ir Christ miraculously feeds five thousand men.-Their different fx. The transfiguration of Christ on a mountain. (ix. 28–36.) frv. Christ forewarns his disciples of his sufferings and death; exhorts CLASS V. contains an Account of our Saviour's last Journey to Jerusalem, including every Circumstance relative to his Pas sion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension. (ix. 51–62. x.| xxiv.) PT SECT. 1. Transactions from Christ's departure out of Galilee to Jerusalem, to keep the feast of Tabernacles, to his departure from Jerusalem after the feast. $i. In his way to Jerusalem, the Samaritans refuse to receive ChristHis answer to several persons about following him. (ix. 51-62) 35. The seventy disciples sent forth to preach. (x. 1—16.) and then Es sactions 1—13.) passovers, Iver, 17 a ide before 1 Sabbath day; - where 49); **vul capers of *** ? Le the widow's by spies, and his af Jesus, at the .where be delivers NO. 1800 al Christians, 6.255 4: a lus esteem, $5.1 and expels a uses the daughter of Jairus to Si de Tetrarch desires to ***** ** be the birth of John stances contean Greep's being then The early testimony see a at our Lord's profiunis age at the com year of the reigning s & memorable inci e est; the conversion SECT. 2. Transactions between Christ's departure from Jeruss- $i. The return of the seventy disciples to Christ. (x. 17–24.) 5 v. Christ's reply to the Jews, who ascribed his expulsion of demons to § vi. His answer to the Jews, who demanded a sign from heaven. (r. 2 § vii. The Pharisees reproved for their hypocrisy. (xi. 37–54.) § xi. Christ reproaches the people for not knowing the time of Messiah's § xii. God's judginents on some are designed to bring others to repent ance. The parable of the fig-tree. (xiii. 1-9.) § xiii. Christ cures an infirm woman on the Sabbath day (xiii. 10-17); and delivers the parable of the mustard seed. (18–21) § xiv. Christ's journey towards Jerusalem to keep the feast of Dedication; in the course of which he shows that repentance is not to be deferred (xiii. 22-30.); reproves Herod, and laments the judicial blindness of Jerusalem. (31-45) SECT. 3. Transactions subsequently to the feast of Dedication after Christ's departure from Jerusalem, and before his retur thither to keep his last passover, A. D. 32, 33. i. Christ heals a dropsical man on the Sabbath day, and inculcates the duties of humility and charity. (xiv. 1-14.) $ii. The parable of the great supper. (xiv. 15–24.) § iii. Courage and perseverance shown to be requisite in a true Christian § iv. Christ illustrates the joy of the angels in heaven over repenting sin § vi. The Pharisees reproved for their covetousness and hypocrisy. (xvi § vii. The parable of the rich man and Lazarus. (xvi. 19-31.) § ix. In his last journey to Jerusalem, Christ cures ten lepers (xvii. Il- § x. Encouragement to perseverance in prayer, illustrated by the parable of the importunate widow. (xviii. 1—8.) § xi. Self-righteousness reproved, and humility encouraged, by the para ble of the Pharisee and publican or tax-gatherer. (xviii. 9-14.) § xii. Christ encourages young children to be brought to him (xviii, 1517.); and discourses with a rich young man. (18-30.) § xiii. Christ again foretells his death to his disciples (xviii. 31-34.); and cures a blind man near Jericho. (35-42.) § xiv. The conversion of Zaccheus. (xix. 1-10.) xv. The parable of a nobleman going into a distant country to receive kingdom. (xix. 11-28.) a who had been bowed SECT. 4. The transactions at Jerusalem, until the passion of the cleansing of the enter a Samaritan city; HOT BORDOBA, 23 Two of his discierview he had, after Way to Einmans, and at yag parables to those Of this number are es; of the rich fool who e day to live, vainly exulted an and Lazarus; of De Puolan praying in the a widow's importunity, the barren fig tree; of It is worthy of remark, Treasus, in the second of Luke; who has thus, Mis in every thing mate. boca 38 inguished by the name み - as se dat nguished to our times. See the passage of Irenæus *** tǝl., 4o. vol. i pp. 366, 367. Christ, A. D. 33. $i. On Palm Sunday (as we now call it) or the first day of Passion week, Christ makes his lowly yet triumphal entry into Jerusalem, weeps over the city, and expels the traders out of the temple. (xix. 29-46.) $ii. On Monday, or the second day of Passion-week, Christ teaches during the day in the temple. (xix. 47, 48.) $iii. On Tuesday, or the third day of Passion-week. (a) In the day time and in the Temple, Christ confutes the chie priests, scribes, and elders, 1. By a question concerning the baptist of John. (xx. 1-8.)-2. By the parable of the labourers in the vine yard. (9-19.)-3. By showing the lawfulness of paying tribute to Cæsar. (20-26.)-The Sadducees confuted, and the resurrection proved. (27-40.)-The scribes confounded, and the disciples of Christ warned not to follow their example. (41-47.)-The charity of a poor widow commended. (xxi. 1-4.) (b) In the evening, and principally on the Mount of Olives, Christ discourses concerning the destruction of the temple, and of the last judgment (xxi. 5-28.); delivers another parable of the fig tree (9 33.); and enforces the duty of watchfulness. (34-38.) betray Christ (xxii. 4-5); and Christ sends two disciples to prepare the Passover. (7-13.) vi. On the Passover-day, that is, from Thursday evening to Friday (c) During the night, Christ having been conducted to the high-priest's (d) At day-break on Friday morning, Christ is tried before the Sanhiedrin (xxii. 66-71.); from whose tribunal, (e) On Friday morning, 1. he is delivered first to Pilate (xxiii. 1-7.), who sends him to Herod (8-12); by whom he is again sent to Pilate, and is by him condemned to be crucified. (13-25)-2. Christ's discourse to the women of Jerusalem as he was led forth to be crucified. (26-31.) The transactions of the third hour.-The crucifixion; Christ's garments divided; the inscription on the cross; his address to the penitent robber. (xxiii. 32-43.) (g) From the sixth to the ninth hour.-The preternatural darkness, rending of the veil; death of Christ, and its concomitant circumstances. (xxii. 44-49.) (h) Between the ninth hour and sunset, Jesus Christ is interred by SECT. 5. Transactions after Christ's resurrection on Easter -11.) 1 $i. Christ's resurrection testified to the woman by the angel. (xxiv. Peter. (xxiv. 12-35.) 36-49.) SECT. 6. The ascension of Christ, and the apostles' return to The plan of classifying events, adopted by Luke, has been followed by Livy, Plutarch, and other profane historical writers. Thus Suetonius, after exhibiting a brief summary of the life of Augustus, previous to his acquiring the sovereign power, announces his intention of recording the subsequent events of his life, not in order of time, but arranging them into distinct classes; and then proceeds to give an account of his wars, honours, legislation, discipline, and private life. In like manner, Florus intimates that he would not observe the strict order of time; but in order that the things, which he should relate, might the better appear, he would relate them distinctly and separately.2 by Saint Luke in more animated language than is used by either of the rest (xi. 53.): "They began vehemently to press him with questions on many points." And, on another occasion, speaking of the same people, he says, that they were filled with mudness. (vi. 11.) Lastly, in the moral instructions given by our Lord, and recorded by this evangelist, especially in the parables, no one has surpassed him in uniting affecting sweetness of manner with genuine simplicity, particularly in the parables of the benevolent Samaritan and the penitent prodigal.3 SECTION V. ON THE GOSPEL BY SAINT JOHN. I. Title.-II. Author.-III. Date.-IV. Genuineness and authenticity of this Gospel, particularly of ch. xxi., and ch. vii. 53., and viii. 11-1.-V. Its occasion and design.-Account of the tenets of Cerinthus.-Analysis of its contents.-VI. The Gospel of John, a supplement to the other three.—VII. Observations on its style. I. THE TITLE of this Gospel varies greatly in the manuscripts, editions, and versions. In the Codex Vaticanus it is simply ra lavav, according to John; in many other MSS. and editions, Evagger to nata lax, the Gospel according to John, or to xara levy (agor) Evegger, the Gospel according to (Saint) John; in the Codex Bezæ, Agxa Evgenio xx lxvvy, the Gospel according to John beginneth. To omit minor variations in manuscripts of less ancient date,-in the Syriac version, in Bishop Walton's Polyglott, this Gospel is entitled, "The Holy Gospel, the preaching of St. John, which he delivered in Greek, and published at Ephesus:" in the Arabic version it is "The Gospel of St. John the son of Zebedee, one of the twelve apostles, which he wrote in Greek by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit;" and in the Persian version, "The Gospel of John, one of the twelve apostles, which was spoken in the Greek-Roman tongue at Ephesus.' 11. John, the evangelist and apostle, was the son of Zebedee, a fisherman of the town of Bethsaida, on the sea of Galilee, and the younger brother of James the elder. His mother's name was Salome. Zebedee, though a fisherman, appears to have been in good circumstances; for the evangelical history informs us that he was the owner of a vessel, and had hired servants. (Mark i. 20.) And therefore we have no reason to imagine that his children were altogether illiterate, as some critics have imagined them to have been, from a misinterpretation of Acts iv. 13., where the terms apauμara and Sara, in our version rendered unlearned and ignorant men, simply denote persons in private stations of life, who were neither rabbis nor magistrates, and such as had not studied in the schools of the Pharisees, and consequently were ignorant of the rabbinical learning and traditions of the Jews. John and his brother James were, doubtless, well acquainted with the Scriptures of the Old Testament, having not only read them, but heard them publicly explained in the synagogues; and, in common with the other Jews, they entertained the expectation of the Messiah, and that his kingdom would be a temporal one. It is not impossible, though it cannot be affirmed with certainty, that John had been a disciple of John the Baptist, before he became a disciple of Christ. At least, the circumstantial account, which he has given in ch. i. 37-41. of the two disciples who followed Christ, might induce us to suppose that he was one of the two. It is, however, certain that he had both seen and heard our Saviour, and had witnessed some of his miracles, particularly that performed at Cana in Galilee. (ii. 1-11.) John has not recorded his own call to the apostleship; but we learn from the other three evangelists that it took place when he and James were fishing upon the sea of Galilee. VIII. If Paul had not informed us (Col. iv. 14.) that Luke was by profession a physician, and consequently a man of letters, his writings would have sufficiently evinced that he had had a fiberal education; for although his Gospel presents as many Hebraisms, perhaps, as any of the sacred writings, yet his language contains more numerous Græcisms, than that of any other writer of the New Testament. The style of this evangelist is pure, copious, and flowing, and bears a considerable resemblance to that of his great master Paul. Many of his words and expressions are exactly parallel to those which are to be found in the best classic authors; and several eminent critics have long since pointed out the singular skill and propriety with which Luke has named and described the various diseases which he had occasion to notice. As an instance of his copiousness, Dr. Campbell has remarked, that each of the evangelists has a number of words which are used by none of the rest: but in Luke's Gospel, the number of such words as are used in none of the other Gospels, is greater than that of the peculiar words found in all the other three Gospels, put together; and that the terms peculiar to Luke are for the most part long and compound words. There is also more of composition in his sentences than is found in the other three Gospels, and consequently less simplicity. Of this we have an example in the first sentence, which occupies not less than four verses. Further, Luke seems to approach nearer to the manner of other historians, in giving what may be called his own verDr. Campbell on the Gospels, vol. ii. pp. 126–129. Rosenmüller, Scholia in Nov. Test. vol. ii. pp. 3-6. Kuinüel, Comment. in Libros Hist. Nov. dict in the narrative part of his work. Thus he calls the Test. vol. ii pp. 213-220. Bp. Marsh's Michaelis, vol. iii. part i. pp. 228--Pharisees up, lovers of money (xvi. 14.); and in distin-271. Pritii, Introd. ad Nov. Test. pp. 181-195. Viser, Herm. Sacr. Nov. guishing Judas Iscariot from the other Judas, he uses the Comm. Crit. in Libros Nov. Test. pp. 81. 88. Bishop Cleaver's Discourse Test. pars i. pp. 333-339. pars ii. pp. 205-209. 221. et seq. 264. Rumpæi, phrase & 21 severo porns, who also proved a traitor. (vi. 16.) on the Style of St. Luke's Gospel, in his Sermions, pp. 209–224. 8vo. Ox. Matthew (x. 4.) and Mark (iii. 19.) express the same senti- ford, 180 ment in milder language, who delivered him up. Again, the attempt made by the Pharisees, to extort from our Lord what might prove matter of accusation against him, is expressed Suetonius in Augusto, c. ix. (al. xii.) p. 58. edit. Bipont. This historian has pursued the same method in his life of Cæsar. Flori, Hist. Rom. lib. i. c. 19. 2 R VOL. II. he thinks are three degrees in the call of Saint John to be a follower of Christ, viz. 1. His call to the discipleship (John i. 37-42.), after which he continued to follow his business for a short time; 2. Ilis call to be one of the immediate companions of Christ (Matt. iv. 21, 22.); and, 3. His call to the apostleship, when the surname of Boanerges was given to him and his brother. Lampe, Comment. in Evangelium Johannis Prolegom. cap. ii. pp. 17-21. 4 Matt. iv. 21, 22. Mark i. 19, 20. Luke v. 1-10. Lampe has marked what And Mark, in enumerating the twelve apostles (iii. 17.), | in the year 68; Dr. Owen in 69; Michaelis in 70. But when he mentions James and John, says that our Lord "sur- Chrysostom and Epiphanius, among the ancient fathers, and named them Boanerges, which is, sons of thunder," from Dr. Mill, Fabricius, Le Clerc, and Bishop Tomline, among which appellation we are not to suppose that they were of the moderns, refer its date, with greater probability, to the particularly fierce and ungovernable tempers (as Dr. Cave year 97, Mr. Jones to the year 98, and Berthold to the last has conjectured); but, as Dr. Lardner and others have ob- decad of the first century. The principal argument for its served, it is rather to be considered as prophetically represent- early date is derived from John v. 2., where the apostle says, ing the resolution and courage with which they would openly" Now there is at Jerusalem, by the sheep-market, a pool, which and boldly declare the great truths of the Gospel when fully is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches." acquainted with them. How appropriate this title was, the From these words it is urged, that Jerusalem was standing Acts of the Apostles and the writings of John abundantly when they were written; and that if they had been written show.2 From the time when John and his brother received after the destruction of Jerusalem, the evangelist would have their immediate call from Christ, they became his constant used the past tense instead of the present, and would have attendants; they heard his discourses, and beheld his mira- said, There was at Jerusalem a pool, &c. But this argument cles; and, after previous instruction, both public and private, is more specious than forcible; for, though Jerusalem was they were honoured with a selection and appointment to be demolished, it does not necessarily follow that the pool of of the number of the apostles. Bethesda was dried up. On the contrary, there are much What the age of John was at this time, his history does stronger reasons for supposing that it escaped the general denot precisely ascertain. Some have conjectured that he was vastation; for, when Vespasian ordered the city to be demolishthen twenty-two years old; others that he was about twenty-ed, he permitted some things to remain for the use of the gar five or twenty-six years of age; and others again think that rison which was to be stationed there; and he would naturally he was about the age of our Saviour. Dr. Lardner is of leave this bathing-place, fitted up with recesses or porticoes opinion that none of the apostles were much under the age for shade and shelter, that he might not deprive the soldiers of thirty, when they were appointed to that important office. of a grateful refreshment. Now, since the evangelist's Whatever his age might have been, John seems to have been proposition may simply regard Bethesda, we cannot be cer the youngest of the twelve, and (if we may judge from tain that it looks further, or has any view to the state of Je his writings) to have possessed a temper singularly mild, rusalem. The argument, therefore, which is deduced from amiable, and affectionate. He was eminently the object of the above passage in favour of an early date, is inconclusive. our Lord's regard and confidence; and was, on various occa- But, besides this argument, we have strong evidence from sions, admitted to free and intimate intercourse with him, so the contents and design of the Gospel itself, that it was not that he was characterized as "the disciple whom Jesus written until the year 97. It is evident, as Bishop Tomline loved." (John xiii. 23.) Hence we find him present at has forcibly remarked, that the evangelist considers those to several scenes, to which most of the other disciples were whom he addresses his Gospel as but little acquainted with not admitted. He was an eye-witness, in company with Jewish customs and names; for he gives various explana only Peter and James, to the resurrection of Jairus's daughter tions which would be unnecessary, if the persons for whom to life, to our Saviour's transfiguration on the mount, and to he wrote were conversant with the usages of the Jews. his agony in the garden. John repaid this attention by the Similar explanations occur in the Gospels of Mark and Luke; most sincere attachment to his master; for, though, in com- but in this of John they are more marked, and occur more mon with the other apostles, he had betrayed a culpable frequently. The reason of which may be, that when John timidity in forsaking him during his last conflict, yet he wrote, many more Gentiles, and of more distant countries, afterwards recovered his firmness, and was the only apostle had been converted to Christianity; and it was now become who followed Christ to the place of his crucifixion. He necessary to explain to the Christian church, thus extended, was also present at the several appearances of our Saviour many circumstances which needed no explanation while its after his resurrection, and has given his testimony to the members belonged only to the neighbourhood of Judæa, and truth of that miraculous fact; and these circumstances, while the Jewish polity was still in existence. It is reason together with his intercourse with the mother of Christ able to suppose that the feasts and other peculiarities of the (whom our Saviour had commended to his care) (xix. 26, Jews would be but little understood by the Gentiles of Asia 27.), qualified him, better than any other writer, to give a Minor, thirty years after the destruction of Jerusalem. circumstantial and authentic history of Jesus Christ. In one of our Saviour's interviews with his apostles, after his resurrection, he prophetically told this evangelist that he would survive the destruction of Jerusalem, and intimated, not obscurely, that Peter would suffer crucifixion, but that he would die a natural death. (xxi. 18-24.) After the ascension of Christ, and the effusion of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, John became one of the chief apostles of the circumcision, and exercised his ministry at Jerusalem and its vicinity, in the manner and with the success related in the Acts of the Apostles. He was present at the council held in that city (Acts xv.) about the year 49 or 50. Until this time he probably remained in Judæa, and had not travelled into any foreign countries. From ecclesiastical history we learn, that after the death of Mary, the mother of Christ, John proceeded to Asia Minor, where he founded and presided over seven churches in as many cities, but resided chiefly at Ephesus. Thence he was banished to the Isle of Patmos towards the close of Domitian's reign, where he wrote his Revelation. (Rev. i. 9.) On his liberation from exile, by the accession of Nerva to the imperial throne, John returned to Ephesus, where he wrote his Gospel and Epistles, and died in the hundredth year of his age, about the year of Christ 100, and in the third year of the reign of the emperor Trajan.4 III. The precise time when this Gospel was written has not been ascertained, though it is generally agreed that John composed it at Ephesus. Basnage and Lampe suppose it to have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem; and, in conformity with their opinion, Dr. Lardner fixes its date 1 Cave's Life of St. James the Great. § 5. p. 142. Lampe, Comment. in Evangelium Johannis Prolegom. cap. i. pp. 21–30. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 156–170. ; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 212–220. Michaelis, vol. iii. part i. pp. 272-274. Lampe, Proleg. in Joan. Evangel pp. 31-102. Jones on the Canon, vol. iii. pp. 101-110. IV. The Gospel by John has been universally received as genuine. The circumstantiality of its details proves that the book was written by a hearer and eye-witness of the discourses and transactions it records; and, consequently, could not be written long afterwards by a Platonic Christian, as it has been recently asserted, contrary to all evidence. But, besides this incontestable internal evidence, we have the external and uninterrupted testimony of the ancient fathers of the Chris tian church. His Gospel is alluded to, once by Clement of Rome, and once by Barnabas; and four times by Ignatius bishop of Antioch, who had been a disciple of the evange list, and had conversed familiarly with several of the apostles. It was also received by Justin Martyr," Tatian, the churches of Vienne and Lyons,12 Irenæus, 13 Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch,15 Clement of Alexandria,16 Tertullian," Ammonius,18 Origen,19 Eusebius,20 Epiphanius, Augustine, Chry sostom, and, in short, by all subsequent writers of the ancient Christian church. The Alogi or Alogians, a sect which is said to have existed in the second century, are reported to See Josephus de Bell. Jud. lib. iii. c. i. § i. 14 Dr. Townson's Works, vol. i. p. 224. This conjecture is confirmed by the fact, that Vespasian soon after erected magnificent public baths at Rome. Suetonius in Vespasiano, c. vii. See particularly John i. 38. 41., ii. 6. 13., iv. 9., and xi. 55. 8 Elements of Christ. Theol. vol. i. pp. 335. Jones on the Canon, vol. ii pp. 113-116. See Jones on the Canon, vol. iii. pp. 117, 118. 10 Dr. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 120, 121.; 4to. vol. i. p. 344. 14 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 183.; 4to. vol. i. p. 379. 16 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 212. 220.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 395, 399. 17 Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. p. 256.; 4to. vol. i. p. 419. 19 Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 414-417.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 503-505. 19 Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. pp. 469, 470.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 533, 534. 20 lbid. Svo. vol. iv. pp. 225-227.; 4to. vol. ii. pp. 368, 309. 21 See their several testimonies in Lardner's Works, Svo. vol. vi. pp. 187 -190.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 227, 228. have rejected this Gospel, as well as the rest of John's writings; but we have no information concerning these Alogi, on which any dependance can be placed for, in strictness, we have no account of them except the later and uncertain accounts of Philaster and Epiphanius; Irenæus, Eusebius, and other ancient writers before them, being totally silent concerning the Alogi. The probability, therefore, is, that there never was any such heresy.' 6 the seventh verse of John viii., where a has the article r prefixed.-He that is without sin among you, let him first cast THE [not a stone, as in our authorized version] STONE at her; TON AIOON & AUTO Baker. The allusion, Bishop Middleton remarks, is to the particular manner of stoning, which required that one of the witnesses (for two at the least were necessary, see Deut. xvii. 6.) should throw the stone, which was to serve as a signal to the by-standers to complete the punishment. There is therefore strict propriety in calling this stone TON, in order to distinguish it from other stones. It is not probable that an interpolator would have been thus exact in his phraseology, or would have adverted to this apparently trifling circumstance; especially since the expression of order is not elsewhere found in the New Testament. A few manuscripts (Griesbach and Schulz specify eleven) omit the article: but this, Dr. M. is of opinion, only proves that the copyists knew not what to make of it; and that, had they undertaken to interpolate the passage, they would have done it less skilfully than did the present interpolater, supposing we must consider the passage to be spurious. With such decisive testimonies to the genuineness of John's Gospel, it is not a little surprising, that an eminent critic on the continent should have asserted that his Gospel and Epistles exhibit clear evidence, that it was not written by an eyewitness, but was compiled by some Gentile Christian in the beginning of the second century, after the death of the evangelist John, for whom he passed himself. It is also astonishing that, with such testimonies to the genuineness of this Gospel, so distinguished a critic as Grotius should have imagined that the evangelist terminated his history of our Saviour with the twentieth chapter, and that the twenty-first chapter was added after his death by the church at Ephesus. But this opinion is contradicted by the universal consent of manuscripts and versions; for, as this Gospel was published before the evangelist's death, if there had been an edition of it without the twenty-first chapter, it would in all probability have been wanting in some copies. To which we may add that the genuineness of the chapter in question was never doubted by any one of the ancient Christian writers. Finally, the style is precisely the same as that of the rest of his Gospel. Some doubts have been entertained concerning the genuineness of the portion of this Gospel comprised between ch. vii. 53. and viii. 1—11. Its authenticity has been questioned by Erasmus, Calvin, Beza, Grotius, Le Clerc, Wetstein, Semler, Schulze, Morus, Haenlein, Paulus, Schmidt, and various other writers who are mentioned by Wolfius, and by Koecher: Griesbach and Schulz have remarked it as a passage which ought probably to be omitted; and its genuineness has been advocated by Drs. Mill and Whitby, Bp. Middleton, Heumann, Michaelis, Storr, Langius, Dettmers, Steudlin, Kuinel, and