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.
Few subjects connected with the Fourth Gospel are more difficult and
more complicated than this question of the date (i. e. the day of the
month) of the Last Supper and the Crucifixion. As the texts stand there
is a real difference between the dates assigned to these events in the
Synoptics and in the Fourth Gospel. There is agreement as to the day of
the week. In any case the Last Supper was eaten on the evening of
Thursday, and our Lord suffered on the afternoon of Friday. But
according to the Synoptics this Thursday would be Nisan 14, though on
the Jewish reckoning (which counted the days from sunset to sunset) the
Last Supper would fall on the beginning of Nisan 15. The Supper itself
would be the regular passover, and the Crucifixion will have taken place
after the passover. According to St. John we are expressly told that the
Last Supper was held ‘_before_ the passover’ (xiii. 1), on what we
should call the evening of Nisan 13, and the Jews the beginning of Nisan
14; and our Lord will have suffered on the afternoon of the following
day, that still belonged to Nisan 14, and His death will have taken
place at the time devoted to the slaughter of the Paschal lambs (3-5
p.m.).
It is said that this date is chosen for typological reasons, to identify
Christ as the true Paschal Lamb. If that is so, the Evangelist has at
least not said a word to emphasize the point, and to appreciate its
significance we have to go to St. Paul (1 Cor. v. 7, ‘For our passover
also hath been sacrificed, even Christ’). But the argument may just as
well be inverted, and St. Paul may be taken as corroborating the
statement in the Fourth Gospel. It is indeed, as I cannot but think in
this as in other cases, more probable that the fact gave rise to the
idea, than that the idea came first and was afterwards translated into
fact.
There does not, therefore, seem to be any real presumption against the
accuracy of the Fourth Gospel. Probably, if the truth were known, the
presumption so far as it went would be rather in its favour, from the
early date and excellent character of the evidence supplied by St. Paul.
But when we come to compare the two narratives in detail, the favourable
presumption is increased by the fact that, whereas the Fourth Gospel is
throughout entirely consistent with itself, the Synoptics are by no
means so consistent.
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