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.
A smaller item of proof tending in the same direction is supplied by the
_Didaché_. It is well-known that the very ancient Eucharistic prayer
contained in that document has the remarkable phrase ‘to make perfect in
love,’—‘Remember, Lord, Thy Church to deliver it from all evil and to
perfect it in Thy love,’ which it is natural to compare with 1 John iv.
17, 18; John xvii. 23. The coincidence cannot be wholly accidental,
though the question must be left open whether the phrase comes directly
from a writing or only circulated orally[77]. The problem is the same as
that which has just met us in the case of Ignatius, though on a much
smaller scale. As far as it goes, it helps to strengthen the conclusion
that has just been drawn.
Between Ignatius and Irenaeus we have Papias, Justin, and the greater
Gnostics. In view more particularly of the discussion by Schwartz, I
think it may be said that Papias probably knew the Gospel and recognized
it as an authority. That Justin also used it I think we may take as at
the present time generally admitted; and from the extent to which he
used it I do not think that any inference can be drawn. Professor Bacon
complains that the suggestions which have been put forward to account
for the somewhat sparing use which he makes of it are not
satisfactory[78]. Probably they are not in the sense of carrying
conviction that any one of them is right to the exclusion of others.
There must always be this difficulty where we are quite in the dark, and
where the whole chapter of accidents is open before us. It is no doubt a
sounder method to fall back with Dr. Drummond simply upon our
ignorance[79]. But to say that the negative side of Justin’s evidence in
any sense cancels the positive seems to me untenable.
As to Basilides and Valentinus, though there remains in my own mind a
slight degree of probability that they really used the Gospel, I admit
that this probability is not of a kind that can be strongly asserted
where it is challenged. At the same time I cannot think Schmiedel’s
hypothesis at all probable that ‘the Fourth Gospel saw the light
somewhere between A.D. 132 and A.D. 140[80], and that although it was
not used by the founders of the great Gnostic schools, it was at once
adopted by their disciples. This is an instance of the way in which Dr.
Schmiedel and his friends, when they light upon a hypothesis that
favours the negative side, content themselves with stating it, as if it
must at once carry conviction; and form no mental picture of the
conditions with a view to ascertain whether the hypothesis is or is not
probable. We may be pretty sure that the Fourth Gospel did not come in
surreptitiously in this way, like a thief over the wall, and at once
obtain recognition without any examination of credentials.
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