designation. As between the two brothers, there can be no hesitation in assigning the authorship to John, since James early fell a victim to the Herodian persecution 44 A.D. (Acts xii. 2).

If the Gospel was not written by John, it must have been written by some one who wished to pass for that apostle; and those who reject the Johannine authorship have the insuperable difficulty to encounter of finding a writer of the post-apostolic age possessed of the intellectual gifts and the spiritual elevation needed for the production of so sublime a work, and at the same time capable of claiming for his unscrupulous fabrications, in the most solemn terms, the authority of an eyewitness and apostle who had reclined in Jesus' bosom.

Besides the allusions to the inner life of Christ and His apostles which have already been referred to, there may be discerned in this Gospel, on a close examination, many other tokens of its apostolic origin.

(1) In its account of Christ's ministry it gives a faithful picture of the Messianic hopes of temporal sovereignty which existed among the Jews prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, as well as of the conflict which Christ waged with such expectations (i. 19-28; iv. 25; vi. 14, 15; vii.; xi. 47-53; xix. 12); while we also find traces of acquaintance with the Temple arrangements of the same period (ii. 13-16; iv. 20, 21; x. 23).

(2) It shows a minute acquaintance with Jewish customs (ii. 6; iii. 25; vii. 22; xi. 55; xix. 7, 31), manners (iv. 9, 27; vii. 2, 37; x. 22; xi. 44; xviii. 28; xix. 40), and opinions (i. 46; vii. 35, 41, 52; ix. 2, 16; x. 19-21), frequently giving explanations as if it were written by a Jew for foreign readers.

(3) It also shows a minute acquaintance with the topography of Jerusalem (v. 2; viii. 20; ix. 7; xi. 18; xviii. 1, 15; xix. 13, 17, 41), and with the geography of Palestine generally (i. 28; iii. 23; iv. 5, 35; xi. 54).

(4) It is circumstantial in many of its statements, and bears the stamp of personal knowledge such as would be possessed by an eyewitness (i. 29, 35-43; ii. I, 20;

iv. 6, 40, 52; vi. 16-24, x. 40, xi. 6, 39, etc.; xii. I, xviii. 10, etc.; xix. 25, xx. I-10, etc.)

(5) While written in Greek, it is Hebraic in its style and structure, abounding in parallels and contrasts, both in expression and arrangement (e.g. chap. i.), and frequently quotes from the Old Testament, sometimes directly from the Hebrew (xiii. 18; xix. 37, etc.)

All that can be alleged against the apostolic authorship of the fourth Gospel, on account of its marked divergence from the other Gospels in the representation of Christ's character and teaching, is sufficiently met by the fact that "the synoptical Gospels contain the Gospel of the infant Church; that of St. John, the Gospel in its maturity. The first combine to give the wide experience of the many; the last embraces the deep mysteries treasured up by the one." If we suppose the fourth Gospel to have been written about 85 A.D., an interval of more than half a century would thus have elapsed since the death of Christ. During that time Christianity had spread into many lands and furnished subjects for reflection to many minds, while the Jewish expectations and prejudices which had clung to many of the early members of the Church had been in a great measure dissipated by the fall of Jerusalem. In these circumstances it was inevitable that the truths of the Gospel should be viewed in new lights and assume more speculative forms; and in Ephesus, as the great meetingplace of Oriental mysticism and Greek philosophy, the deeper questions and more theological aspects of the new religion would naturally claim a large measure of attention. (Cf. Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and the Ephesians, pp. 91, 99.)

We thus see that, as the other Gospels had reference to distinct types of thought for which they were severally adapted, so the fourth Gospel was designed to meet the demand for a more intellectual presentation of divine truth, which might serve as an antidote to the Gnostic speculations which were imperilling the recognition at one time of Christ's divinity, and at another time of His

humanity. In God's providence a worthy exponent of this phase of the Gospel was found in the aged Apostle John, whose heart and mind had been so receptive of divine truth even in his youth as to win for him the place of closest fellowship with his Master, and who had since then enjoyed the teaching of the Holy Spirit for a longer period than any of his fellows, and amid more intellectual surroundings, and was thus singularly fitted for the great task which Providence had assigned to him. Its Date.-85-90 A.D., as indicated above.

