(6) The portrait of Jiihn the Baptist differs from that of the Synuutists ; but if it l>e noted that the Fourth Gospel takes up the storj' where the current tradition dropped it, the chief dilliculty vanishes. The strange i|uestion sent from the prison (Mt 11^ and parallels) seems all the more strange in view of the great testimonies to Jesus borne by the Huptist as given in Jn 1 and 3 (cf. ReynoUls, John the Jia/Uist, 419-4-10). liut there is nothing, after all, in the ' witness of John ' which transcends the OT standpoint, ami Christ declares In ch. 6 that He had 'greater witness than that
of John.' Like Judaism itself, John would never have accomplished his proper work if he had not held to it too tenaciously even after it had reached its climax. lint this involves exegetical considera- tions that are beyond our present .scope.
(7) Of nothing are we more certain than of th« historical character of Siiiion Peter. The blending of courage and weakness, the desire to suggest the courses to be followed even by his Lord, succeeded by the profound deference paid to the expression ot the thought of Christ as soon as his reckless blundering was corrected, recur from lirst to last. This double personality am)ears at the earliest introduction to Jesus, amid the splendours of the transliguration and the solemnities of Geth- semane, in his base denials and bitter tears, on the morning of the resurrection amid the visions of heavenly things, in the controversy with St. Paul over the essence of justilication, ami in the traditions of Church history. He is a real, not an imaginary man. If St. John had given a fundamentally different interpretation of his per- sonality, it would have been strongly adverse to the historicity of his narrative ; but the fact is, that in the transactions of chs. 13. 18. 2U and 21, though handling -several diverse incidents, St. Jolin s statements exactly preserve the same com- plicated features of St. Peter's inner and outer life. He who said to the Lord of the invisible world, ' Not so. Lord,' or ' Depart from me, for I am a sinful man,' or ' That be far from thee. Lord ' ; who would have builded tabernacles on the slopes of Hermon, or engaged a whole bat- talion of Koinan .soldiers with a single sword, and then declared with curses that he knew not the man whom he had risked his life to defend, — is the same as the disciple who first cried, ' Tliou shalt never wasli my feet ' and then, ' not my feet only, but also my hands and my head ' ; who rushed into the sea to reach the feet of his risen Lord, and whose new act of impulsive curiosity received anew the rebuke of tlie Lord. Tlie in- delible imprint of personality is carried through- out the fourfold narrative.
(8) Ciiiiii>hns and Pilate, thongh portrayed at a dillerent angle and in the midst of^ circumstances wliieh though concordant with those of the Syn- optists have a dillerent bearing on the whole narrative, are alike etched from the life, and betray no departure from the reality common to the earlier representation. Caiaphasand Pilate are described as priest and ruler of Israel during the whole of the ministry of Jesus, Lk 3'. The remorseless retiolve of the Sadducean priest to find or make a capital charge a''ainst Jesus on the ground eillier of sedi- tion or blasphemy ; the unprincipled endeavour to keep the Pharisees from siding with Jesus in His relormatory zeal; the demand on oath from our Lord of the loftiest claim of Mcssiahsliip and Sonship with a view to his immediate condemna- tion on a charge to which Pilate could not listen ; and the delivery of Jesus to the Komans on a new charge altogetlier, which Pilate saw through at a glance, — all this is left intact by the Fourth Evangelist, while he C4ists an additional light on the main motives of both the priest and the governor. The moral confu.•^ion of the motives of Caiaplias, evinced (ll*") in his prophetic forecast of a scapegoat to the indignant inajestv of liome, offered in the person of one absolutely innocent ol the crimes alleged ; the superstitious fears which blended in Pilate's mind with the abuse of lis sovereign power; the uprising of his moral, at least III his pulitieal, eoiiscienco, which led to the temporary delay of the ^enlence, — all these ele- ments are emphasized by the Fourth Gospel from its own sources of evidence. The private interviews between Pilate and Jeaus, to whicn tu«
716
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
beloved disciple was privy (18""'* 19'"'=), as well as the private and preiiuiinury examination before Annas, add to the general information, and have a t-upplementary oharactcr ; still the author does not ijjnore, but gives the result of the action of the Sanhedrin under the leadersliip of Caiaphas in Pilate's own words, 'Thine own nation and the chief priests delivered thee unto me' (18"). The Barabons incident brin^ into pointed relief the action of the priestly ])arty as touched on in the Synoi>tic narrative, tcllinj; us that there was a pause and a nuestioning amon^ tlie /''x^of, which was overcome by the activity of the priests, who ' persuaded' the people (Mt 27**) ; but the Johan- nine narrative sliows how the fact corresponds with the earlier tradition ; and the extremely culpalile weakness of Pilate is further shown in the de- lineations of the I'ourth Gospel. Pilate crushed the warnings of his own conscience, and was more intent on visiting his .supercilious antipathy on the priests than on carrying out his own expressed conviction that the prisoner was innocent of the charge brought against Him. He yielded at lust to a cI.Tmour which might complicate his relations with Tiberius, as tlie most fateful expression of Jewish natioii.il degradation at length burst upon his ear. * We have no king but Caesar' sealed the doom, not only of Jesus, but of the theocratic nation. Jesus was sacrificed to the cowardice and meanness of Pilate. The spirit of revenge which induced him to abide by the 'title' upon the Cross is another touch of characterization whicli we owe, as we believe, to the special sources of information possessed by the Fourth Evangelist. We are not concerned to deny that John's silence about thr sublime assumption of the Mcssiahship and judgment of the world, and of tlie divine claim He made to the highest conceivable diguitj-, even when it sealed His death-warrant from the Sanhedrin, is a serious perplexity, but, at all events, it reveals no mere doctrinal perversity on the part of the writer to press the apparent theme and motive of his own wonderful contribution to the history of the Word made flesh.