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.
vi. If the younger son of Zebedee had died in this or some other way,
there would be nothing to prevent us from supposing that the John who
took up his abode at Ephesus was the beloved disciple. And it would
really simplify the history, and make everything more compact, if we
could suppose that the beloved disciple, and the John who wrote the
Gospel and Epistles, and the John who appears to have called himself,
and to have been called by others ‘the Presbyter,’ were one and the same
person.
vii. It is a remarkable fact that some of our best authorities, while
they leave no doubt as to the identification of the John who figured so
conspicuously at Ephesus with the beloved disciple, abstain from
expressions that would identify him with the son of Zebedee. Irenaeus
most often calls him ‘the disciple of the Lord,’ which we remember is
the very phrase used by Papias of the Presbyter. He also more than once
describes him as having lain upon the breast of the Lord, but he nowhere
(I believe) speaks of him as one of the Twelve or as the son of Zebedee.
Polycrates uses the same designation, ‘John who lay upon the breast of
the Lord’; and the Muratorian Fragment speaks of him as ‘one of the
disciples’: but neither of these witnesses ever calls him an Apostle.
Irenaeus, however, does perhaps hint at this title where he says that
the Church at Ephesus, ‘having been founded by Paul, and John having
resided among them until the time of Trajan, is a true witness of the
tradition of the Apostles’ (Eus. _H. E._ iii. 23. 4). Clement of
Alexandria also and Tertullian unequivocally call John an Apostle.
viii. If these expressions had stood alone, there need be no great
difficulty. We may be pretty sure that the beloved disciple, even if he
had not been one of the original Twelve, would be called an Apostle in
the wider sense, like St. Paul and St. Barnabas and James the Brother of
the Lord. And it would be only natural that he should seem to step into
the place of the older John (on the hypothesis of his martyrdom), just
as James the Lord’s Brother in a manner stepped into the place of the
older James.
It is worth while to bear in mind that the title ‘Apostle’ was used more
freely in the early days of the Church than we are in the habit of using
it. It was not till about the end of the second century that (except in
the case of St. Paul and St. Barnabas and one or two others) it came to
be as a rule narrowed down to the Twelve. In the earliest usage of all
the word had its proper meaning of ‘one who is sent on a mission.’ But
this usage was gradually lost sight of, and it took the place of the
primitive μαθητής.
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