Literature. — R. Flint, Christ'a Kingdom upon Earth, 245 ; H. S. Holland, God's City, 206 ; W. C. E. Newbolt, Coxmsels of Faith and Practice, 1G9. A. E. RoSS.
NEW BIRTH.— See Regeneration.
NEW COMMANDMENT.— The definition of the Ciiristian law of love as a ' new commandment ' is peculiar to the Johannine writings (Jn 13^^ 15'^, 1 Jn 2'- ^ 2 Jn ^). In the Fourth Gospel the Supper is regarded as the prototype of the Agape rather than of the Eucharist, and the institution of the ' new covenant ' gives place to that of the ' new commandment ' of brotherly love. The command- ment, like the covenant, is inaugurated by a sym- bolical act, the washing of the disciples' feet.
In the Synoptic Gospels our Lord repeatedly in- sists on love for one's neigiibour as the paramount ethical duty (cf. Mt 5^3-'^ Mk 12^', Lk lO^o-S') ; He contrasts this new conception of the INIoral Law with the rule tliat held good 'in old time' (Mt 5*'^-*^). The words in the Fourth Gospel thus sum up witii an exquisite simplicity the authentic substance of the social teaching of Jesus. At the same time there are elements in the Johannine idea which difierentiate it from the apparent parallels in the Synoptics.
(1) Jesus in His teaching, as given in the Synop- tics, does not impose His ethic under the form of ' commandment.' Accepting the moral code of the Decalogue as Divinely given. He contents Himself witli 'fulfilling' it by a deeper and more inward interpretation. The ettect of His 'fulfilment' is indeed to replace the ancient Law by a new one, but in this Christian law the idea of commandment is altogether transcended. It is a ' law of liberty,' which tile enlightened conscience originates for itself. Tlie Fourth Gospel reverts to the idea of 'commandment* — of a moral law enforced from without. Jesus as the Son of God has poAver to impose a new law, equally binding with that of the Decalogue ; and it is henceforth valid in virtue of His authority.
(2) The divergence from tlie Synoptics is still more marked in regard to the scope of the ' new commandment.' The love which it requires is the (jiiXadeXcpia that found expression in the Agape; not love to one's neighbour in the universal sense, but love of Christians to one another. Here more signally than elsewhere the Fourth Evangelist betrays the influence of the later Church - idea which had narrowed the original intention of the teaching of Christ. A sharp distinction had grown up between the community of believers and the ' world,' and the duty of Christians was primarily, if not exclusively, to their brethren. The passage in the Fourth Gospel already contemplates a time when mutual love within the Churcli was the yvwp'.(rfj.a tQiv 'K.pLcma.vwv (Jn IS'', cf. Tert. Apol. 39). There is no indication of a wider demand, in the spirit of the Sermon on the Mount and the parable of the Good Samaritan.
The commandment is expressly called a nev^ one, although in its Synoptic form it appears as a direct quotation from the ancient Law (Alt 22^"||Mk 12^^ = Lv 19^^). The newness has been explained in various ways, (a) According to the Greek com- mentators (Cyril, Theod. Mojjs. etc.) it consists in the higher degree of love implied in KadCcs rjydwricra vfids — not 'as thyself but 'more than thyself,' Avith the self-forgetting love of Christ. This, how- ever, overstrains the meaning of KaOws, Avliich says nothing of the quality of Christ's love, but states the simple fact of His examjile. (ft) Several modern commentators (e.g. Meyer, Godet, Bugge) have still sought the explanation in the Avords ' as I have loved you.' The love of Christ experienced by the believer is to be the motive poAver to a neAv and higher kind of love. Our love to one another is henceforth to be Christian love — not grounded in a mere natural instinct, but in an inward felloAv- ship Avith Christ. Tliis idea is certainly present in the Gospel, and in the Epistle it comes to definite expression. ' Hereby Ave knoAV love, because he laid down his life for us ; and Ave ougiit to lay down our lives for the brethren' (1 Jn 3"'). The love rer|uired in Christians is the greater love Avhich Avas revealed for the first time in the Cross of Christ. This, hoAvever, does not seem to be the idea involved in the 'neAv commandment.' The newness is ascribed to the commandment itself, not to the motive or the quality of the love en- joined in it. (c) An attractive explanation is that suggested by Olshausen. The commandment of love is neAV in tlie sense that it is for ever fresh, ahvays reneAving itself. Such a meaning seems to be plainly implied in the beautiful antithesis in the Ejnstle ( I Jn 2^- ^), ' I Avrite no new command- ment unto you, but an old commandment. Again, a new commandment I Avrite unto you.' This passage, hoAvever, is a kind of poetical expansion of the idea of a 'neAV commandment,' and cannot be construed as an exegesis, (d) The simplest and most natural explanation is that Christ has in efi'ect established a neAV morality by His insistence on love as the fulfilment of the LaAV. In outAvard form the demand Avas an old one, and this is ac- knowledged in the Synoptic parallels by the quota- tion from Leviticus. But the place assigned to it by Jesus as the sum of the LaAV, the sovereign principle of the moral life, invests it Avith a new significance. The ancient morality is superseded by the Christian law of lo\e. The Avords in the Fourth Gosjiel thus give expression to the truth Avhich had emerged ever more clearly in the course of later reflexion, — that the teaching of Jesus, based as it Avas on the religion of the OT, Avas something radically neAv. The LaAv had been not only fulfilled but abrogated. In its place there Avas a neAV commandment, a neAV determining principle for the moral life.