Dr. Bloomfield. The limits necessarily prescribed to this section forbid us to enter into a review of all that has been said on this subject; but it may be permitted to remark that the evidence is in favour of the genuineness of the passage in question. For, though it is not found in several ancient versions, and is not quoted or illustrated by Chrysostom, Theophylact, Nonnus (who wrote commentaries or explanations of this Gospel), nor by Tertullian, or Cyprian, both of whom treat copiously on chastity But, besides this more general design of the evangelist, and adultery, and therefore had abundant opportunity of ci- we are informed by Irenæus, and other ancient writers, that ting it, if it had been extant in their copies; yet it is found there were two especial motives that induced John to comin the greater part of the manuscripts (Griesbach has enume-pose his Gospel. One was, that he might refute the heresies rated more than eighty) that are extant, though with great of Cerinthus and the Nicolaitans, who had attempted to cor diversity of readings. If it had not been genuine, how could rupt the Christian doctrine: the other motive was, that he it have found its way into these manuscripts? Moreover, might supply those important events in our Saviour's life, there is nothing in the paragraph in question that militates which the other evangelists had omitted. Respecting the either against the character, sentiments, or conduct of Jesus former of these motives, Irenæus gives us the following Christ; on the contrary, the whole is perfectly consistent account.9 with his meekness, gentleness, and benevolence. To which we may add, that this passage is cited as genuine by Augustine, who assigns the reason why it was omitted by some copyists, viz. lest any offence should be taken by supposing that our Lord suffered a guilty woman to go unpunished. But, in reply to this supposition or objection, we may remark, 1. That, according to his own declaration, he came not into the world to condemn the world (John iii. 17. viii. 15. xii. 47. Luke xii. 14.) and to execute the office of a judge (and it is but reasonable to try him by his own principles, in which no inconsistency can be found); and, 2. Any exercise of judicial authority would have given a direct contradiction to that deference and subordination which he constantly showed and inculcated to the power of the civil magistrate. An additional evidence in favour of the disputed clause is found in Dr. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ix. pp. 515 516.; 4to. vol. iv. pp. 690, 691. Dr. Bretschneider, in his Probabilia de Erangelii et Epistolarum Johannis Apostoli Indole, et Origine. 8vo. Lipsiæ, 1820. In justice to Dr. Bretschneider it must now be stated that, in the preface to the second edi. tion of his Handbuch der Dogmatik (Manual of Dogmatic Theology), he derlared himself satisfied concerning the genuineness of this passage. (Jena Literary Gazette for January, 1827, Supplt. No. 1.) Upon a review therefore of the whole evidence respecting this disputed clause, we may safely conclude that it preponderates in favour of its genuineness. V. The design of St. John in writing his Gospel was "to convey to the Christian world just and adequate notions of the real nature, character, and office of that great Teacher, who came to instruct and redeem mankind. For this purpose, he studiously selected, for his narrative, those passages of our Saviour's life, which most clearly displayed his divine power and authority: and those of his discourses, in which he spoke most plainly of his own nature, and of the efficacy of his death, as an atonement for the sins of the world. The object, which this evangelist had in view, is very clearly stated in chap. xx. verse 31. It was not to accumulate as many instances as possible of the miraculous power exerted by Jesus; but only those, which most distinctly illustrated his peculiar office and nature: Many other signs truly did Jesus, in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book. But THESE are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing, ye might have life through his name. This expression seems to prove, that those persons are wrong, who suppose that St. John wrote his Gospel, merely to supply the defects and omissions of the other Evangelists. The real difference between them is, that they wrote a history of our Saviour's life; but St. John, of his person and office." * The genuineness of the twenty-first chapter of St. John's Gospel is satisfactorily vindicated against the objections of Grotius, and some modern critics, by Professor Weber in his "Authentia capitis ultimi Evangelii Johannis, &c." Halis, 1823, 8vo. Wolfi Curæ Philologica, in loc. Staeudlin, Prolusio quà Pericopre de Adulterà, Joh. vii. 53. viii. 1–11., Veritas et Authentia defenditur. Gottinge, 1806, 4to. "John being desirous to extirpate the errors sown in the minds of men by Cerinthus, and sometime before by those called Nicolaitans, published his Gospel in which he acquaints us that there is one God, who made all things by his word, and not, as they say, one who is the Creator of the world, and another who is the Father of the Lord: one the Son of the Creator, and another the Christ from the supercelestial abodes, who descended upon Jesus the Son of the Creator, but remained impassible, and afterwards fled back to his own plerōma or fulness." This testimony of Irenæus has been opposed by Lampe, Lardner, Tittmann, Kuinoel, and adopted by