CHAPTER X

EPILOGUES AND CONCLUSIONS

Few of the great writings cherished and transmitted by the early church have escaped the natural tendency to attachments at beginning and end. In the later period such attachments took the form of prefixed _argumenta_, _i. e._ prefatory descriptions of author and contents, and affixed _subscriptions_, devoted to a similar purpose. These, like the titles, were clearly distinguished from the text itself, and in modern editions are usually not printed, though examples of 'subscriptions' may be seen in the King James version after the Pauline Epistles. Before the time when canonization had made such a process seem sacrilege they were attached to the text itself, with greater or less attempt to weld the parts together. We need not add to what has been already said as to certain superscriptions of the later epistolary literature, such as James and Jude, where the relation to the text impresses us as closer than is sometimes admitted; nor need we delay with the preamble to Revelation (Rev. i. 1-3). That which has been added at the close, in cases where real evidence exists of such later supplementation, is of special significance to our study, inasmuch as it tends to throw light where light is most required. For that is an obscure period, early in the second century, when not only the churches themselves were drawing together toward catholic unity under the double pressure of inward and outward peril, but were bringing with them their treasured writings, sometimes a collection of Epistles, sometimes a Gospel, or a book of Prophecy, sometimes, as in the groups of writings attributed to John and Peter, a full canon of Gospel, Epistles and Apocalypse, followed but little later by 'Acts' as well.

The most ancient list of books authorized to be publicly read that we possess is that of the church of Rome _c._ 185, called after its discoverer the Canon of Muratori. From this fragment, mutilated at beginning and end, we learn that Paul's letters to the churches were arranged in a group of seven[31] of which Romans stood last. It is probably due to its position at the end that Romans has been supplemented by the addition of Pauline fragments, which did not appear in some early editions of the text. The letter proper ends with ch. xv. though xvi. 21-23 probably followed, perhaps concluding with ver. 24, which some texts insert after ver. 19. Ver. 25-27 is another fragment omitted in some texts.

Footnote 31: The personal letters formed a separate group. Two letters to the same church (1st Cor., 2nd Cor.) were counted as one. Marcion (140) counted ten in all, and had a different order.

We have seen above (p. 200) how Revelation has received conclusion after conclusion, so that the relation of personalities has become almost unintelligible. We have very meagre textual material for Revelation, and can scarcely judge whether any of the process represented in Rev. xxii. 6-21 belongs to the period of transmission, after the publication of the book in its present form. Until the discovery of new textual evidence the phenomena in Revelation must be treated by principles of the higher criticism, as pertaining to its history before publication. At all events we know that the attribution to "John" (ver. 8 f.) was current as early as Justin's _Apology_ (153).

The longer and shorter supplements to Mark belong again to the field of textual criticism. The manuscripts and early translations carry us back to a time when neither ending was known; though only to leave us wondering how the necessity arose for composing them--a question of the higher criticism. Mark xvi. 9-20 shows acquaintance with Luke, and probably with John xx. It is noteworthy, however, in view of the author's attempt to cover the resurrection appearances of these two gospels, that he betrays no sign of acquaintance with John. xxi. In this case of the Roman gospel, however, textual evidence enables us to trace something of the history of supplementation. The so-called 'Shorter' ending provides a close for the incomplete story, resembling Matthew, while the 'Longer' is drawn from Luke and John. i.-xx. Subsequent employments show that the 'Longer' ending had been attached (perhaps at Rome) not later than _c._ 150. It is the first evidence we have of combination of the Fourth gospel with the Synoptics; for even Justin, though _affected_ by John, does not _use_ it as he uses Matthew, Mark and Luke. Parity among the four is not traceable earlier than Tatian (_c._ 175), the father of gospel 'harmonies.' The 'Shorter' ending, if not the Longer as well, would seem to have been added in Egypt. The supplements to Mark have this at least of singular interest, that they show the progress of a process whose beginnings we traced back to Palestine itself in the church of the 'apostles, elders and witnesses of the Lord,' where "the Elder" in the tradition reported by Papias is already offering explanations of the disagreements of Matthew and Mark with a view to their concurrent circulation.

