Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) (748 page)

Read Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) Online

Authors: George Eliot

BOOK: Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated)
13.84Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
we must suppose that Jesus at the first glance, witli tlie eye of him who knew hearts, penetrated into the inmost nature of Simon, and discovered not only his general fitness for tlie apostleship, but also the special, individual qualities which rendered him comparable to a rock. According to Mattliew, it was not until after long intercourse with Jesus, and after he had given many manifestations of Ins peculiar cliaracter, that tills surname was conferred on Simon, accompanied by an explanation of its meaning (xvi. 18.): evidently
THE LIFE OF JESUS.
 
a much more natural account of tlie matter than that of the fourth evangelist, who makes Jesus discern at tlie first glance the future value of Simon to his cause, an odorando j udicare which transcends the synoptical representation in the same ratio as tlie declaration.
Tfw’tt shall be called Cephas, presupposes a more intimate knowledge, than the proposal, I will make you fishers of men. Even after a more lengthened conversation witli Peter, such as Lucke supposes, Jesus could not pronounce so decidedly on his character, without being a searcher of hearts, or falling under the imputation of forming too precipitate a judgment. It is indeed, possible that the Christian legend, attracted by tlie significance of the name, may have represented Jesus as its author, wliile, in fact, Simon liad borne it
from his birth.
 
Tlie entire narrative concernina; Natlianael is a tissue of improbabilities. When Philip speaks to him of a Messiah from Nazareth, lie makes the celebrated answer, Can any good th’uiq coma out of Nazareth (v. 47.) ? There is no historical datum for supposing tliat Nazareth, when Jesus began his ministry, was tlie object of particular odium or contempt,* and there is every probability that tlie adversaries of Christianity were the first to cast an aspersion on tlie native city of tlie Messiah whom they rejected. In tlie time of Jesus, Nazareth was only depreciated by the Jews, as being a Galllean city- a stigma which it bore in common with many others : but in this sense it eould not be despised by Natlianael, for lie was himself a Galilean (xxi. 2.). Tlie only probable explanation is tliat a derisive question, wliicli, at tlie time of tlie composition of the fourth gospel, the Christiana liad often to hear from their opponents, was put into the mouth of a cotemporary of Jesus, tliat by the manner in which he was divested of his doubt, others miglit be induced to comply with the invitation, to come and see. As Natlianael approaches Jesus, the latter pronounces this judgment on his character, -Behold an Israelite indeed, in iohom is no guile (v. 48.)! Paulus is of opinion tliat Jesus miglit liave previously gathered some intimations concerning Natlianael at Cana, where he liad just been attending; a marriao’e of some relations.! But if Jesus liad bccomo
0
 
C5
 
‘
 
acquainted witli Natlianael’s character in a natural way, lie must, in answer to the question Whence JcnovJCst thou me ? either have reminded him of tlie occasion on which they had liad an earlier interview, or referred to the favourable report of others. Instead of this he speaks of his knowledge that Natlianael liad been tarrying under a iigtree : a knowledge which from its result is evidently intended to appear supernatural. Now to use information, obtained by ordinary means, so as to induce a belief tliat it has been communicated supernaturally, is charlatanism, if anything deserve the name. As, however, tlie narrator certainly did not mean to impute such artifice to Jesus, it is undeniably his intention to ascribe to him a supernatural knowledge of Nathanael’s character. As little are the words,
THE DISCIPLES OF JESUS.
 
When thozi wast under the figtree, I saw thee, explained by tlie exclamation of Paulus, “How often one sees and observes a man who is unconscious of one’s gaze!” Lucke and Tholuck are also of opinion, tliat Jesus observed Nathanael under tlie fig-tree in a natural manner; they add, however, tlie conjecture, tliat tlie latter was engaged in some occupation, such as prayer or the study of tlie law, wliicli afforded Jesus a key to Ills character. But if Jesus meant to imply, “How can I fail to be convinced of thy virtue, having watclied thee during thy earnest study of tlie law, and thy fervent prayer under the fig-tree ?” lie would not liavc omitted the word TTpoaev^oiisvov ^praying), or dva-yivaxficnvTa (reading’), for want of which we can extract no other sense from his declaration than this : “Thou mayest be assured of my power to penetrate into thy inmost soul, from tlie fact tliat I belield tliee when thou wast in a situation from which all merely human observers were excluded.”
 
