JOHN. 248 JOHN. as tlie Codex Bezw, il stands in the second place, in otliers in the third, while in s<inie circles it headed the list. Its Usual pusition in ancient times «as, however, the same a» at present. The general character of this Gospel, its inlluence over Christian thonyhl, and the high claims it makes lor itself combine to render il one of the most conspicuous and important books of the whole Bible. The following discussion will consider: 1. The contents of the Gospel; II. The critical questions centring about the work: III. The conclusions necessitated by the facts as to its authorsliip, date, and general purpose. I. The Co.ntexts oe the Gospel. In striking contrast to the first three, or Syn<i])tic Gospels, the fourth Gospel states explicitly the apologetic motive controlling its author in writing it (cf.xx. 30-31). It is in the light of this statement that the outline of contents should be constructed. Understanding, then, that the author intended so to depict the person and work of .Tesus that saving faith in Him as the Son of God would result to his readers, the contents may be out- lined as follows: The Prologue (i. 1-18), in which the profound significance of the historic Christ is set forth: He was the divine Logos incarnate, the life and light of man, who alone has re- vealed (iod. but who, when He came to 'His own.' was not received, though to receive Him makes one a child of God. In the Prolognie we find the fundamental ideas which the history following is intended to illustrate and prove: The divine glorv of .Jesus: the nature of the reception accorded Him, faith on the pari of some with its necessary results, and unbelief on the part of others; and the significance of it all for the world. In accordance with these conceptions the contents are arranged thus: (1) Tlie beginiiirigs of faith in .Tesus as Messiah (i. 19; iv. 54) : how the first public appearances of .Jesiis in .Judca and Galilee were received by many with faitli and the reasons for this: incidentally, in accordance with the Prologue, it is noted that, even at the first. .Jesus was met by unbelief. The whole sec- tion may be further subdivided: (a) The testi- mony of John the Baptist to Jesus (i. 19-34). (b) In consequence of this the first disciples are gained, and, in turn, lead others to the same step (i. 35-51). (c) The first miracle (at Cana) confirms the faith of these disciples (ii. 1-12). (d) At Jerusalem He asserts His authority, but is rejected (ii. 13-25). (e) In conversation with Xicodemus the nature of faith in Him is ex- plained (iii. 1-21). (f) Further testimony by the Baptist (iii. 22-36). (g) The faith of the woman of Samaria (iv. 1-42). (h) The second miracle, in Galilee (at Cana), with faith as its result (iv. 43-54). (2) The grent conflict of Jesus with the unbelief of the .Jews (v.-xii.) is told in detail: (a) At a feast in .Jerusalem, the evidence of a miracle is rejected by the .Jews (chap. v.). (b) In Galilee, His claiin to be the Bread of Life after the miracle of feeding the five thousand is rejected : by way of contrast, the faith of the disciples is noted (chap. vi.). (c) Further claims and testimony at .Jerusalem, at the Feast of Tabernacles, are not accepted (vii. i.-x. 21). (d) .Jesus' claims, made at the Feast of Dedication, aroise only anger (x. 21-42). (e) Even the great miracle of raising Lazarus from the dead only serves to bring about the definite decision to put .Jesus to death (chap. xi.). (f) The final assertion of His claim — on Palm Sunday in Jerusalem — is also rejected; Jesus witlulraws (xii. 1-30, 44-50) ; relleetions by the Evangelist (.xii. 37-43) ; incidcnt;illy, in this whole section, many instances of faith are noted. (3) The sclf-iciclutioii of .Jesus to His disciples, in the conversations at the supper, and on the waj' to Gethsemane and in the mediatorial jjrayer (xiii.-xvii.) . (4) The ctdmination of the life of Jesus (xviii.-xx.). (a) His resignation to the hostility nuinifested against Him; the narra- tive of the arrest, trial, crucifixion, and burial (.xviii.-.ix.) . (b) His glorification in His resur- i-ection (.x. ). The Gos])ol concludes with an Appendix (chap, xxi.), written mainly to correct a false vniderstanding of certain words of Jesus. It is evident that we have here no ordinary biog- raphy; nor is it an attempt to give a full ac- count of Jesus' public ministry. Much is pre- supposed, as already known to the readers, and many months are passed over in silence. Only a few selected occasions are dealt with, and these are described from certain well-defined points of view. The happenings of but few days, not many more than twenty, are told. The interest of the writer was. evidently, not that of the mere his- torian. All this is in marked contrast with what we find in the first three Gospels. Because of these peculiarities, and of others which are revealed by a close study of tire- work, the fourth Gospel has been subjected, during the past hun- dred years, to a fire of criticism perhaps unparal- leled in the history of literature. II. The Criticism of the Foirth Gospel. The main question to which this Gospel gives rise is — can it be considered an historical source for our knowledge of Jesus Christ? It is necessary, in the first place, to note what indications the work itself contains as to its authorship. Such indications may be incidental and unintentional, or they may be explicit claims to which due consideration must be given. It has long been recognized that the writer's knowledge of contemporary .Judaism and of Palestine is re- markable. He shows himself perfectly at home in regard to numerous details of .Jewish observ- ances and belief, and had an intimate knowledge of the topographv of Palestine and of .Jerusalem. These facts can only be accounted for on the sup- position that the writer was a .Jew of Palestine by birth and education. It is almost inconceiv- able that a Gentile could have written as he did. At the same time he was a .Jew whose break with formal .ludaism was complete. He was no longer a Jew- at heart. It may be said further that the Gospel seems to have been written by one who was an eye-witness of many of the events he recorded. Attention has often been called to the fact that the references to persons, siich as Peter, Philip. Thomas. .Judas Iscariot. Pilate. Mary, Martha, and others, brief as they are, betray the impressions made by such persons on one who had seen or heard them. They are remarkaldy lifelike and tally exactly with what is known of them from other sources. Many incidental touches in the narrative, such as "it was about the sixth hour," '".Jesus sat thus on the well" ( iv. 6) are best explained as due to personal experi- ence. In addition to such incidental indications of authorship by an eye-witness there are ex- press statements to the same effect. In i. 14 it is said, "and we beheld his glory." The 'we' seems to mean the author addressing his readers. In xix. 35 a somewhat similar note is found, "he who
