supplemented and revised by a Christian, and issued not earlier than 136: ?How strange that we should ever have thought it possible for a personal attendant upon the ministry of Jesus to write or edit a book mixing up fierce Messianic conflicts, in which, with the sword, the gory garment, the blasting flame, the rod of iron, as his emblems, he leads the war march, and treads the winepress of the wrath of God until the deluge of blood rises to the horses? bits, with the speculative Christology of the second century, without a memory of his life, a feature of his look, a word from his voice, or a glance back at the hillsides of Galilee, the courts of Jerusalem, the road to Bethany, on which his image must be forever seen.

The force of this statement, however, is greatly broken if we consider that the apostle John, in his earlier days, was one of the ?Boanerges, which is Sons of thunder? ( <410317>Mark 3:17), but became in his later years the apostle of love: <620407>1 John 4:7 ? ?Beloved, let us love one another for love is of God.? The likeness of the fourth gospel to the epistle, which latter was undoubtedly the work of John the apostle, indicates the same authorship for the gospel. Thayer remarks that ?the discovery of the gospel according to Peter sweeps away half a century of discussion. Brief as is the recovered fragment, it attests indubitably all four of our canonical books.?? Riddle, in Popular Com., 1:25 ? ?If a forger wrote the fourth gospel, then Beelzebub has been casting out devils for these eighteen hundred years.? (in the genuineness of the fourth gospel, see Bleek, Introduction to New Testament, 1:250; Fisher, Essays on Supernat. Origin of Christianity, 33, also Beginnings of Christianity, 320- 362, and Grounds of Theistic and Christian Belief, 245-309; Sanday, Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, Gospels in the Second Century and Criticism of the Fourth Gospel; Ezra Abbott, Genuineness of the Fourth Gospel, 52, 80-87; Row, Bampton Lectures on Christian Evidences, 249- 287; British Quarterly, Oct. 1872:216; Godet, in Present Day Tracts, 5: no. 25; Westcott, in Bib. Com, on John?s Gospel, Introduction xxviii ? xxxii; Watkins, Bampton Lectures for 1890; W.L. Ferguson, in

Bibliotheca Sacra, 1896:1-27.

(d) The epistle to the Hebrews appears to have been accepted during the first century after it was written (so Clement of Rome, Justin Martyr, and the Peshito Version witness). Then for two centuries, especially in the Roman and North African churches, and probably because its internal characteristics were inconsistent with the tradition of a Pauline authorship, its genuineness was doubted (so Tertullian, Cyprian, Iren^us, Muratorian Canon). At the end of the fourth century, Jerome examined the evidence and decided in its favor; Augustine did the same; the third Council of

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment