That the general religious attitude of Revelation is Jewish Christian may probably be infeiTed from such passages as IP 20» 21 '^ and 7*-*. But this does not imply that the work has a particularistic or an anti-Pauline standpoint ; the truth is, rather, that the book presupposes throughout the uni-
versality of salvation (cf. 5» 7" [212'«-2«]), just as, conversely, it says that the unbelieving Jews are not Jews but ' a synagogue of Satan ' (2^ 3^). And when (in 2"*) the Lord assures believers that He will cast upon them no otlier burden than abstinence from tilings sacrificed to idols and from fornication (cf. 2'''*' -"), we are reminded, as indicated above, of the ordinances of the Apostolic Decree for the Gentile Christians. The word ' law ' (w'/ios), how- ever, does not occur in the book.
In the First Epistle of John — as in the Second and Third as well — we find no special reference to the Law. In the First Epistle an error is assailed which lies quite outside the question as to the validity of the Mosaic Law, viz. an ethical in- differentism which, side by side with a Docetic Christology, had apparently assumed a Gnostic complexion. When John, after a warning against being led astray, declares with empliasis that ' he (only) that doeth righteousness is righteous,' and that 'he that doeth sin is of the devil' (3'^'")) he
?robably has in view some misapplication of the 'auline teaching on righteousness. There is notliing in the Epistle which points directly to antinomian tendencies, but something of that nature seems to be hinted at in the closing ad- monition against 'the idols' (5*'), which Avould appear to point to the evils mentioned in Rev 2i4f. 20^ Qj^ ^i^g positive side, the exhortations of the Epistle are directed towards the true faith and towards walking in brotherly love; 'to walk in the light ' consists in brotherly love (cf. 2^- ^^ 3^'^* 4. 5). St. John's well-known definition of sin as 'transgression of the law,' 'lawlessness' (avofxla [1 Jn 3^]), might seem to be of special interest for our present subject, but he does not further develop the thought, which is apparently only of a sub- sidiary character, to be compared with the refer- ences to the requirements of the Law with which on occasion St. Paul supports his admonitions (cf. Gal 5'*, Ro 138-10).
Finally, the Gospel of St. John shows its remote- ness from the ecclesiastical conflict regarding the LaAV by the subordinate place which the idea of the v6txoi occupies in it. This probably finds ex- pression in the significant verse of the Prologue (1") in which St. John compares the Old and the New Dispensation : ' the law was given through Moses ; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.' The antithesis of law and grace is genuinely Pauline ; that of law and truth reminds us above all of the Epistle to the Hebrews : the Law was only an imperfect revelation of the nature of God, which has at length been declared by the only begotten Son (Jn 1'^), 'full of grace and truth' (v."). Moreover, the references to the Law in the Ijody of the Gospel are not so much meant, as in Mt., to interpret its requirements; here, in fact, the Law, or the Scripture, is adduced rather for purposes of argument (cf. b^^- «-« with V^-"^* lO^^- [' your law ' = Scripture, Ps 826] . cf. 123* [' the law ' = Ps 110*, Is 9^ Dn 7''']). It is true that the law of the Sabbath is referred to in a special way, inasmuch as Jesus was on two occasions charged with violating the day, and vindicated His action (59-13. 16-18 722-24, cf^ 9i4fif.) by appealing to the ex- ample of God His Father, who ' worketh even until now' (5'^), and to the practice of circumcising on the Sabbatli (V^). A passage like 7"*"'-, however, and still more decidedly 10** ('in your law'), seems to indicate a certain detachment from the stand- point of the Law generally. And the superiority of the Christian point of view, as contrasted Avith the LaAV, or Avith the legal Avorship, finds expression above ail in the great utterance of Jesus regarding the true Avorship (4-i'"*): 'the hour cometh Avhen neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem shall ye worship the Father. . . . God is spirit : and they
LAW
LEAVEN
693
that worship him must worship in spirit and trutli.' Tlie ethic of St. John's Gospel is most impressively brought to a focus in tlie new commandment of brotherly love (IS^* lo'^- 1^- "). While the dis- courses of Jesus in the first part of the Gospel, in which He addresses the people ('the world'), demand faith in His name, those in the second part (13-17), where He speaks to the disciples (those who have that faith, believers), all converge in the commandment of mutual love ; here, accordingly, we have the same two-fold requirement which we found so simply expressed in the First Epistle of John (3-^). In the Gospel, no doubt, Jesus speaks not only of His commandment, but also of His commandments ; by these, however, He must iiave meant, not tlie commandments of the OT, but in all likelihood simply the special aspects of the law of love.