sympathetic weeping over that grave, and Hij divine condolence with Martha and Mary.
Obviously, it was the purjiose of the Fourtn Evangelist to record the impressive words, gestures, revelations by which the Lord unveiled both Him- self and the Father. These are more impressive in St. John than in the popular tradition, but they did not conceal the humanness of His love. The ironical charge, which was transformed into a crown of glory, ' He saved others, himself he could not save,' is one of the keynotes of the Fourth as well as of the other Gospels. On the other hand, do we not find in the Sermon on the Mount as well as in the charge to the twelve disciples (Mt 10), to say nothing of the interpretation of the great parables of the Sower, of the Tares, and of the 1 )rag- iii't iMt Vi). and of tin/ Si-.mI iirowiiii.' secivtlv (Mk 4-""), stupendous claims of personal dii;nit_v. and of kinship with the supreme Kevealer and Arbiter of human destiny? Does any assumption of the Fourth Gospel transcend the claims made by the great prophet of Mt 23-25? The Jesus of the Fourth Gospel felt that His o^vn powers and claims were of supreme moment to mankind, but that the end of all He said aud did was the life, light, peace, and joy of His brethren, and their victory over the world. Let the following passages be specially consulted : S" 6-''- «•»> 7"- ''■ »« 8'^ »'• " 10»- "■ a U*) joa. «s i33«. S5 \i»B.^ a^„j almost every paragraph of the valedictory discourse. The same features and spirit pervade the Synoptic Gospels, establishing more of unity than diversity in their theme. They alone relate the supernatural birth of Jesus. Nothing more characteristicallv Johannine can be found tlian Mt ll^-=» and Lk lO^'- ", wherein the Lord's supreme self-consciousness was uttered, and is revealed in most close and gracious relations ■nith the consolation and salvation of mankind No words in the Fourth Gospel concerning our Lord's character and prerogatives are loftier than those in the Synoptic Gospels. We believe we are justified in saying that the Synoptists would be more difficult to expound without the light of the F'ourth Evangelist than the F'ourth Gospel without the aid of the Synoptists.
Other interesting and mutually corroborating elements are found in the four Gospels. There is, for example, the portraiture of certain per- sonages in the Fourth Gospel of whom we know nothing elsewhere, not even the name — unless the name be a second name of one known to us by another.
( 1 ) The most striking instance of this is Nathanael (1 and 21). A widely spread idea prevails that he is to be identified with the Bartuolomew of the Synoptic lists of apostles, where he is (by his patronymic only) associated with Philip and Thomas.
(2) Nicodemvs is thrice referred to (3. 7" IQ"), nay, he is photographed by a few phrases. The familiarity of our Lord with this distinguished
{)ersonage is quite parallel with numerous scattered lints of His social relationships, especially in Lk •jM gs jga There is no certain identilication of Nicodemus ■with one N. ben-Gorion, who, accord- ing to the Talmud, survived the fall of Jerusalem (see Geikie, i. 584 ; Winer's liealworterbuch, ii. 152).
(3) The woman of Samaria is portrayed with inimitable \'ivacity, and in a few sentences she has told her own story for all time. The refer- ences to Samaria and the Samaritans in Lk and Ac are all illumined by this sketch of the early intercourse of our Lord with the inhabitants of Sycliar.
(4) Mary and Martlia have been introduced to the Synoptic history almost as ideals of the con- trast between the contemplative and the active
JOnX, GOSPEL OF
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
715
reli^ous life. In Jn there is a brilliant page of gi uuine biography and history. The time and the plat ; are recorded ; the characterization of the women is beautifully preserved alon^ unconscious lines in Jn 11. The resemblance of uieir brother's name to that of the beggar of St. Luke's parable does not throw any light on this story, for all the surroundings are different, unless there be a faint adumbration in Abraham's word, ' Neither will they be persuaded,' etc., of the access of malignity in the hearts of the Pharisees, as reported in Jn 12'", on hearing of the resurrection of Lazarus.
(5) The Virgin Mother. The reticence of the Synoptic account is one of the marvels of NT. We learn there that probably both she and Jo.seph also were the lowly heirs of the family and throne of David, that she occupied a purely OT stand- point, that she saw in the great function intnisted to her a solution of the balUing parado.xes of the theocratic kingdom. Mt and Lk combine to tell us of the gracious incidents of the infancy, while Mk sheds a very strong light on the probability that she shared with her other sons the fear that her prophetic child was ' beside himself,' and that she received from Him a severe yet filial rebuke. Shu would doubtless have spared Him every rough liandling, and sought to restrain all undue exposure to the rising storm of mingled enthusiasm and malignity. The sublime waj' in Avhich, according to Alk, the Lord balUed the de- sign of the bretliren, and emancipated Himself from the control of His domestic circle, is on many grounds, both literary and doctrinal, most note- woi thy. Cf. and connect Mk 3*' with »<•". Alary followed Jesus to Jerus. and was present at the tragedy, but there is no statement in any of the Synoptists that she was there. Lk, however, places her with her sons among the discijiles before and after the Ascension, and it may be readily inferred that she wa.s among the women who ministered to Jesus, though Marj' of Magdala and Mary the mother of James the less and of Joses hide her from view. The same picture of the Virgin Mother is preserved by the beloved disciple. Here also she allows herself to be over- shadowed by others and hidden in the glory of her Son and Lord. The author of the Fourth Gospel never breathes her name, but preserves the memory of the incident which he knew best, that he received the dying legacy of his Master, and as a son with a mother took her to his own home. The reference to the mother of our Lord frees his narrative from all Docetic taint ; and the firm vindication of the truth that the Lord came in the tlesh and was made tlesh, seemed to him to be of the very essence of the Gospel, and the denial of it to be antichrist. At the same time, his constant reference to the supernatural, heaven- descended life of Christ gives tlio most vital basis for His immaculate conception. Minute touches also show at Cana the manner in which, while He delivered Himself from maternal control, Jesus obeyed her desire to meet the needs of their humble hosts. Thus, in the most subtle manner, the rare and wonderful portraiture is the same in both documents.