Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) (767 page)

Read Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated) Online

Authors: George Eliot

BOOK: Delphi Complete Works of George Eliot (Illustrated)
4.98Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
 
If, from the point of view now attained, we glance back on our first passage, iv. 44, it is easy to see how tlie evangelist might be led to insert in so unsuitable a connexion the testimony of Jesus as to tlie treatment of a prophet in his own country. It was known to him traditionally, and he appears to have applied it to Galileo in general, being ignorant of any unfavourable contact of Jesus with the Nazarenes. As, therefore, he knew of no special scene by which tins observation might have been prompted, he introduced it where the simple mention of Galilee suggested it, apparently without any definite idea of its bearing.
 
The result of the above investigation is this; the fourth evangelist succeeds in giving connectedness to his materials, when he presents his own tliouglits in the form of discourses delivered by Jesus; but lie often fails lamentably in tliat particular, wlien he lias to deal with tlie real traditional sayings of Jesus. In tlie above instances, when lie has the same problem before him as the synoptists, lie is as unfortunate in its solution as they; nay, he is in a yet more evil case, for his narrative is not homogeneous with the common evangelical tradition, and presented few places where a genuine traditional relic could be inserted. Besides, he wag accustomed to cast his metal, liquid from his own invention, and was little skilled in tlie art of adapting independent fragments to each other, so as to form an harmonious mosaic.
 
§ 83. THE MODEEN DISCUSSIONS ON THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE
DISOOUESES IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN-EESULT.
 
THE foregoing examination of the discourses of Jesus in the fourth gospel, has sufficiently prepared us to form a judgment on the controversy of whicli they liave recently been the subject. Modern criticism views these discourses with suspicion, partly on account of their internal contexture, which is at variance with certain generally received rules of historical probability, and partly on account of tlieir external relation to other discourses and narratives.
 
THE LIFE OF JESUS.
 
With respect to tlic internal contexture of the above discourses, there arises a twofold question : Docs it correspond to the laws, first, of verisimilitude, and secondly, of memory ?
 
It is alleged by tlic friends of tlie fourth gospel tliat its discourses are distinguished by a peculiar stamp of truth and credibility ; that the conversations which it represents Jesus as holding with men ot tlie most diverse disposition and capacity, are faithful delineations of character, satisfying tlic strictest demands of psychological criticism.* In opposition to tills, it is maintained to be in tlie highest degree improbable, tliat Jesus should have adopted prccise-ly the same style of teaching to persons differing widely in their degrees of cultivation; tliat lie should have spoken to the Galileans in the synagogue at Capernaum not more intelligibly than to a master of Israel; tliat tlic matter of his discourses should have turned almost entirely on one doctrine.-tlie dignity of his person; and tliat their form should have been such, as to seem selected witli a view to perplex and repel his hearers. Neither, it is further urged, do the interlocutors express themselves in conformity with their position and character. Tlie most educated Pharisee lias no advantage in intelligence over a Samaritan woman of tlie lowest grade; tlie one, as well as the other, can only put a carnal interpretation on the discourse which Jesus intends spiritually; their misconstructions, too, are frequently so glaring, as to transcend all belief, and so uniform tliat they seem to belong to a standing set of features witli wliicli the author of the fourth gospel lias chosen, for tlie sake of contrast, to depict those whom lie brings into conversation with Jesus.f Hence, I confess, I understand not wliat is tlic meaning of verisimilitude in tlie mind of tliosc wdio ascribe it to the discourses of Jesus in tlic gospel of John.
 
As to tlie second uoint, regarding tlie powers of memory, it is pretty generally agreed that discourses of the kind peculiar to John’s gospel,-in contradistinction to the apothegms and parables, eitlicr isolated or strung together, in tlie synoptical gospels,-namely, series of dependent propositions, or prolonged dialogues, are among the most difficult to retain and reproduce witli accuracy.t Unless such discourses were reduced to writing at tlie moment of their delivery, all liope of their faithful reproduction must be abandoned.
Hence Dr. Paulus once actually entertained tlie idea, tliat in the judgment-halls of tlie temple or tlie synagogues at Jerusalem, there were stationed a sort of shorthand writers, wliose office it w^as to draw up verbal processes, and that from their records the Christians, after the deatli of Christ, made transcripts.§ In like manner, Bertholdt was of opinion, that our evangelist, during the lifetime of
* Wegscheider, Einl. in clas Evang. Job. S. 271 ; Tlwluck, Comm. S. 37 f. f Thug Eckermann, tlieol. Beitrage, .’», 2, S. 228; (Vogi-1) der Evangelist Johannes iinil seine Ausleger vor dem jiingstcn Gericht, 1, S. 28 fi’., Wegsclu-iJer, S. 281 ; Bretsehneider, Probabil. 33, 4.”), apud Wcgscheider, ut sup. S. W I ; Brutachneider, Probab. p. 33, 45.
 
MSCOUBSES OF JESUS IN THE FOUETH GOSPEL
 
Jesus, took down most of the discourses of Jesus in the Aramsean
language, and made tliese notes the foundation of Ills gospel, composed at a much later period.* These modern hypotheses are clearly unhistorical ;f nevertheless, their propounders were able to adduce many reasons in their support. The prophetic declarations of Jesus relative to his death and resurrection, said Bcrtholdt, are more indefinite in Jolm than in the synoptical gospels, a sure si”-n that they were recorded before their fulfilment, for otherwise the writer’s experience of tlie event would have reflected more clearness on the predictions. To tills we may add tlie kindred argTinicnt, by “which Henke thought it possible to establish the genuineness of tlie discourses in John: namely, that tlie fourth Evangelist not seldom appends explanatory remarks, often indeed erroneous, to the obscure expression of Jesus, thus proving tliat he was scrupulously conscientious in reporting tlie discourses, for otherwise lie would liave mingled his comments with their original matter.t But it is with justice objected, that tlie obscurity of tlie predictions in the fourth gospel is in perfect harmony with tlie mystical spirit tliat pervades the work, and as, besides, tlie author, together with his fondness for the obscure and enigmatical, indisputably possessed taste, he must have been conscious that a prophecy would only be tlie more piquant and genuine-looking, the more darkly it was delivered: lienee, though he put those predictions into the mouth of Jesus long after the events to which they refer, lie might yet cliose to give them an indefinite form.
 