Buddeus, Michaelis, Moldenhawer, Mosheim, Bishop Tomline, Dr. Owen, and other later divines. The principal objections against the declaration of Irenæus may be reduced to the two following: viz. 1. That Irenæus is at variance with himself: for in another passage he says, "as John the disciple of our Lord assures us, saying, But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye Kuinöel, Comment. in Libros Nov. Test, Historicos, pp. 379-396. Titt manni Commentarius in Evang. Johannis, pp. 318-322. Bishop Middleton's Doctrine of the Greek Article, on John viii. 7. Griesbachii et Schulzii Nov. Test. tom. i. pp. 555, 556. Bloomfield's Annotations, vol. iii. pp. 275–294., in which Dr. B. has given a copious statement of the evidence for and against this section of St. John's Gospel. Bp. Bloomfield's Lectures on the Gospel of St. John, pp. 4, 5. might have life through his name; foreseeing these blasphemous notions that divide the Lord, so far as it is in their power." Now, if Irenæus here meant to say, that John only foresaw the errors, which were propagated by Cerinthus and the Gnostics, it must appear very extraordinary that he should say, in the passage above quoted, that John wrote against the errors which had been propagated by Cerinthus. But the contradiction is only apparent; for providens, the expression of Irenæus, does not signify "foreseeing," but guarding against. The latter passage, therefore, when properly explained, does not confute but confirm the former. Besides, as Paul, in his first Epistle to Timothy, speaks of Gnostic errors, it is evident that they must have been propagated long before John wrote his Gospel. 2. The second argument, relied upon by those learned men who dissent from the common opinion, is, that the early fathers, in their catalogues of heretics, for the most part place Cerinthus after Carpocrates, who unquestionably lived and taught in the second century. This circumstance would cer tainly possess considerable weight, if it appeared that the early fathers had paid due attention to the regular order of time in their enumeration of heretics: but, instead of this, we know the fact to be, that the names of heretics are set down by Irenæus, Tertullian, Clement, and others, at random, and without paying any regard to the times in which they lived. "But even if Irenæus had not asserted that St. John wrote his Gospel against the Gnostics, and particularly against Cerinthus, the contents of the Gospel itself would lead to this conclusion. The speeches of Christ, which John has recorded, are selected with a totally different view from that of the three first evangelists, who have given such as are of a moral nature; whereas those which are given by John are chiefly dogmatical, and relate to Christ's divinity, the doctrine of the Holy Ghost, the supernatural assistance to be communicated to the apostles, and other subjects of a like import. In the very choice of his expressions, such as light, life, &c. he had in view the philosophy of the Gnostics, who used or rather abused these terms. That the first fourteen verses of John's Gospel are merely historical, and contain only a short account of Christ's history before his appearance on earth, is a supposition devoid of all probability. On the contrary, it is evident that they are purely doctrinal, and that they were introduced with a polemical view, in order to confute errors, which prevailed at that time respecting the person of Jesus Christ. Unless John had an adversary to combat who made particular use of the words light, and life,' he would not have thought it necessary after having described the Creator of all things, to add, that in him was life, and the life was the light of men, or to assert that John the Baptist was not that light. The very meaning of the word light,' would be extremely dubious, unless it were determined by its particular application in the oriental Gnosis. For without the supposition, that John had to combat with an adversary who used this word in a particular sense, it might be applied to any divine instructor, who by his doctrines enlightened mankind. Further, the positions contained in the first fourteen verses are antitheses to positions maintained by the Gnostics, who used the words yes, ζωή, φως, μονογένης, πλήρωμα, &c. as technical terms of their philosophy. Lastly, the speeches of Christ, which St. John has selected, are such as confirm the positions laid down in the first chapter of his Gospel; and therefore we must conclude that his principal object throughout the whole of his Gospel was to confute the errors of the Gnostics."2 the design and arrangement of John's Gospel, it will be necessary to take a brief review of the tenets of Cerinthus, in opposition to which the evangelist purposely wrote it. This will not only reflect considerable light on particular passages, but make the whole appear a complete work,regular, clear, and conclusive. Cerinthus was by birth a Jew, who lived at the close of the first century: having studied literature and philosophy at Alexandria, he attempted at length to form a new and singular system of doctrine and discipline, by a monstrous combination of the doctrines of Jesus Christ with the opinions and errors of the Jews and Gnostics. From the latter he borrowed their Pleroma or fulness, their ons or spirits, their Demiurgus or creator of the visible world, &c. and so modified and tempered these fictions as to give them an air of Judaism, which must have considerably favoured the progress of his heresy. He