Here the whole stress is thrown not on any peculiarity in tlie situation of tlie person seen, but on tlie fact that Jesus saw him, whence it is necessarily inferred that he did so by no ordinary, natural, means. To imagine tliat Jesus possessed such a second sight, is, we grant, not a little extravagant; but for tliat very reason, it is the more accordant witli tlie tlien existing notions of a prophet, and of the Messiah. A like power of seeing and hearing beyond the limits assigned to human organs, is attributed to Elisha in the Old Testament. When (2 Kings vi. 8, ft’.) the king of Syria makes war against. Israel, Elisha indicates to tlie king of Israel every position of tlie enemy’s camp; and when tlie king of Syria expresses Ilis suspicion tliat he is betrayed by deserters, he is told that the Israeli tisli prophet knows all the words tliat lie, tlie king of Syria, speaks in his private chamber. Thus also (xxi. 32.) Elisha knows that Joram has sent out messengers to murder him, How could it be endured tliat tlie Messiali should fall short of the prophet in Ills powers of vision ? This particular, too, enables our evangelist to form a climax, in wliicli Jesus ascends from the penetration of one immediately present (v. 42), to tliat of one approaching for tlie first time (v. 48), and finally, to tlie perception of one out of the reach of human eyesight. Tliat Jesus goes a step farther in tlie climax, and says, tliat this proof of his messianic second sight is a trifle compared with wliat Nathanael lias yet to see,-tliat on him, tlie bon of man, the angels of God shall descend from tlie opened heavens (v. 51),-in nowise shows, as Paulus thinks, tliat there was nothing miraculous in tliat first proof, for there is a gradation even in miracles.
 
Thus in the narrative of John we stumble at every step on difficulties, in some instances greater than those witli wliicli tlie synoptical accounts are encumbered: hence we. learn as little from the one as tlie other, concerning the manner in which the first disciples at
tacllefl +1lOT»eol-,roc, +^ 1^.,,.»T .-.-..--^ -.--.
 
•.->.1
 
‘“ ••
 
THE LIFE OF JESUS.
 
Probabilla,* in deriving the divergency of the fourth evangelist from his predecessors, from the wish to avoid mentioning tlic derided •fishing-trade of the most distinguished apostles : since in chap. xxi., which Brctschncider allows to be by the same hand as the rest of the gospel, he unhesitatingly introduces tlie obnoxious employment. I
rather surmise tliat the idea of their having received their decisive apostolic call while actually engaged with their fishing-nets, was not afloat in tlie tradition from which the fourth evangelist drew; and that tills writer formed his scenes, partly on the probably historical report tliat some disciples of Jesus liad belonged to tlic school of the Baptist, and partly from tlie wisli to represent in the most favourable light, tlie relation between Jesus and the Baptist, and tlie supernatural gifts of tlic former.
 
§ 71. PETER’S DRAUGHT OF FISHES.
 
WE have hitherto examined only two accounts of tlie, vocation of Peter and his companions; there is a third given by Luke (v.
1-11.). I sliall not dilate on the minor points of diffcrcnccf between liis narrative and tliat of tlie first two evangelists: the essential distinction is, tliat in Luke tlie disciples do not, as in Matthew and Mark, unite themselves to Jesus on a. simple invitation, but in consequence of a plentiful draught of fishks, to which Jesus lias assisted Simon. If this feature be allowed to constitute Luke’s narrative a separate one from tliat of his predecessors, we have next to inquire, into its intrinsic credibility, and then to ascertain its relation to tliat of Mattliew and Mark.
 