After the addition of Mark to Matthew it was comparatively easy to take in Luke-Acts as a third, and to form composites out of the three such as the _Gospel of Peter_ (North Syria _c._ 130) and the _Gospel of the Nazarenes_ (Coele-Syria _c._ 140). Justin at Rome (_c._ 153) is still such a three-gospel man, though affected by the Fourth; whereas his predecessor Hermas (125-140) seems to rest on Mark alone, though perhaps acquainted with Matthew. The step was a harder one which aimed to take in the Fourth gospel. Tatian at Rome (_c._ 175) and Theophilus at Antioch (181) are the agents of its accomplishment; and, as we have seen, it was not effected without a determined opposition, led at Rome by the presbyter Gaius, and answered by Irenæus (_c._ 186) and Hippolytus (_c._ 215). Such opposition from the side of advocates of Petrine apostolicity is anticipated in the most significant and important of all the epilogues, the so-called Appendix or Epilogue to the Fourth gospel (John xxi.).

Just when, or where, this supplement was added is one of the most difficult problems of the higher criticism. On the side of external evidence we have the fact that it shows no effect in Mark xvi. 9-21, where John xx. is employed, and that there is a great change about A.D. 170 in the treatment of this Gospel and its related Epistles, those who use them before this time showing no disposition to treat them as having high apostolic authority. On the side of internal evidence there are such data as the use of the second-century name for the Sea of Galilee ("Sea of Tiberias," xxi. 1), and references to the martyrdom of Peter at Rome (xxi. 18 f.) and to legends of John as the 'witness' who should survive until the Coming (xxi. 23). Whether these data suggest an origin at Ephesus, or at Rome, and at just what date, are problems for technical research. That which is of chief interest for us is the motive and function of this supplement to the Ephesian Gospel, and the light it throws upon conditions in the church at large.

It is quite apparent that John xxi. forms a subsequent attachment after the formal conclusion of the Gospel proper in xx. 30 f. For, apart from differences in style and doctrinal standpoint, it makes a complete new departure along the lines of Mark's story of Galilean resurrection manifestations; whereas the Gospel follows the Lukan type, and brings everything to a close without removal from Jerusalem. The message to the disciples by the women at the sepulchre is here given by Jesus in person as in Matt. xxviii. 10, and is actually delivered as in Luke xxiv. 10 f. It is followed by the promised manifestation to the disciples with the overcoming of their incredulity, and by the great Commission, accompanied by the Gift of the Spirit. The story has thus been brought to a formal conclusion, the invariable and necessary conclusion of all evangelic narratives. The author's recapitulation of the nature and contents of his book and assurance in direct address to the reader of his purpose in writing ("that _ye_ may believe") follows appropriately as a winding up of the whole. It is not conceivable that the same writer should resume immediately after this, at an earlier point in the narrative, where the disciples are still scattered in Galilee, unconscious of their vocation and commission. For in spite of the endeavour of the supplementer in ver. 14 to make this out "the third[32] time that Jesus was manifested" they have manifestly returned to their original means of livelihood unawakened to the resurrection faith. Moreover the story culminates with a restoration of Peter to favour, with unmistakable reference to his humiliating failure to live up to the promise (xiii. 36-38), "Lord, why cannot I follow thee even now? I will lay down my life for thee" (_cf._ xxi. 15-19). If it had been the evangelist's intention to tell this he would have told it before the Commission in xx. 19-23. In short, we have here two widely variant forms of the tradition of the rallying of the disciples from their unbelief by the risen Christ and commissioning of them to their task. The two commissions, one a general commission of all "the twelve," like Matt. xviii. 18, the other a special commission of Peter like Matt. xvi. 19, are attached one after the other, with the curious infelicity that the restoration of Peter from his defection, together with his installation as chief under-shepherd of the flock, comes _after_ the commission in which he has already appeared with the rest, restored to full faith and favour, and gifted with the inspiration and authority of the Spirit.

Footnote 32: A miscount for "fourth," unless we disregard xx. 11-18, or else (with Wellhausen) consider xx. 24-29 an insertion later than the Epilogue.

