RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Jesus Christ
Of these sources the former contain from the
nature of the case but slight and incidental allusion
to the tradition; but for the very rea-
1*.T^e son that no effort is made to prove a
EfpStulS case' the readers being merely reminded of generally accepted facts, this testimony, so far as it goes, is of far greater value than apologetic narrative. Moreover, the nucleus of this group consists of extensive " epistles " by a known author addressed at a fixed date to definite localities critically authenticated, and from twenty to fifty years earlier in date than the anonymous narratives. It is needless, in view of this, to explain why the historical critic takes his stand primarily at the situation of belief and practise indirectly revealed by the great Pauline Epistles, employing them as a standard. The minor elements of this group, disputed letters of Paul, later and doubtful writings attributed to Peter, John, James and Jude add little in any event to the knowledge of Christianity as it existed in Corinth c. 55 a.d. derivable from the two Epistles to the Corinthians alone.
The narrative writings (2) are four in number, all anonymous, none earlier than 65 a.d., the latest, attributed in veiled language, in a subsequently at- _ tached appendix, to the Apostle John
Gos 1^ not earlier than 98 a.d. They show a large degree of mutual dependence, but certainly have no mere partial presentation in mind. Each aims to furnish to its respective region " the Gospel " as locally understood inclusive of all essential features. Not in the case of Mark, admittedly representing the tradition as it circulated at Rome, nor even in the case of John, representing that of proconsular Asia, can it be supposed that the writer intended merely to supplement certain standard authorities already current. Just as Mark represents " the Gospel " as understood in Rome, one of the two chief Pauline centers, and John that of Ephesus, the other, so the double work attributed to Luke, whom tradition declared of Antiochian parentage, represents " the Gospel " (Luke i. 4) as understood in " Syria and Cilicia " (Acts xv. 23; Gal. i. 21); while southern Syria, whose historic relations are with Egypt, seems to be represented by the Gospel attributed to Matthew. Critical examination shows these four Gospels to be largely interdependent so that practically the whole of Mark has been transcribed to form the narrative outline of both Matthew and Luke while John shows dependence on all three. Yet in each there persists a significant local type. Both Syrian gospels, besides the conspicuous Mark element, make large use of a factor absent from gospels of the Pauline or Greco-Roman field, that of the commandments of Jesus. This factor (Q) determines the very nature of Matthew, whose whole mission is to teach men " to observe all things whatsoever I commanded you " (Matt, xxviii. 20) . Luke's drafts from this same " teaching " source are only second in extent to his extracts from Mark, and are transcribed with much greater exactness. He adds, however, quite a body of narrative not used by Matthew, including his whole second " treatise," and by such additions, as well as the VI.— 11
treatment of material, generally approximates more nearly than Matthew to Mark's idea of " the Gospel " as the whole drama of Jesus' career (Acts i. 1). The motive of the Ephesian Gospel is different. While in form largely composed of dialogue, often tending to monologue (iii. 1-21), it does not aim to transmit " commandments of the Lord." Its discourses are controversial expositions of the great Pauline doctrines of new birth, life in the Spirit, etc. Nor does the author aim at history. The " works " he relates are seven symbolic " signs " " manifesting the glory " of the incarnate Logos. The explicit aim is to produce faith in Jesus as the incarnate Son of God, and thus convey that mystical " life " which is the essence of Pauline religion (John xx. 31; cf. Gal. ii. 20).
The great Pauline Epistles recall the conditions out of which the Greek Gospels have grown. They re- _ _,. produce not only Paul's own conception Pauline °^ " ^e Gospel " including an outline Gospel. °f the story, but certain fundamental differences between Paul and the older apostles, which in some degree correspond to and explain the persistent differences of type in the Greco-Roman and the Syrian tradition. Paul was both unable, and of principle unwilling, to compete with those who claimed to report acts and utterances of the Lord from their own observation. Even had he known a flesh and blood Messiah, such a Messiah, were it even the earthly Jesus himself, he would know no more (II Cor. v. 16), because since his experience in conversion, redemption had lost all interest save as a spiritual experience beginning in the individual soul. His own hopeless struggle for the righteousness of the law, on which participation in the Messianic age, the rabbinic " world to come," was in his view conditioned, had issued in a moral death, from which he had been raised by vision of the risen Lord of Stephen and of many another Christian martyr. Dawning faith in the crucified Messiah of the publicans and sinners, outcasts from synagogue orthodoxy, had brought to him not merely hope of a forgiveness without the works of the law, but an experience similar to that he witnessed in them, though of loftier moral type, an influx of life and power from " the spirit." The starting-point of everything was to Paul the risen, glorified Christ, giver of the Spirit. He had been revealed as the Son of God with power by the resurrection (Rom. i. 4). This inward experience made Paul an apostle (Gal. i. 16) and gave him his message. Conference with those who were apostles before him was not needful to prepare him to preach it (Gal. i. 16- 17). And yet without the safe anchor of connection with the historic Jesus, this doctrine of a spiritual Christ was exposed to all kinds of vagaries. From what it actually suffered at the hands of docetic Gnostics (see Docetism), and of ultra Paulinists like Marcion (q.v.), it seems that it would soon be assimilated in the hands of Greek converts to the myths of the redeemer-gods (theoi soteres), who, incarnate in the form of demigods, or as invisible eons, " powers," or " emanations," were held to participate in the life of men. The whole ethical content of Paul's religion of the Spirit was
Jesus Christ