Character and Contents.-Many of the remarks that might have been made under this head have already found place in this chapter, and at pages 11 and 14, where a contrast is drawn between the Synoptics and the fourth Gospel. On the whole perhaps no fitter epithet can be found for this Gospel than that applied to it by Clement of Alexandria at the close of the second century, viz. the spiritual Gospel. It may also be described as the doctrinal or theological Gospel. It represents Christ's person and work not with special reference to the Past, or the Present, or the Future; but generally with reference to Eternity, in which Past, Present, and Future are alike included.

Its great theme is set forth in the Prologue or Introduction (i. 1-18), which strikes the keynote of the whole Gospel. It represents Christ as the Manifestation of the divine Being, the only Source of life and light, in human form ("the Word was God" and "the Word became flesh"), and, as such, the object, on the one hand, of saving faith, and the occasion, on the other hand, of the world's unbelief. The whole book is an elaboration of this sublime thought, with a singular union of depth and simplicity-chiefly in connection with the Lord's visits to Jerusalem at the national feasts, when He had occasion to press His claims, as the Revealer of the Father, upon the teachers of religion. This Manifestation, attested by several forms of divine witness-bearing (including miracles, which are always called "signs" in this Gospel, as expressions of Christ's

glory), may be said to reach a climax in xii. 37-40 ("though he had done so many signs before them, yet they believed not on him "), after which there is described, on the one hand, the downward course of the world's unbelief leading to the crucifixion, and on the other, the perfecting of the disciples' faith, which attains its final and typical expression in the slowlymatured but deep-rooted confession of the doubting Thomas, "My Lord and my God" (xx. 28).

As already indicated, the fourth Gospel contains very few incidents of the ministry in Galilee. In this respect, as well as in many of its unexplained allusions (i. 32, 40; iii. 5, 13, 24; vi. 62, 70; xx. 17), it takes for granted acquaintance with the earlier Gospels. The matter which it contains in common with each of the three other Gospels is very limited in extent, but of the most profound significance, viz. the Miraculous Feeding of the Multitude and the Death and Resurrection of Christ. A crucified and risen Saviour who can say of Himself, "I am the bread of life; he that cometh to me shall not hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst,❞—this is the essence of the four Gospels, as it is the essence of Christianity symbolised in the Lord's Supper; and the final object of the whole New Testament is summed up by the last of the apostles when he says, "These are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that, believing, ye may have life in his name " (xx. 31).

CHAPTER VII

"THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES"

ITS Author. There can be no doubt that the Book of Acts is from the same pen as the third Gospel. This is evident from the preface at the head of each book, and from the similarity of their general style and

structure.

But

An attempt has been made, however, to raise a distinction, as regards authorship, between different portions of the book. There are certain passages whose genuineness has scarcely ever been disputed—those, namely, in which the writer uses the first person plural, as having been himself present on the occasions referred to. It is generally acknowledged that these passages are the genuine work of a companion of the apostle. by a certain school of critics the rest of the book has a very different character assigned to it. According to them, the "we" passages formed the original notes of an eyewitness, which were made use of by a subsequent writer in the second century, as the nucleus of a history in great part fictitious, which was designed to bridge over the gulf between Paul and the rest of the apostles.

1 From these passages it appears that the writer joined Paul's company at Troas (xvi. 10), that he accompanied him to Philippi, where he was left behind when Paul departed to another city, that after an interval of six or seven years he rejoined the apostle on the latter's return to Philippi, and accompanied him on his last journey to Jerusalem (xx. 5-xxi. 18), and afterwards from Cæsarea to Rome (xxvii. 1-xxviii. 16).