Tills observation helps to explain why tlie evangelist, when elucidating some obscure expressions of Jesus, adds that. his disciples did not understand them until after his resurrection, or after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (11. 22; vii. 39); for the opposition of tlie darkness in wliicli the disciples at one time groped, to tlie liglit which ultimately arose on them, belongs to tliat order of contrasts witli wliicli this gospel abounds. Another argument, adopted by Bertholdt and approved by Tlioluck, is, that in the discourses of the fourth gospel there sometimes occur observations, wliich, having no precise meaning in themselves, nor any connexion with tlie rest of tlie discourse, must, have been occasioned by some external circumstance, and can only be accounted for on.
tlie supposition of prompt, nay, of immediate reduction to writing;
 
and among their examples tlie passage, Arise, let us go hence (xiv.
31), is one of tlie most important. But tlie origin of such digressive remarks lias been above explained, in a manner tliat renders tlie hypothesis of instantaneous note-taking superfluous.
 
Thus commentators liad to excogitate some other means of certifying the genuineness of the discourses of Jesus in tlie fourth gospel. Tlie general argument, so often adduced, founded on wliat a
^ Veroshnilia de origine evangelii Joannis, opusc. p. 1 ff. Einl. in das N. T. S. 1302
ff. This opinion is approved by Wugschcider, ut sup. p. 270 ff. and also Mug. 2, 2U3 f.
and Tlioluck, Coinm. p. 38, think the supposition of early notes not to be altogether rejected.+ Lucke. 1. S. 192 f.+ Henke. proerramm. duo illustratur Johannes apostolua
THE LIFE OF JESUS.
 
good memory might achieve, especially among men of simple lives,
unused, to writing, lies in the region of abstract possibility, where, as Liicke remarks,* there may always be nearly as much said against as for a theory. It has been thought more effectual to adopt an argument resting on a narrower basis, and to appeal to the individual distinctions of tlie apostle John,-to his intimate and peculiar relation to Jesus as the favourite disciple,-to his enthusiasm for his master, wliicli must surely have strengthened his memory, and have enabled him to preserve in the most lively recollection all that can.»3
from tlie lips of his divine friend.f Although this peculiar relation of John to Jesus rests on the authority of John’s gospel alone, we might, without reasoning in a circle, draw from it conclusions as to the credibility of tlie discourses communicated by him, were the faults of wliicli his gospel is accused only such as proceed from tlie inevitable fading of tlie memory; because the positive notices of tliat relation could never flow from tills negative cause. As, however, tlie suspicion which lias arisen to the prejudice of tlie fourth evangelist lias gone far beyond those limits, even to the extent of taxing him with free invention, no fact resting on tlie word of John can be used in support of the discourses which he communicates. But neither the above relation, if admitted, nor tlie remark that John apparently attached himself to Jesus in early youth, when impressions sink deepest, and from the time of his master’s death lived in a circle where tlie memory of his words and deeds was cherished, f suffices to render it probable that John could retain in his mind long scries of ideas, and complicated dialogues, until the period in which the composition of his gospel must be placed. For critics are agreed that tlie tendency of tlie fourth gospel, its evident aim to spiritualize the common faith of Christians into the Gnosis, and thus to crush many errors which liad sprung up, is a decisive attestation tliat it was composed at a period wlien the church had attained a degree cf maturity, and consequently in tlie extreme old age of tlie apostle. §
 
Hence tlie champions of the discourses in question are fain to bring forward, as a forlorn hope, tlie supernatural assistance of the Paraclete, wliicli was promised to tlie disciples, and wliicli was to restore all that Jesus had said to their remembrance. This is done byThohick with great confidence,!) by Lucke with some diffidence, *[
which Tholuck’s Anzeiger severely censures, but which we consider laudable, because it implies a latent consciousness of the circle that is made, in attempting to prove the truthfulness of tlie discourses in John, by a promise which appears nowhere but in those discourses ;**
and of the inadequacy of an appeal, in a scientific inquiry, to a popular notion, such as tliat of tlie aid of the Holy Spirit. Tlie con
* Ut sup. p. 199.•;• Wegscheider, p. 28G ; Liicke, p. 195 f.}• Wegscheider, p.
285 ; Lucke, ut sup.
DISCOURSES OF JESUS IN THE FOURTH GOSPEL.
 
sciousness of this inadequacy shows itself indirectly in Tholuck for he ekes out tlie assistance of the Paraclete by early notes; and in Lucke also, for he renounces the verbal authenticity of the discourses in John, and only contends for their substantial veracity on “rounds chiefly connected with the relation which tlicy bear to otner discourses.
 

Other books

Tempting the Highlander by Michele Sinclair
The Magnificent Elmer by Pearl Bernstein Gardner, Gerald Gardner
Diviner by Bryan Davis
Airframe by Michael Crichton
Nixon's Secret by Roger Stone
The Devil Inside by Amano, Mia