taught that the most high God was utterly unknown before the appearance of Christ, and dwelt in a remote heaven called AHPOMA (Pleroma) with the chief spirits or Eons-That this supreme God first generated an only begotten SON, MONOTENEZ, who again begat the word, Aoroz, which was inferior to the first-born. That CHRIST was a still lower æon, though far superior to some othersThat there were two higher wons, distinct from Christ; one called ZOH, or LIFE, and the other 2, or the LIGHT-That from the æons again proceeded inferior orders of spirits, and particularly one Demiurgus, who created this visible world cut of eternal matter-That this Demiurgus was ignorant of the supreme God, and much lower than the Eons, which were wholly invisible-That he was, however, the peculiar Ged and protector of the Israelites, and sent Moses to them; whose laws were to be of perpetual obligation-That Jesus was a mere man of the most illustrious sanctity and justice, the real son of Joseph and Mary-That the on Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove when he was baptized, revealed to him the unknown father, and empowered him to work miracles-That the Æon, LIGHT, entered Jchn the Baptist in the same manner, and therefore that John was in some respects preferable to Christ-That Jesus, after his union with Christ, opposed himself with vigour to the God of the Jews, at whose instigation he was seized and crucified by the Hebrew chiefs, and that when Jesus was taken captive, and came to suffer, Christ ascended up on high, so that the man Jesus alone was subject to the pains of an ignomin ous death-That Christ will one day return upon earth, and, renewing his former union with the man Jesus, will reign ia Palestine a thousand years, during which his disciples will enjoy the most exquisite sensual delights. Bearing these dogmas in mind, we shall find that Saint John's Gospel is divided into three parts; viz. PART I. contains Doctrines laid down in Opposition to those of Cerinthus. (John i. 1-18.) The doctrines laid down in the first part, as contra-positions to the tenets of Cerinthus, may be reduced to the following heads, in which the evangelist asserts, 1. That Christ is the Logos or Word of God. 2. That the Logos and Monogenes are not distinct beings, but one and the same person. (1. 14.) 3. That Christ or the Logos is not an inferior Eon, but God. (i. L.). 4. That he perfectly knew the supreme God, being always with him in the Pleroma. (i. 18.) 5. That he is not to be distinguished from the Demiurgus; for he is the creator of the whole world. (i. 3, 10.) 6. That life and light are not particular and separate spirits, but the saine with the Logos and Christ. (1. 4. 7-9 17.) And, therefore, that Christ, the Logos, Life, Light, the Only-Begotten, are not distinct Eons, but one and the same divine person. 7. That no particular Eon entered into John the Baptist by the name of Light, to communicate to hit a superior knowledge of the divine will (i. 8.); but that he was a mere man, and, though inspired, much inferior to Jesus, being only the forerunner of him. (1. 6. 8. 15.) 8. That the supreme God was not entirely unknown before the time of Christ; for inen had received such lights on this head, under the various dispensations through which they passed, that it was then own fault if they remained ignorant. (i. 9, 10.) In addition to the preceding arguments and proofs, there is one circumstance highly worthy of remark, which greatly strengthens the testimony of Irenæus as to the object of John in writing his Gospel; viz. that he delivered it within a century after that Gospel was written. Now, as Irenæus was a disciple of Polycarp, who was personally acquainted with the evangelist, he consequently had the best means of procuring information on this subject. The evidence of a credible writer of the second century, uncontradicted by contemporary writers, or by those who lived in the following century, is pp. 278, 279. Tittmanni Meletemata Sacra in Evangelium Johannis, pp surely preferable to the conjectures offered by critics of the eighteenth or nineteenth century.3 In order to understand 1 Quemadmodum Joannes Domini discipulus confirmat, dicens, "Hæc autem scripta sunt, ut credatis quoniam Jesus est filius Dei, et ut credentes, vitam æternam habeatis in nomine ejus;" providens has blasphemas regulas, quæ dividunt Dominuin quantuin ex ipsis attinet. Advers. Hæres. lib. iii. c. 16. 9. That the Jews were not the peculiar people of an inferior God, such 1-24. Kuinöel, Comment. in Hist. Libros Nov. Test. vol. ii. pp. et seq. Mosheim's Commentaries, vol. i. pp. 337-347. Dr. Lardner's Works Svo. vol. ix. pp. 325-327.; 4to. vol. iv. pp. 567-569. Dr. Owen's Observa tions on the Four Gospels, pp. 88-92. To this learned writer we are chiefly indebted for the preceding observations. The sentiments of Basilides, of Alexandria (who was nearly contemporary with Cerinthus), concerning the Logos, were not very unlike the tenets of that hæresiarch. Mr. Townsend has given an abstract of them in his New Testament, arranged in chrono logical order, &c. vol. i. pp. 19-21. Lampe, Prolegom. in Johannis Evangelium, vol. i. p. 179. et seq. Bud- Unus et idem ostenditur Logos et Monogenes, et Zoe et Phōs, et Soter deus de Ecclesia Apostolica, p. 412. et seq. Mosheim's Commentaries on et Christus filius Dei, et hic idem incarnatus pro nobis. Iren. lib. 1. c the Affairs of Christians, vol. i. pp. 337 338. note. Michaelis, vol. iii. part i. | i. § 20. 2 Michaelis, vol. iii. part i. p. 280. |