SECTION XIII.

THE PRINCIPAL WITNESS ON OUR LORD AS KING, PRIEST, AND ANGEL.

The author of "Supernatural Religion" quotes the passage in Dial.

xxxiv.:--

"For Christ is King, and Priest, and God, and Lord, and Angel, and

Man, and Captain, and Stone, and a Son born," &c.

And he remarks, with what I cannot but characterize as astonishing

effrontery, or (to use his own language with respect to Tischendorf) "an

assurance which can scarcely be characterized otherwise than an

unpardonable calculation upon the ignorance of his readers." (Vol. ii.

p. 56.)

"Now these representations, which are constantly repeated throughout

Justin's writings, are quite opposed to the spirit of the Fourth

Gospel." (Vol. ii. p. 288.)

He first of all takes the title "King," and arbitrarily and unwarrantably

restricts Justin's derivation of it to the seventy-second Psalm,

apparently being ignorant of the fact that St. John, in his very

first chapter, records that Christ was addressed by Nathanael as "King

of Israel"--that the Fourth Gospel alone describes how the crowd on His

entry into Jerusalem cried, "Osanna, Blessed be the King of Israel, Who

cometh in the name of the Lord" (xii. 13)--that this Gospel more fully

than any other records how Pilate questioned our Lord respecting His

Kingship, and recognized Him as King, "Behold your King;" and that those

who mocked our Lord are recorded by St. John to have mocked Him as the

"King of Israel."

So that this term King, so far from being contrary to the spirit of the

Fourth Gospel, is not even contrary to its letter.

But this, gross though it seems, is to my mind as nothing to two other

assertions founded on this passage of Justin:--

"If we take the second epithet, the Logos as Priest, which is quite

foreign to the Fourth Gospel, we find it repeated by Justin."

Now, it is quite true that the title "priest" is not given to our Lord

in St. John, just as it is not given to Him in any one of the three

Synoptics, or indeed in any book of the New Testament, except the

Epistle to the Hebrews: yet, notwithstanding this, of all the books of

the New Testament, this Gospel is the one which sets forth the reality

of Christ's Priesthood. For what is the distinguishing function of the

Priesthood? Is it not Mediation and Intercession, and the Fourth Gospel

more than all sets forth Christ as Mediator and Intercessor? As Mediator

when He says so absolutely: "No man cometh unto the Father but by me;"

"As my Father sent me so send I you; whosesoever sins ye remit, they are

remitted unto them."

Again, the idea of Priesthood is actually inherent in the figure of the

good Shepherd "Who giveth His Life for the sheep;" for how does He give

His life?--not in the way of physical defence against enemies, as an

earthly "good shepherd" might do, but in the way of atoning Sacrifice,

as the author of "Supernatural Religion" truly asserts, where he writes

(vol. ii. p. 352):--

"The representation of Jesus as the Lamb of God taking away the sins

of the world is the very basis of the Fourth Gospel."

Again, in the same page:--

"He died for the sin of the world, and is the object of faith, by

which alone forgiveness and justification before God can be

secured."

Again, with reference to His Intercession, we have not only the truth

set forth in such expressions as "I will pray the Father," but we have

the actual exercise of the great act of priestly Intercession, as

recorded in the seventeenth chapter of the Fourth Gospel. If we look to

words only (which the author of "Supernatural Religion" too often does),

then, of course, we allow that the epithet "priest" is quite foreign not

only to the Fourth Gospel, but to every other book of the New Testament,

except the Epistle to the Hebrews; but if we look to the things implied

in the idea of Priesthood, such as Mediation and Intercession, in fact

Intervention between God and Man, then we find that the whole New

Testament is pervaded with the idea, and it culminates in the Fourth

Gospel.

The next assertion of the author of "Supernatural Religion" on the same

passage betrays still more ignorance of the contents of St. John's

Gospel, and a far greater eagerness to fasten on a seeming omission of

the letter, and to ignore a pervadence of the spirit. He asserts:--

"It is scarcely necessary to point out that this representation of

the Logos as Angel, is not only foreign to, but opposed to, the

spirit of the Fourth Gospel." (Vol. ii. p. 293)

Now just as in the former case we had to ask, "What is the

characteristic of the priest?" so in order to answer this we have only

to ask, "What is the characteristic of the angel?"

An angel is simply "one sent." Such is the meaning of the word both in

the Old and New Testament. The Hebrew word [Hebrew: mlakh] is applied

indifferently to a messenger sent by man (see Job i. 14; 1 Sam. xi. 3; 2

Sam. xi. 19-20), and to God's messengers the Holy Angels, that is, the

Holy Messengers, the Holy ones sent. And similarly, in the New

Testament, the word [Greek: angelos] is applied to human messengers in

Luke vii. 24, [Greek: apelthontôn de tôn angelôn Iôannou], also in Luke

ix. 52, and James ii. 25. That the characteristic of the angel is to be

"sent" is implied in such common phrases as, "The Lord _sent_ His

Angel," "I will _send_ mine angel," "Are they not all ministering

spirits _sent_ forth to minister?" &c.

Now one of the characteristic expressions of the Fourth Gospel--we might

almost have said _the_ characteristic expression--respecting Jesus, is

that He is "sent." To use the noun instead of the verb, He is God's

special messenger, His [Greek: angelos], sent by Him to declare and to

do His will: but this does not imply that He has, or has assumed, the

nature of an angel; just as the application of the same word [Greek:

angelos] to mere human messengers in no way implies that they have any

other nature than human nature. Just as men sent their fellow-men as

their [Greek: angeloi], so God sends One Who, according to Justin, fully

partakes of His Nature, to be His [Greek: angelos].

This sending of our Lord on the part of His Father is one of the chief

characteristics of the Fourth Gospel, and the reader, if he cannot

examine this Gospel for himself, comparing it with the others, has only

to turn to any concordance, Greek or English, to satisfy himself

respecting this matter.

Jesus Christ is said to be "sent of God," _i.e._ to be His [Greek:

angelos], only once in St. Matthew's Gospel (Matthew x. 40: "He that

receiveth me receiveth Him that sent me"), only once in St. Mark (ix.

37), only twice in St. Luke (ix. 48; xx. 13), but in the Fourth Gospel

He is said to be sent of God about forty times. [84:1] In one discourse

alone, that in John vi., Jesus asserts no less than six times that He is

sent of God, or that God sent Him; so that the dictum, "This

representation of the Logos as angel is not only foreign to, but opposed

to, the spirit of the Fourth Gospel," is absolutely contrary to the

truth.

The Lost Gospel and Its Contents Or, The Author of "Supernatural Religion" Refuted by Himself · 第 13 / 25 章