It is true that the function of "tending the flock of God" (_cf._ 1st Pet. v. 2) committed to Peter in xxi. 15-19 is a more special one than the apostolate conferred on all in xx. 21-23; but the Epilogue has previously (xxi. 1-14) given to Peter a special and commanding part in the apostolate (extension of the gospel to the world). No one will question that in such a writer as the Fourth evangelist (and if anything still more the writer of the Epilogue) narratives of miracle are intended to have a symbolical sense. Nor will it be denied that the miraculous draft of fishes, which in Luke v. 1-11 attends the original vocation of "Simon,"[33] is here applied to the work the twelve are to accomplish in the now opening future as "fishers of men." The particularization of the number of the fishes, and the statement that the peril of the rending of the net (_cf._ Luke v. 6) was happily avoided, are, of course, also intended to convey a symbolical sense, which Jerome makes still easier to grasp by informing us that 153 was taken by naturalists of the time to be the full number of all species of fish. John xxi. 1-14 is therefore a primitive story of the appearance of Jesus after his resurrection "to Peter and them that were with him," in Galilee (not in Jerusalem as in John i.-xx. and Luke), having a relation to Luke v. 1-11, and probably also to Matt. xiv. 28-33 (_cf._ John xxi. 7). It is also nearly akin to the fragment at the end of the _Gospel of Peter_. It symbolizes the work of the apostolic mission under the figure of the fishing of men (_cf._ Mark i. 17; Matt. xiii. 47-50), and gives to Peter the leading part. In fact Peter not only comes to the Lord in advance of all the rest, and alone maintains with him something like the intimate relations of the past, but performs after his private interview with Jesus the gigantic feat of bringing unaided to land the entire miraculous catch. The great and various multitude, which all working in common had enclosed in the net, but had not been able to lift into the boat, Peter, at Jesus' word, brought safely home. The writer who so employs the already conventionalized symbols of ecclesiastical imagery, surely had no mean idea of the apostleship of Peter. In at least as high degree as the author of Acts he conceives of Peter as commissioned in a special sense to be the great director and leader of all missionary activity, to Gentiles as well as Jews (Acts xv. 7), and to have been the saviour of the unity of the church in the hour of its threatened disruption. When in addition he is invested by Jesus with the insignia and office of chief under-shepherd of the flock of God, the stain of his threefold denial wiped out by a threefold opportunity to prove his special love by special service, and the ignominy of his previous failure to "follow" (xiii. 36-38) atoned for by the promise that in old age he shall have opportunity to follow Jesus in martyrdom (xxi. 18 f.), there remains nothing that the most exacting friend of 'catholic' apostolicity could demand in the way of tribute to its great representative.

Footnote 33: The addition in ver. 10_a_ and the plural "they" in ver. 11, are mere editorial adaptations of the story to Mark i. 16-20.

And yet the main object of the Epilogue has not yet been touched. It was not written, we may be sure, merely to glorify Peter; though it is, of course, insupposable that the Gospel in its primitive form simply left Peter in the attitude of a renegade after xviii. 27, to reappear quite as if nothing had happened in xx. 1 ff.[34] It pays its tribute to Peter as chief witness to the resurrection, chief apostle, chief saviour of the unity of the church, chief under-shepherd of the flock of God, in the interest of that catholic apostolic unity which all churchmen were so earnestly labouring to achieve in the writer's time, and for which the name of Peter was increasingly significant. But the chief object of the Epilogue is something else. It was written primarily to commend and find room for another authority, the authority of the Gospel to which it is appended, and which repeatedly sets over against Peter a mysterious unnamed figure, who always sees when Peter is blind, believes when Peter is unbelieving, is faithful when Peter and all the rest have fled in cowardly desertion. The object of the Epilogue is to find room alongside the growing and salutary authority of Peter for the authority and message of "the disciple whom Jesus loved." Its purpose appears in its conclusion, "This (the disciple whom Jesus loved) is the disciple which beareth witness of these things, and wrote these things, and we (the church which cherishes and gives forth this 'spiritual' Gospel) know that his witness is true."

Footnote 34: We must conclude that _both_ these data from Synoptic tradition, the denial (xiii. 36-38; xviii. 15-18, 25-27) _and_ the restoration (ch. xxi.) are supplements to the original form of the Gospel.

