JESUS CHRIST

in his old age — about a .d . 95. It is also true that the Gospel solemnly stakes its credit on its right to be accepted as the narrative of an eye-witness (Jn 19^^ 212^). And its claim is strengthened by the fact that, in the judgment even of many unsympathetic witnesses, it embodies a larger or smaller amount of independent and valuable information. On the other hand, it is a serious matter that a Gospel, appearing at the close of the century, should practically recast the story of Jesus which had circulated in the Church for sixty years, and should put forward a view of the course of the Ministry which is not even suspected in the other Apostolic sources. Psissing to the teaching, we find that the process which was indiscoverable in the Synoptic report has here actually taken place, and that the discourses of Jesus are assimilated to a well-marked type of Apostolic doctrine. There is reason to believe that for both history and doctrine the author had at his disposal Memorabilia of Jesus, but in both cases also it would seem that he has handled his data with great freedom. The treatment of the historical matter, it may be permitted to think, is more largely topical, and the chronological framework which it provides is less reliable, than is commonly supposed. The discourses, again, have been expanded by the reporter, and cast in the moulds of his own thought, so that in them we really possess a combination of the words of Jesus of Na^reth with those of the glorified Chris tispeaking in the experience of a disciple. The hypothesis wnich seems to do justice to both sets of phenomena is that John was only the author in a similar sense to that in which Peter was the author of Mk., and Matthew of canonical Mt., and that the actual composer of the Fourth Gospel was a disciple of the second generation who was served heir to the knowledge and faith of the Apostle, and who claimed considerable powers as an executor. In view of these considerations, it is held that a sketch of the life of Jesus is properly based on the Synoptic record, and that in utilizing the Johannine additions it is desirable to toke up a critical attitude in regard to the form and the chronology. There is also much to be said for ex-pounding the teaching of Jesus on the basis of the Synoptics, and for treating the Johannine discourses as primarily a source for ApostoUc doctrine. It is a different question whether the interpretation of Christ which the Fourth Gospel supplies is trustworthy, and on the value of this, its main message, two remarks may be made. It is, in the first place, substantially the same valuation of Christ which per-vades the Pauline Epistles, and which has been endorsed by thesaintly experience of the Christian centuries as answering to the Imowledge of Christ that is given in intimate com-munion with the risen Lord. Moreover, the doctrine of Providence comes to the succour of a faith which may be distressed by the breakdown of the h3^othesis of inerrancy. For it is a reasonable beHef that God, in whose plan with the race the work of Christ was to be a decisive factor, took order that there should be given to the after world a record which should sufficiently instruct men in reply to the ques-tion, 'What think ye of Christ?'

(2) The Epistles. — From the Epistles it is possible to collect the outstanding facts as to the earthly condition, the death, and the resurrection of Christ. Incidentally St. Paul shows that he could cite His teaching on a point of ethics (1 Co 7")t and give a detailed account of the institution of the Lord's Supper (ll^aff). It is also significant that in allusions to the Temptation (He 416), the Agony (5'), and the Transfiguration (2 P 1''), the writers can reckon on a ready under-standing.

(B) Extra-Canonical Sources: (1) Christian; (a) Patristic references. — The Fathers make very trifling additions to our knowledge of the facts of the Ufe of Jesus. There is nothing more important than the statement of Justin, that as a carpenter Jesus made ploughs and yokes {Dial. 88). More valuable are the additions to the canonical sayings of Jesus (Westcott, Introd. to the Gospels^, 1895; Resch, Agrapha^ 1907). Of the 70 Logia which have been claimed, Ropes pronounces 43 worthless, 13 of possible value, and 14 valuable (Die Siyruche Jesu, 1896). The following are deemed by Buck to be noteworthy (Synapse der drei ersten Evangelien^ 1906): —

(1) * Ask great things, and the small shall be added to you; and ask heavenly thin^, and the earthly shall be added to you* (Origen, de Orat. § 2).

(2) ' If ye exalt not your low things, and transfer to your

right hand the things on your left, ye shall not enter into my kingdom' (Acta Fhilippi, ch. 34).

443

JESUS CHRIST

(3) ' He who is near me is near the fire, he who is far from me is far from the kingdom' (Origen, Horn, in Jer. xx. 3).

