The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 1 — Section 69

lypse Is ono of tho strongeRt arguments for the Johannilie a11tl1r,rs!tip fJj lhe F(J'l.l,r/!1 Gosiel. 'I he lntr.rnal o.nd external evidence already nilduccrl for the former compeh us, therefore, to eimmine the grounds of the supposed incompntibility of the sin:;le author- ship. In drawing attention t-o the supposrd dill'ercnces or real differences of style, it is incumbent upon us to remember that tho Gospel is a religious biogrnphy, the Apoca- lypse the record of a series of marvellous visions; that the Gospel is written in Cllncise though limpid prose, o.nd tho Apocalypse is in structure and arrangement poetical; that the Gospel hetmys, without quoting it, a close acquaintance with the synoptic narrative, and the Apocalypse a very intimate knowledge of the prophets Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Danial, and the Psalms, but without once referring to them; that the Gospel is framed on the lines of the reflective and argumentative history, and that the Revelation proceeds on the lines of the apocalyptic literature which prevailed. Liicke, Moses Stuart, Dr. S. Davirfaon (in each of his' Introductions to the New Testnment '), Dr. William Lee (in the 'Speaker's Commentary'), have each presented, in ,·ery o.bundaut fashion, long lists of discrepancies, some of the most striking and important of which must be passed under review. We therefore proceed to notice- (b) The phenomena of divergence and resemblance between the two documents. (11) The grammatical and lexical differences. (/J) The grammatical and lexical resem- blances. (-y) The structure of the two books._ (5) 'fhe theological divergences and resem b1ances. (a) 7'he grammatz'.cal and lexical di.ffe:rences. (i.) It is sta.ted that the Gospel is remarkably free from Hebraisms, but that the Apocalypse is charged with them; that the first is written in a fair approximation to classical Greek, whereas the lattct· reveals everywhere a strong Hcbraistic or Aramaic colouring. \Viner says that these Hebraisms are, throughout the New '.l.'1Jstam~nt, more conspicuons in the different and enlarged sense· of words than in grammatical relations of words, although the most obvious illustrations arc found in the substitution of the simple Kcal as representative of the Hebrew copulative ( l) vau:, in place of the numerous particles and conjunctions with which classical Greek abounds; also of &s as possibly representing the Hebrew prefix :l/, or J~. The discourses of our Lord and the visions of the seer "Would certainly further such a contrast in the construction of the Greek sentences. Yet it wust be remembered that in the Gospel, where intense feeling seems to make each uttera.:ce a separate heart-throb (eh. xv., xvii.), and each change in the scene and each successive! event a separate thing of great and unpar,1lleled interes\ as in eh. xx., the evan;;elist dispenses with particles, and moves on from step to step without their aid. It is rniJ. that John uses ,rdvToTE and ,rcl,,ron and Ka6cl,s in the Gospel, but that they are not found in the Apocalypse; but the use of· the first two of these common wonl. occurs very rarely in the New Testament, and their absence proves nothing, while the absence of 1<a8cl,s in the Apocalypse is no proof of Hebraism, because the particlo occurs in portions of the New Testament th11t nre specially Ilebraistic. It is certain that the Apocalypse uses Hebrew words like" Abaddon" (Rev. ix. 11), "Amen," "Hallelujah" (Rev. xix. 1, 3, 4-, 6); but then it must not be forgotten that the Gospel alone in tho New 'l'estament nlso makes use of the "Amen, amen," when calling special attention to the words which follow; and records the Jewish burst of praise, 'fl<Tavvd (eh.xii. 13), and in eh. i. 4-1 and iv. 25 is the one writing which translite- rates into Greek the Hebrew M<<T<Tlas (explained by the writer as equal to Xp1<TT6s); g,ivrs the Hebrew form of the tribunal before which Christ was brought as ra/3/3a9&. (see eh. xix. 13); and, together with Matthew nnd l\Iark, speaks of roA-yo8&. (eh. xix. 17); and refers to the µdvva (eh. vi. 31) as in Rev. ii. 17; records the Galilrean form, pa/J{Jowl, in eh. xx. 16; and in a whole group of passages, after giving the Hebrew or Aramaic form, furnishes the translation into Greek. It is impossible to overlook, in the Apoca- lypse, tbo F~ebrew root of !llany of the representations; e.g. the imagery of the tornplo furnishes ~be scenery of eh. i.-iii., "the seven golden lamps," "the hi,ldea manna," and "the new name on the white stone." Tho history of Israel, moreover, gives meaning to the reference to the" Root and Offspring of David," also to the quotation from Ps. ii., references to tbe "Lion of the tribe of Judah," to the '' twelve tribes of Isrnel," and to" tho new Jerusulom coming down out of heaven." But this peculiarity is equally conspicuous in the Gospel. We have (p. :xlvi.)  INTRODUC'l'ION TO