The writer does not explicitly say that he means the Apostle John (reputed in Ephesus the author of Revelation); for such direct identification might well endanger his own object. But he makes it clear in two ways that John is really intended, as, indeed, subsequent writers immediately infer.[35] (1) "The sons of Zebedee" are introduced for the first time in the entire work in xxi. 2, among the group who are present with Peter. An easy process of elimination,[36] then, leaves open to identification as "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (ver. 7) only John, or else one of the two unnamed "other disciples," who could hardly be reckoned among Jesus' closest intimates.

Footnote 35: The _Muratorianum_ bases its legendary account of the writing of the Fourth gospel by "John" with the endorsement of "his fellow-disciples and bishops" on John xxi. 24.

Footnote 36: The early death of James the son of Zebedee (Acts xii. 1) excludes him from consideration.

(2) The scene of the prediction of Peter's martyrdom (xxi. 18 f.) is followed immediately (ver. 20-23) by a reference to traditions which we know to have been current before the close of the first century regarding the martyrdom of the two sons of Zebedee, in particular regarding John. Peter in xxi. 21 raises the question as to the _fate_ of "the disciple whom Jesus loved" (literally, "and as to this man, what?"). The pregnant command of Jesus to Peter, "Follow me," is clearly intended to have reference to martyrdom (_cf._ xiii. 36 f.), and it is obeyed by "the disciple whom Jesus loved" as well as Peter. Peter's inquiry and the Lord's reply had given rise "among the brethren" to the belief that this disciple would "tarry" till the Coming. Now it is of John, son of Zebedee, and only of him, that we have a curious vacillation of ancient tradition between belief in his martyrdom in the same sense as his brother James (Mark x. 39), and a belief (probably based on Mark ix. 1) that he would tarry as an abiding witness until the Coming ('white martyrdom'). The writer of the Epilogue has manifestly these traditions about the fate of John in mind. He would have his readers understand that the enigmatic prophecy of Jesus neither promised the permanent survival of John, nor his violent death, but was at least capable of an interpretation which set John alongside of Peter, not as a rival of his leadership, or directive control, but simply as a witness ('martyr') to the truth. Peter is willingly granted the office of 'ruling elder' in the church, if only "the disciple whom Jesus loved" may have the function of the prophet and teacher 'in the Spirit,' the man of faith and insight, whose function it is to interpret 'the mind of Christ.'

Few things could be more significant of the conditions of Christian life and thought in the earlier years of the second century than this Epilogue, appended to the 'spiritual' Gospel to commend it to general acceptance in the church. It is not vitally important whether the cautiously suggested identification of the Beloved Disciple with John, the son of Zebedee, be correct or not. It is important to a historical appreciation of the great literary contribution of the churches of Paul to the 'catholic' Christianity of the second century, that we realize what Petrine catholicity had then come to mean, and how the Pauline spiritual gospel came half-way to meet it. On this point a study of the epilogues is rewarding, but especially of the great Epilogue to the Gospel of John.

We have reached the period for our own concluding words. The process of combination and canonization of the New Testament writings, which followed upon the consolidation of the churches in the second century falls outside our province. We have sought only to give some insight into the origins, considering the Making of the New Testament to apply rather to the creations of the formative period, when conscious inspiration was still in its full glow, than to the period of collection into an official canon. As we look back over the two leading types of Christian thought, Pauline and 'Apostolic,' the Greek-Christian gospel _about_ Jesus, and the Jewish-Christian gospel _of_ Jesus, the gospel of the Spirit and the gospel of authority, we cannot fail to realize how deep and broad and ancient are the two great currents of religious thought and life that here are mingling, contending, coming to new expression and clearer definition. Each has its various subdivisions and modifications, Pauline Christianity in the Greek world has its problems of resistance to Hellenistic perversion on the one side, to reaction toward Jewish external authority on the other. Apostolic Christianity whether in its more conservative form at Jerusalem, or in broader assimilation to Pauline doctrine at Antioch and Rome, has also its divergent streams, its more primitive and its more developed stages. The literature, as we slowly come to appreciate it against the background of the times, more and more reveals itself as an index to the life. Not to the mere idiosyncrasies of individuals, but to the great Gulf-stream of the human instinct for social Righteousness and for individual Redemption, as it sweeps onward in its mighty tide.