(4) ' If ye liepfc not that which is small, who will give you that which is great?' (Clem. Rom. ii. 8).

(5) 'Be thou saved and thy soul' (Exc.e.Tneod.ap.Clem. Alex. § 2).

(6) ' Snow yourselves tried bankers ' (Clem. Alex. Strom. i. 28).

(7) 'Thou hast seen thy brother, thou hast seen God' (ii). 1. 19).

More recent additions to the material are to be found in Grenfell and Hunt, Sayings of our Lord (1897) and New Sayings of Jesus (1904).

(ft) Apocryphal Gospels. — These fall into three groups according as they deal with the history of Joseph and Mary (.Protevangelium of James), the Infancy (Gospel of Thomas), and Pilate (Acts of Pilate). They are worthless elaborations, with the addition of grotesque and some-times beautiful fancies ('Apocryphal Gospels, Acts and Revelations,' vol. xvi. of the Ante-Nicene Library, 1870). Of more value are the fragments of the Gospels of the Hebrews, the Egyptians, and Peter (Hilgenfeld, NT extra canonem receptumf, 1876-84; Swete, The Akhmim Fragment of the Gospel of Peter, 1903).

(2) Jewish sources. — Josephus mentions Jesus (Ant. XX. ix. 1), but the most famous passage (xvin. iii. 3) is mainly, if not entirely, a Christian interpolation. The Jews remembered Him as charged with deceiving the people, practising magic and speaking blasphemy, and as having been crucified; but the calumnies of the Talmud as to the circumstances of His birth appear to have been comparatively late inventions (Huldricus, Sepher Toledot Jeschua, 1705; Laible, Jesus Christus im Talmud, 1900).

(3) Classical sources. — There is evidence In the classical writers for the historical existence, approxi-mate date, and death of Jesus, but otherwise their attitude was ignorant and contemptuous (Tac. Ann. XV. 44; Suetonius, Lives of Claudius and Nero; the younger PUny, Epp. x. 97, 98; Lucian, de Morte Peregrini; Celsus in Origen; cf. Keim, Jesus of Nazara [Eng. tr.], 1876, i. pp. 24-33).

2. Presuppositions, — It is impossible to write about Christ without giving effect to a philosophical and reUgious creed. The claim to be free from presup-positions commonly means that a writer assumes that the facts can be accommodated to a purely naturalistic view of history. As a fact, there is less reason to con-strue Christ in naturalistic terms than to revise a natural-istic philosophy in the light of 'the fact of Christ.' A recent review of the whole literature of the subject (Schweitzer, Von Beimarus zu Wrede, 1906) shows how profoundly the treatment has always been influenced by a writer's attitude towards ultimate questions, and how far the purely historical evidence is from being able to compel a consensus sapieniium. There are, in fact, as many types of the Life of Christ as there are points of view in theology, and it may be convenient at this stage to indicate the basis from which the work has been done in the principal monographs.

Types of the Life of Christ. —

I. Elimination of the supernatural, from the standpoint of (1) Eighteenth Century Deism — Faulua, Das Leben Jesu, 1828; (2) Modem Pantheism — D. F. Strauss, Leben Jesu, 1835-36 (Eng. tr. 1846); (3) Philosophical Scepticism— Renan, La Vie de Jesus, 1863 (Eng. tr. 1864).

II. Reduction of the supernatural, with eclectic reserva-tion, from the standpoint of Theism^-Seeley, Ecce Homo, 1866; Hase, Die Gesch. Jesu, 1876; Keim, Die Oesch. Jesu von Nazara, 1867-72 (Eng. tr. 1873-77); O. Holtzmann, Das Leben Jesu, 1901 (Eng. tr. 1904).

Within the rationalistic school there have emerged some-what radical differences in the conception formed of Jesus and His message. One group conceives of Him as a man who is essentially modem because the value of His ideas and of His message is perennial (Hamack, Dos Wesen des Christenthums, Eng. tr. 1901); another regards Him as, above all, the spokesman of unfulfilled apocalyptic dreams (J. Weiss, Die Predigt Jesu vom Reiche Oottes, 1892). Bous-set mediates between the two views (Jesus, 1906).