[visible personality to a deeper apprehension of what he said and was. He sought to ground their faith upon deeper reasons than those which appeared so largely to the senses and would be quickly weakened when he should have disappeared from their sight. Only as faith penetrated into the heart of his spiritual truth and struck its roots into the life of God, could its persistence and growth be assured. Hence he said to Thomas: "Because thou hast seen me thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed" (xx. 29). This is the beatitude of those who have not seen Christ in the flesh, but who have seen him with the eye of the spirit and who have discerned in him the revelation of God and of the meaning and goal of life. It was only by such a deepening of faith that the spiritual vision of the first disciples could be gradually enlarged and clarified. Gradually their inherited prejudices gave way. They saw the work of Christ and the meaning of his Kingdom in a new light. Their own faith found broader and more secure (foundations. That all this might happen it was necessary, he said, that he should withdraw from them his bodily presence. The veil of sense must be rent; the aid of sight must be surrendered in order that his disciples might walk by faith alone. The inner treasures of the gospel must be jopened by the Spirit; its hidden depths must be fathomed; its lofty heights must be ascended. His followers must cease to know him after the flesh, for the lower easily becomes a hindrance to the higher. Under the guidance (of the Spirit faith must assert its true power, realize its own true nature, adjust itself to that spiritual world to which it belongs, and go forth on its world-conquering mission.

It remains to consider the work of the Spirit on the unbelieving world. It is described in the following passage: "And he (the Paraclete), when he is come, will convict the world in respect of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement: in respect of sin, because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because I go to the Father, and ye behold me no more, of judgement, because the prince of

this world hath been judged" (xvi. 8-11). The Spirit is here described by judicial analogies as appearing as an advocate against the unbelieving world which has rejected (Christ. In respect to the matters of sin, righteousness, and judgment the Spirit will convict the world of being in the wrong and will pronounce upon it the verdict of guilty. There are three counts in the indictment against the world, and the causal clauses which are added to the statement of them give the reasons why on each of them the world stands condemned.

With respect to the matter of sin the Spirit will convict the world by showing that it was in the wrong in not welcoming and believing on Jesus Christ as its Saviour. The sinfulness of men in rejecting him will more and more plainly appear. The Spirit will demonstrate the sinfulness of opposition to Christ. The next element in the verdict. is kindred to this. With regard to righteousness the Spirit will convict the world of its false position, because Jesus is going to the Father, and his disciples will see him no more. The righteousness which is here in question is probably the personal righteousness of Christ. The world has deemed him unrighteous, and has crucified him as such. The Spirit will accuse and convict the world of being in the wrong in its estimate of Christ. It will reverse the world's verdict by appealing to his ascension and glorification. When he ascends to heaven and exerts his rightful spiritual authority over the world, it will be seen that the world has misjudged him. The third element in the Spirit's conviction of the world is in respect to judgment. In the matter of judgment the Spirit will put the world in the wrong because he will show that the prince of the world stands condemned. The result of the Spirit's work will be a victory over Satan. This result is seen as already on the point of being accomplished. "Now shall the prince of this world be cast out" (xii. 31). The Spirit will procure the verdict of history which will vindicate Christ and condemn the spirit of opposition to him. It is probable that this work of the Spirit is conceived of as wrought mediately

through the testimony and teaching of believers in whom he dwells.1

This form of teaching concerning the Spirit is mainly peculiar to the fourth Gospel. The Synoptists speak of the Spirit of God as descending upon Jesus at his baptism (Mk. i. 10), as driving him into the wilderness to be tempted (Mk. i. 12), as speaking in his disciples (Mt. x. 20), and as pervading his life-work (Lk. iv. 18). But these expressions hardly carry us beyond the Old Testament idea of "the Spirit" as a name for the power or presence of God. The elaboration of the doctrine of the Spirit's personal nature and of his offices in redemption is characteristic of that form of Jesus' teaching which the fourth Gospel presents. It is the Johannine counterpart of that aspect of the Synoptic teaching concerning the parousia which is expressed in the words of Jesus: "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world" (Mt. xxviii. 20).

1 The foregoing points are elaborated with more exegetical detail in my Johannine Theology, ch. viii.

DRED OF LIFE

CHAPTER VI

ETERNAL LIFE

THE phrase "eternal life" holds a place of prominence in the fourth Gospel similar to that which is occupied by the title "Kingdom of God" in the Synoptics. Their meaning is also essentially similar. To "see" or "enter into" the Kingdom of God (iii. 3, 5) is the same as to "have eternal life" (vv. 15, 16). Both terms express the realization of salvation - the appropriation of the saving benefits which Christ came to bestow. Our present purpose requires us to discuss the provision for the bestowment of eternal life through Christ, the method of its appropriation, and its essential nature and characteristics. Jesus represents himself as the bread of life of which, if a man eat, he shall live forever the spiritual nourishment for the permanent satisfaction of the soul (vi. 35, 50). When pressed for an explanation of these strange words, he said that men should obtain eternal life by eating his flesh and drinking his blood (vv. 51-56). What was his meaning? The interpretation which was adopted by many of the Church fathers and which obtains in the Roman Catholic church is that he referred to the impartation of his body and blood to the communicant in the eucharist. A considerable number of modern Protestant scholars apply the words to the Lord's supper.1 The diffi

1 Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, p. 281, maintains this view on the ground that the discourse is predictive and that Jesus is speaking symbolically of his death and resurrection. If this is the case, it would more naturally lead to the interpretation given by Augustine and preferred by most Protestant scholars, that the reference is to the propitiatory death of Christ rather than specifically to the Lord's supper. The alleged “predictive element," however, is that which requires to be proved. Jesus

culties which confront this explanation appear to me to be very great. Jesus is discussing his mission with his enemies. That he should assert in reply to their criticisms that it is necessary for men to partake of a memorial supper which was to be founded some time afterwards, seems almost incredible. If that were the meaning of the discourse, it is difficult to see how it could have been in the slightest degree understood by those to whom he spoke. Moreover, the whole discourse appears to speak of a present gift of eternal life which is available for men by a believing reception of himself. It does not purport to [speak of future events; it refers to what men may now do and, in consequence, have eternal life. Hence the great. majority of recent interpreters - correctly, as I believe -reject this application of the discourse.

to

Almost equally difficult, however, is the prevailing Protestant interpretation that Jesus here spoke specifically of his death. The giving of his flesh for the life of the world (v. 51) does not seem to denote a giving up of his body to death, but a continuous offering of himself to men (as the living bread from heaven. The two expressions give his flesh to be eaten, and to offer himself as the bread of life appear to be perfectly synonymous; but I do not see how the latter is capable of any specific application to his death. Moreover, it is almost as difficult to suppose that in a disputation with hostile Jews, Jesus would dwell so long in advance upon the saving significance of his death as it is to suppose that he would offer them a mystical exposition of the import of the eucharist. In view of these difficulties there is a strong tendency among recent interpreters to abandon these explanations and to seek an interpretation more in accord with the historic situation of the discourse, and with the natural meaning of the figure of "the bread of life," which underlies this whole description of his saving mission.

says that the Father is now giving (dídwoiv, v. 32) the true bread from heaven, which is his flesh (v. 51).

1 So, e.g. Lücke, Meyer, Weiss, Beyschlag, Wendt, Westcott, and Godet.