The literature of the New Testament must be understood historically if understood at all. It must be understood as the product, we might almost say the precipitate, of the greatest period in the history of religion. It represents the meeting and mutual adjustment of two fundamental and complementary conceptions of religion. The antithesis is not merely that between the particularism of the Jew and the universalism of the Gentile. It is an antithesis of the social ideal of Law and Prophets against the individual ideal of personal redemption through union with the divine Spirit, which lay at the heart of all vital Hellenistic religious thought in this period of the Empire. Christianity as we know it, the religion of humanity as it has come to be, the ultimate world-religion as we believe it destined to become, is a resultant of these two factors, Semitic and Aryan, the social and the individual ideal. Its canonized literature represents the combination. On the one side the social ideal is predominant. It perpetuates the gospel _of_ Jesus in the form of Matthæan and Petrine tradition, supplemented by apocalypse, which tradition attaches conjecturally to the name of John. The goal it seeks is the Kingdom of God, righteousness and peace on earth as in heaven. On the other side the individual ideal predominates. It perpetuates the gospel _about_ Jesus in the form of the Pauline and Johannine doctrine of his person, regarded as the norm and type of spiritual life. The goal it seeks is personal immortality by moral fellowship with God. Its faith is Son ship, by participation in the divine nature, without limitation in time, without loss of individual identity. Both types of gospel are justified in claiming to emanate from Jesus of Nazareth; but neither without the other can claim to fully represent the significance of his spirit and life.

The unity of the New Testament is a unity in diversity. Just because it presents so widely divergent conceptions of what the gospel is, it gives promise of perennial fecundity. Studied not after the manner of the scribes, who think that in their book of precept and prophecy they have a passport to rewards in a magical world to come, but studied as a "manifestation of the life, even the eternal life" of the Spirit of God in man, it will continue to reproduce the spirit and mind of Christ. Studied as a reflection at various times and in divers manners of that redemptive Wisdom of God, which "in every generation entering into holy souls makes men to be prophets and friends of God" (Sap. vii. 27), and which the Greeks, considering it, unfortunately, in its intellectual rather than its moral aspect, call the Logos of God, it will prove, as in so many generations past it has proved, an "incorruptible seed," a "word of good tidings preached unto" the world, a "word of the Lord that abideth for ever."

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. General Introductions to N.T. Literature.

MOFFATT, JAS. _"Internat. Theol. Library" Series._ Scribner's, 1911. Standard, comprehensive, progressive. Best compendium of the subject in English. A book for experts. 671 pp., 8vo.

JÜLICHER, A. Engl. transl, by D. A. Ward, from 4th German ed. London, Smith, Elder & Co., 1903. The most serviceable of modern German Introductions, based on the standard work of the "liberal" school, by H. J. Holtzmann. 650 pp., large 8vo.

ZAHN, THEO. Engl. transl. from 3rd German ed., by M. W. Jacobus. Scribner's, 1909. Standard "conservative" work. Immense scholarship in the harness of apologetics. Total, 1750 pp., in 3 vols., large 8vo.

BACON, B. W. _"New Test. Handbook" Series._ Macmillan 1900. Similar to Moffatt's in standpoint, but without the survey of the literature. For readers less technically advanced. 300 pp., small 8vo.

PEAKE, A. S. N.Y., Scribner's, 1910. 250 pp., 12mo. An excellent primer of the subject, generally conservative.

2. Critical Treatments of Pauline Literature.

SHAW, R. D. _The Pauline Epistles, Introductory and Expository Studies_, 2nd ed. T. & T. Clarke, 1904. 518 pp., large 8vo. Sober and cautious. For general readers.

RAMSAY, W. M. _Pauline and other Studies in Early Christian History._ Hodder & Stoughton, 1906. 425 pp., large 8vo. _The Cities of St. Paul_ (1907, 468 pp.) is by the same author, an eminent geographer and archaeologist ardently enlisted against German criticism. Interesting but diffuse.

