Fourth Gospol and tbo Ruthor of the Apocalypse. pp. h:Yi-lxxxvii. (a) Tho Johnnnino a.uthol'l!hip of the Apocalypse. (CL) Internal evidence. (1:1) Externnl evidence. (b) 'l.'ho phenomena of divergenoo nnd rescmbla.noe between the Apocnlypso nnd the Fourth Gospel. (CL) The grnmm11tioal and lexical diffcrenoes. (/3) The grnmmatical and lexical rceembl11uces, (-y) The structure of the two books. (ll) The theological divergences and resombl11nccs. pp. h.-lxxxvii. VIII. THE GENERAL RELATION BETWEEN THE SYNOPTIO GoSPELS AND TIIE FOURTII GosrEL. pp. lxxxviii.-cxxviii. A. General statement of the discrep1mcies. Examinntion in detail, of: 1. The scene of "ur Lord's ministry. 2. The length of our Lord's ministry. 8. 'fho d11y of our Lord's <leatb. 4. 'fhe omissions of the synoptiets, pp. -lxxxviii.-xovii. B. 'fhe roincidences with the Fourth Gospel. pp. xovii.-cxi.x. I. With refercnoo to m11i n facts. 2. Coiaoidental reference in the Fourth Gospel to matters related in detail in synoptic Gospels. (I) F1tcts. (2) Coincidental reference to matters differently specified in the Fourth Gospel, including omissions in the Fourth Gospel of memorable events. Omission of: (a) The temptation of our Lord. pp. c.-ciii. (b) The Transfiguration. pp. ciii., civ. (c) 'l.'he institution of the Lord's Supper. pp. ov., ovi. (d) The agony in the garden. pp. cvi., cvii. (e) The Asc-0nsiou. pp. cvii., cviii. (8) AllUBions to features of tel\ching and imagery already familiar. p. cviii. (4) Subtle indications of identity of character. pp. cix.-cxii. (5) The portraitures of the Fourth Gospel (a) The mother of Jesus. (b) John the Baprut. (c) Simon Peter. (d) Cainphas l\nd Pil11te. pp. cxii.-oxix. C. Answer to objections based on special discrepancies nnd chamctoristics. I. The @upposcd exaggeration of the supernatural. 2. The non-development of the chamcler of Jesus. S. 'l'he supposed presence of Gnostio elementH in the Fourth Gospel. 4. 'fhe style e.nd diction of the Fourth Gospel. 5. The discourses of the Fo111th Gospel. pp. cxix.- c:xxviii. IX. TnE TEA.omNG Ol!' THE FounTH GosPEL. pp. c:xxviii.-cL •• 1 I . .TohanniM teaching with reference to the Godhead. (I) A Spirit; (2) The Falhl!~· (3) The Father and the Son. (4) God and tho Logos. (5) The Logos made flesh-the humanity of Jesus. (6) The Son of God, the Christ, the Son of man. (7) The Spirit, the Paraclete; the Triu.nity. pp. cn:viii.-cxxxvi • 2. The world. (1) The world as the cren.ture of God. (2) The world of men considered a.110.rt from God and hostile to God. (8) The prince of this world., pp. cxxxvi.-c:xxxix. 3. The aafoation of t}i,e world. (1) The Saviour himself and the world's need. .(2) The nature of salvation. (a) Life to the non-living and dead. (b) Light to the darkened-a Sun and eyesight. (c) Lov:e to the lost, to condemne~ a.n~ to _the _whole wo_rld. (a) The 1;11ea!ls taken by the Light, Life, and Love to effect the illllllllllation; reirurrection, e.nd salvation of the world of men. (a) The sbining of the Light. (b) The sacrificial death. , (o) The rising a,,"'llin. • (d) The Paraolete: (4) The method of appropriating the Life, Light, Love. (a) Faith in his Name. (b) Faith in and following of Jesus, with o.11 its consequences. (a.) Eman- cipation. (fJ) Love to Christ and one another. (-,,) Worship. (Ii) Assurance. (•) Vision of the Father. (0 Union with the Divine humanity.. (71) .Eternal glory. pp. cxx.xix.- cxlix. 4. The future life and judgment of the worl,d. pp. cxlix., cl. 5. The founding and training of the Cliurch. p. cl X. THE .A.mi.ANGEMENT 01!' THE Coli!TENTB 01!' THE . FouBTR GOSPEL. pp. cl.-clx. History of the classi.fication of subject-matter. The 11rrangemcnt followed in the Expomum. XL REl!'EBENCJ:. ~ ~fr.ERATU.BE A.ND T.u:r. pp. clx., clxL INTRODUCTION TO TBE STUDY 011' TH.II ·
GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN. J. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF TilE PROBLEM. 1. EVOLUTION throws. light on a. myriad phenomena, but around e.'\Ch of them them stretches a.. measureless circumference of impenetrable darkness. Science, with all it~ methods, is perfectly powerless to bridge the abyss between "nothing" and "something;" between. eternal "stillness" and "motion;" between non-living "things" and "life;" betw.een '! physical, phenomena." and " mental impressions ; " between " logical pro- cesses" and I' rea.l inspirations." sWe a.re face to face with mysteries everywhere, but our great men furnish our ptofoundest problems. 'l:'he science of their antecedents and their environment does not solve these problems. Criticism may .show that- some peculiarities which we thought unique have been noticed elsewhere; but the greatest men issue from the furnace of historical inquiry unsinged and inexplicable. We are quite ready to concede that some of the great" figures" of history, who to our unassisted gaze have seemed like stars apart, when covered by the object-glr.ss of the modern telescopic inquirer are resolved into clusters of stars. The Greek Sesostris thus becomes, on close inquiry, several Pharaohs rolled into one. The doubtful dignity assjgr.ed to Aristotle in medireval legend, and the incongruous functions attributed to Virgil, have been discredited by criticism. Mists have gathered round the personJ.!ity of Buddha, of Zerdusht, and Mohammed, which the higher criticism. has done much to pierce...We do not deny that there are composite characters even in tbe sacred history, who, when closely examined, lose some of the mythical adornment with which they have been. invested by the piety of three thousand years. 2, What is true of men is also true of their work. The 'Analects' of Confucius are now !mown not to have been the sole product of his brain. No one dares attribute all the discourses of Buddha. to his own lips. We cannot regard all the Hebrew Psalter as the work of JJavid, and many cautious scholars treat the visions of Isaiah as a collection of oracles issuing at different periods from the prophetic heart of Israel. ,Notwithstanding these concessions, we know that some men and some work defy the critical analysis. The more we know of some men so much the greater becomes their wondrous personality. The blending of apparently contradictory elements is so complete. that they cannot be analyzed or torn asunder; e.g. our own Alfred comes out at last from the crucible, minstrel and king, theologian and lawgiver, warrior and saint. There are, moreover, certain works which, though they represent the age in which they were produced, and many lines of antecedent thought, yet are so dominated by the creative energies of master minds that they cannot be regarded as the ratchwork of many brains and remote ages. 'l'his conclusion may present its own peculiar difficulty, but, instead of sacrificing a great man or a unique word at the shrine of psychologia Iv INTRODUOTION TO