and therefore tlir importance of the passage consists in this, that St. John marks the occasion when the previous belief in the Messiahship of Jesus began to be aB'ectcd by a deeper notion of His Divine nature. Looking back upon it in later life, he sees that at that nioiiient the thought that He was Divine was dawning in them.
This event at Cana is also described (2") as the ' beginning of signs.' It is the opening incident of a particular line of witness — the witness of the works (cf. 5^ 10** 15-^). This is continued at Jeru- salem at the Passover, and produces a number of adherents (2^). And here, again, St. John notices an impression created by Jesus iipon His apostles : they found that He e.xercised considerable reserve in His treatment of those who professed belief, in virtue of an insii;ht into them whicli He pos- sessed.* .M'ter tliis we pome to tlie iicconnt of the Ministry and Preaching of our Lord. As in the Synoptic Gospels, He begins by jireachin" (to N'icodemus) the Kingdom of God, with this differ- ence, that He <leclares the necessity of new birth as the condition of entry. It is after the record of this preaching that the witness of John is finally completed and closed, in words which inip'y that his preparatory mi.ssion is over (S*"). It is noticealjle that in this passage Nicodemus is attracted to the new prophet i)y signs (3-), and that the Lord, when lie is challenged to explain the new birth, refers to the witness of an experi- ence already growing up around Him (8 ofoa/ifi/ XaXoiVf , Kdl d iupaKaiuv /iaprrvpov^eD, 3"). In like manner the conversation with the woman at Sychar leads to the unequivocal declaration of Messiahship on the part of the Lord (4^"), and an affirmation of the greatest importance as to the nature of God (4=^, see below, p. 689). The im- pression created by these two scenes on the minds of the apostles is not marked in the .same way as before (2'' and =3). Hut it is obvious that their view of His character is changing and developing rapidly. They have as yet no precise and clear view as to His nature, but they are careful as to commenting on, or asking questions about, what He does. This is expressed in a marked way when the apostles return and find Him talking with a woman. They are surprised, but no one said, ' What seekest thou, or Why talkest thou with her?' (4"). So a^ain, when He says, ' I have meat to eat which ye know not,' they do not ask Him what He means, but talk among themselves