PFLEIDERER, O. _Paulinism._ Engl. transl. by E. Peters. 2nd ed. 1891. Williams & Norgate. 2 vols. 8vo. Total, 580 pp., 8vo. Still a standard exposition of Paul's system of thought. A book for experts.

BAUR, F. C. _Paul the Apostle of Jesus Christ, his Life and Work, Epistles and Doctrine._ Engl. transl. of Zeller's (2nd), German ed., by A. Menzies. Williams & Norgate, 1876. Two vols. 8vo (375 + 350 pp.). An epoch-making book, the starting-point of modern criticism.

SCHWEITZER, A. This able, though one-sided, critic has issued already (1912) the conclusion to his study of modern Lives of Christ (see below, _The Quest of the Historical Jesus_) under the title _Geschichte der Paulinischen Forschung_. It may be expected that this comprehensive survey and searching criticism of the literature of Pauline study will soon be made accessible to the English reader.

WREDE, W. _Paul._ Engl. transl. by E. Lummis. P. Green, London, 1907. 190 pp., 12mo. A brief, brilliant, popular sketch, radical, suggestive. Needs the balance of more cautious criticism.

WEISS, J. _Paul and Jesus._ Engl. transl. by H. J. Chaytor. London and New York, Harper & Bros., 1909. 130 pp., 12mo. An effective answer to Wrede's view of Paul as the real creator of Christianity, by a progressive and able critic.

Lives of Paul by Cone, Clemen (German) and others are abundant in recent years. See the _Encyclopaedias_ and _Dictionaries of the Bible_, s.v. "Paul."

3. Critical Treatments of the Synoptic Gospels and Acts.

STANTON, V. H. _The Gospels as Historical Documents_, Parts I and II. Cambridge University Press, 1903-1909. 297 + 400 pp., 8vo. A standard survey of Gospel criticism from a conservative standpoint, the work of a scholar for scholars.

CONE, O. _Gospel Criticism and Historical Christianity._ Putnam's, N.Y., 1891. 375 pp., small 8vo. Liberal, semi-popular.

BURKITT, F. C. _The Earliest Sources for the Life of Jesus._ Houghton & Mifflin, Boston and New York, 1910. 130 pp., 12mo. Simple and popular. Burkitt is a leading progressive scholar.

4. The Johannine Writings.

DRUMMOND, JAS. _Character and Authorship of the Fourth Gospel._ Scribner's, N.Y., 1904. 544 pp., 8vo. The ablest recent defence of the traditional authorship. Scholarly discussion of the literary history.

BACON, B. W. _The Fourth Gospel in Research and Debate._ Moffat, Yard & Co., N.Y., 1910. 556 pp., 8vo. A similar discussion of the evidences reaching the reverse conclusion.

SCOTT, E. F. _The Fourth Gospel, its Purpose and Theology._ T. & T. Clarke, Edinburgh, 1906. 386 pp., 8vo. Admirable in temper, lucid in style, semi-popular.

SCHMIEDEL, P. W. _The Johannine Writings._ Engl. transl., by M. A. Canney. London, A. & C. Black, 1903. 295 pp., 12mo. Brief, popular, radical, by one of the ablest of N.T. critics.

General.

REUSS, E. _History of the N.T._ Engl. transl. from 5th German ed., by E. L. Houghton. Boston, Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1884. 649 pp. 2 vols. large 8vo. A standard treasury of scholarly information.

WERNLE, P. _The Beginnings of Christianity._ Engl. transl., by G. A. Bienemann. London, Williams & Norgate, 1904. 388 + 404 pp., 8vo. 2 vols. Able, scholarly, advanced.

PFLEIDERER, O. _Christian Origins._ Engl. transl., by D. Huebsch. New York, B. W. Huebsch, 1906. 295 pp., 12mo. Popular lectures showing something of the views of the modern school of critics known as _religionsgeschichtlich_. Pfleiderer's critical opinions are fully expressed in his _Primitive Christianity_ (Engl. transl., by W. Montgomery, in four vols., 8vo. Putnams, 1909).

MUZZEY, D. S. _The Rise of the N.T._ New York, Macmillan, 1900. 156 pp., 12mo. An excellent primer for beginners.