Jesus, oppressed by tlie throng of people on the shore of the
Galilean sc;i, enters into a ship, tliat he may address them with more case at ;i little distance from land. Having brought liis discourse to a close, he desires Simon, tlic owner of tlie boat, to launch out into tlie deep, and let down his nets for a draught.
 
Simon, although little encouraged by tlie poor result of tlie last night’s fishing, declares himself willing, and is rewarded by so extraordinary a draught, tliat Peter and liis partners, James and Jolin (Andrew is not here mentioned), are struck with astonishment, the former even witli awe, before Jesus, as a superior being. Jesus then says to Simon, Fear not; from henceforth tlum shaft catch mc.’i, and the issue is that the three fishermen forsake all, and follow him.
 
The rationalistic commentators take pains to show that whit is above narrated might occur in a natural way. According to them, tlie astonishing consequence of letting down tlie .net was tlic result of an accurate observation on the part of Jesus, assisted by a happy fortuity. Paulus-i: supposes that Jesus at fir.-.t wished to launch out farther into tlic deep merely to escape from tlie crowd, and tliat it.
was not until after sailing to some distance, tliat, descrying a place
‘ ~
 
“‘‘- T--I- -ici. »vnnir.
Gcscli. und dcr Briefe Job, S. 350.
 
THE DISCIPLES OF JESUS.8SS
 
where the fish were abundant, he desired Peter to let down the net.
But he has fallen into a twofold contradiction of tlie evangelical narrative. In close connexion with tlie command to launch out into the deep, Jesus adds, .Let dovm your nets for a draught (K^avdyaye eic; TO /3a0oc, not ^a^daars TU 6iit-va, it. T. A.), as if this were one of his objects in changing tlic locality ; and if he spoke thus when -at a little distance only from tlie shore, his liope of a successful draught could not be tlie effect of liis having observed a place abundant in fish on the main sea, which the vessel had not yet readied.
 
Our rationalists must therefore take refuge in the opinion of the author of tlie Natural History of tlie Great Prophet of Nazareth, wlio says, Jesus conjectured on general grounds, tliat under existing circumstances (indicative probably of an approaching storm), fishing in the middle of tlie sea would succeed better than it had done in tlic night.
But, proceeding from tlie natural point of view, how could Jesus be a better judge in tills matter, than tlie men who had spent half their life on the sea in the employment of fishing? Certainly if tlie fishermen observed nothing which could give them liope of a plentiful draught, neitlier in a natural manner could Jesus; and tlie agreement between his Words and tlie result, must, adhering to the natural point of view, be put down wholly to the account of chance.
But wliat senseless audacity, to promise at random a success, which, judging from tlie occurrences of tlie past niglit, was little likely to follow!
 
It is said, however, tliat Jesus only desires Peter to make another attempt, without, giving any definite promise. But, we must rejoin, in the emphatic injunction, which Peter’s remark on the inauspicious aspect of circumstances for fishing does not induce him to revoke, there is a latent promise, and tlie words, .Let down your nets, &c., in the present passage, can hardly have any oilier meaning than tha’t plainly expressed in tlie similar scene, Jolin xxi. 6., (Just ike net on, the riy/d side of the ship, and ye shall find.
 
When, moreover, Peter retracts liis objection in the words, Nevertheless at thy word I will let down tlie ‘net, em SK TO) prfiMri aov ^aXaw TO
SLK-VOV, though prii.ia may be translated by command rather than by promise, in cither case lie implies a hope tliat wdiat Jesus enjoins will not be without result. If Jesus liad not intended to excite this.
liope, lie must immediately have put an end to it, if lie would not expose himself to disgrace in the event of failure; and on no account ouglit lie to have accepted tlie attitude and expressions of Peter as liis duo, if he liad only merited them by a piece of lucky advice given at a venture.

Other books

Lord Protector by T C Southwell
Bronxwood by Coe Booth
Tequila Sunset by Sam Hawken
Evidence of Guilt by Jonnie Jacobs
ShamelesslyTaken by Blue, Mel
RockYourSoul by Sara Brooks
The Judas Goat by Robert B. Parker