The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel: Eight Lectures on the Morse Foundation, Delivered in the Union Seminary, New York in October and November 1904Sanday, W. (William)
Religion
The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel: Eight Lectures on the Morse Foundation, Delivered in the Union Seminary, New York in October and November 1904
Sanday, W. (William)
Bible. John -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.
The best record of the thoughts that grew and fructified in those
momentous early years is to be found not in the Acts but in the Gospels;
and the fact that it is to be sought there shows whence the impulse
really came. It may seem a truism to maintain that Jesus Christ was the
real Founder of Christianity, and that He founded it by what He was, and
not by what men imagined Him to be. Of course to many Christians it will
seem a truism to say this; the simple Christian never thought otherwise;
but there are Christians who are not simple, and who may be encouraged
to search with a closer scrutiny to see if the old account of the origin
of Christianity is not the best, indeed the only account possible. The
New Testament is scattered with hints, which are not more than hints,
arrow-heads as it were pointing back to Christ. These are a profitable
subject of study—none more profitable. If we pay attention to these
hints, and if we look for the roots of St. Paul’s teaching, I do not
think we shall say that Christianity—the Christianity of nineteen
centuries—was his invention, and that St. John did but follow in his
train.
6. Larger Objections.
The kind of study that I have just been recommending is strictly
critical; but the theory of which I have been speaking carries us out
beyond the narrower ground of criticism into the wider field of history
and teleology. I may just for a moment in conclusion touch on this. It
may supply us with a warning that there is at least a strong presumption
that the theory which fathers the teaching of St. John upon that of St.
Paul, and St. Paul’s teaching upon itself, with no higher sanction
behind, cannot well be true. Such a theory would mean that quite a half,
and the most important half, of the fundamental theses of historical
Christianity, were a mere human invention which those who have had the
wit to discover them to be a human invention may go on to treat as
nothing better,—to bestow on them perhaps a certain amount of praise in
relation to their time, but to regard them as something that the world
has outgrown. This is a view that in the present day, avowedly or
unavowedly, is very largely taken. On this view there is a real nucleus
of truth in biblical Christianity, but that nucleus in the light of
modern science is seen to be very small indeed; all the rest is
surplusage. The misfortune for the theory is that it is not only on the
nucleus of truth, but very largely upon the surplusage, that nineteen
centuries of Christians have lived.
Now I am quite prepared to believe that most great truths that do not
come under the head of Mathematics or Physical Science have had a
certain amount of surplusage attached to them; there has been husk and
kernel, flower and sheath. I quite believe that men do
‘rise on stepping-stones
Of their dead selves to higher things.’
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account