WREDE, W. _The Origin of the N.T._ Engl. transl. by J. S. Hill. Harper & Bros., London & New York, 1909. 151 pp., 12mo. An admirable primer by a brilliant leader of advanced criticism.

VON SODEN. _The History of Early Christian Literature. Writings of the N.T._ Engl. transl., by J. R. Wilkinson. Williams & Norgate, 1906. 476 pp., 12mo. A book for beginners by a great N.T. scholar of liberal views. A closely connected field is covered by various _Histories of the Apostolic Age_, of which the most recent and important are those of Weizsäcker (Engl. transl., 1895) and McGiffert (1897). Less technical and more orthodox are those of Vernon-Bartlett (1899) and J. H. Ropes (1906). _Critical Lives of Christ_ present the results of critical study of the Gospels. A survey of this field of research, keenly analytical and severely critical, is given by A. Schweitzer in _The Quest of the Historical Jesus_ (Engl. transl. by W. Montgomery. A. & C. Black, 1910. 416 pp., 8vo). Schweitzer writes with great scholarship and power, but decided polemic interest as a "consistent eschatologist."

INDEX

Abomination, 161, 218

Acts, 57 ff., 64 ff., 174 ff.

Agabus, 185, 202

Allegory (in John), 224

Angelology and demonology, 95

Antichrist, 217 f.

Anti-legalism (of Mark), 166

Antinomian heresy, 149, 214

Antioch, 71, 175 ff., 183 f.

Apocalypses, 29, 51, 87, 188, 197

Apostolic Christianity, 42, 126, 129, 246

Apostolic Commission, 238 f.

Apostolic Council, 60, 63, 67

Apotheosis doctrine, 49

Appendix to John, 107, 147, 211, 236 ff.

Asia, Churches of, 197 ff.

Athanasius, 29 f.

Babylon (= Rome), 115, 196

Baptist (in John), 225

Bar Cocheba, 204

_Baruch, Apocalypse of_ 188

Baur, F. C., 37 ff.

Beloved disciple, the, 227, 243 ff.

Cæsarea, 85

Calvin, 37

Canonization of the Law, 12

Cerinthus, 219

Chiliasts, 187

Christological Epistles, 97

Christ-party, 45

Clement of Rome, 19 f., 79, 115, 119

Clement of Alexandria, 25

_Clementine Homilies and Recognitions_, 148

Colossians, 98

Corinthian Epistles, 76 ff.

Decrees of Jerusalem, 60

Diary of Acts, 183

Dionysius of Alexandria, 191

Disputed books, 30

Doketism, 21, 110, 126, 153, 163, 184, 186, 214, 217, 219

Elder (of 2nd and 3rd John), 215

Elements, 76, 99

Ephesians, 98

Ephesus, 76, 97, 111 f., 191, 201, 211

Epiphanius, 131

Epistles (Major), 43

Epistles of the Captivity, 42, 85, 100

Eschatological discourse, 161

Esdras (Apocalypse of), 188

External evidence, 38

False brethren, 41

Feasts (in John), 226

Fornication, 60, 77

Gaius (3rd John), 215 f.

Gaius of Rome, 31, 237

Galatians, 56, 74

Gentile liberty, 61 ff.

Gnosticism, 40, 108, 207 f.

_Gospel according to the Hebrews_, 135, 145

_Gospel of the Nazarenes_, 132, 145 ff., 236

Harnack, 98

Hebrews, 107, 116 ff.

Hebrews, Apostolic authority in, 18

Hebrews, Canonical standing of, 31

Hegesippus, 105 f., 111

Hellenistic religion, 247

Hermas, 21, 28, 119 f., 237

Ignatius, 20 f., 23, 111, 124, 126, 208

Incarnation Doctrine, 49, 154, 229, 231

Infancy of Jesus (in Matthew and Luke), 152

Internal evidence, 38

Irenæus, 81, 133, 219

James, 104 ff., 107, 112 f., 130

Jerusalem Conference, 67, 71

Jerusalem succession, 105 f., 119

John, the Apostle, a martyr, 104, 194, 243

John, Gospel of, 25, 31, 43, 54, 206 ff.

John, Revelation of, 30, 43, 63, 107, 131, 187, 189 ff., 235

John, Epistles of, 43, 111, 126, 211 ff.

John, _Acts of_, 219 f.

John, the Elder, 26, 131, 133, 236

Josephus (used by Luke), 174

Judaism _v._ Hellenism, 52 f.

Judaizers, 68

Jude, 19, 80, 107, 130

Justin Martyr, 187, 190, 235 f.

Kindred of the Lord, 164 f.

Laodiceans, 98

Law _v._ grace, 8, 14, 66, 74, 81, 123

_Logia_, 136, 141

Logos-doctrine, 55, 221, 232

Lordship (of Christ), 96

Luke, 27, 139, 173 f.

Luke, his omissions from Mark, 178 f.

Luke, his purpose in writing, 180 f.

Luther, 37

Magic, 93 ff.

Marcion, 22 ff., 40

Mark, 129, 134, 159 ff.

Mark, Duplication in, 172

Mark, Endings of, 168 ff., 235 f.

Matthew, 131 ff., 187

Melito of Sardis, 19, 190

Michælis, 35

Missionary Journey, First, 58 f.

Missionary Journey, Second, 72

Moffatt, Jas., 151

Montanus, 28 f.

Muratorian Fragment, 30, 234

Nepos, the Chiliast, 191

Offering for the poor, 69

Palestine, Origin of Revelations, 195 ff.

Papias, 26, 105 f., 130 f., 186 f., 190, 208

Parables (in Matthew), 149 f.

Passover, 101, 173

Pastoral Epistles, 19, 31, 83, 108, 111, 123

Patmos, 191, 200 f.

Paul, Original Apostle of Asia, 205

Paul, his religious experience, 16

Paul, martyrdom, 105

Pauline _v._ Petrine gospel, 49

Paulinism of Mark, 162

Persecution, 13, 122

Peter (the Apostle), 24, 26, 106, 133, 146

Peter, _Apocalypse of_, 29 f.

Peter, Commission of, 240 f.

Peter, Epistles of, 41, 108 f., 112 ff.

Peter, _Gospel of_, 171, 221, 236

Peter, _Preaching of_, 139

Pharisaic Judaism, 121

Philemon, 88

Philip, Daughters of, 185 f.

Philippians, 89 ff.

Phrygian heresy, 28

_Pirke Aboth_, 141

Polycarp, 26, 110, 130, 186, 218

Porphyry, 106

Post-Reformation dogma, 33 f.

Precepts (of Jesus), 137

Prologue (of John), 231

Prophecy, 188 f., 209

Q-material, 141 ff.

Reconciliation with God, 103

Redeemer-gods, 50

Redemption doctrines, 86, 93

Reformation, 37

Repentance (the Great), 156 f.

Resurrection-doctrine, 73, 78, 125, 155, 158, 204, 210

Revelation (_See_ John, Revelation of)

Romans, 75, 80 ff.

Rome, 120, 129

Satan, Dominion of, 157

Scripture, Use in Paul, 17

Scripture, Use in John, 25

Second Coming, 230

Sermon on Mount, 9

Signs in Fourth gospel, 223

Simon, Richard, 35

Spirit, Doctrine of the, 17, 67, 101 156, 220

Subscriptions, 233

Superstitious Judaism, 93 f.

Symeon, son of Clopas, 105

Synoptic writings, 44, 107

Synoptic writings in John, 228

Syria and Cilicia, 61, 129

_Teaching of the Twelve_, 28, 63, 185

Tertullian, 19, 29

Thessalonian Epistles, 73

Timothy (_See_ Pastoral Epistles), 78

Titus (_See_ Pastoral Epistles)

Transfiguration, 165, 167, 228, 230

Tübingen School, 43 ff.

Unity of the Church, 70, 103, 120

Unity of the N.T., 248

Way (= sect), 8

Weak (party of the), 45

Wisdom of God, 99, 209, 229

Wisdom of Solomon (Sap.), 51

Words of Jesus, 19, 129 f., 144 f.

Zahn, 115

_Richard Clay & Sons, Limited, London and Bungay._