042. Chapter 21 - Critical Essays on John 1:19-51

Chapter 21 - Critical Essays onJohn 1:19-51 (1) Christian Experience

“Come and see.” This word of our Lord and of Philip strikes deep into the needs of the human heart. One cannot study this chapter without a lasting impression of the importance of Christian Experience. Of what value would the miracles of Jesus be, if it were not for the actual redemption of the soul through His ministry? Of what significance is the truth that He is the Son of God, if our daily fellowship with Him does not lift us out of the mire and “into the heavenly places”?

Extremists Old and New

It has seemed impossible to maintain a sane view of the place of Christian Experience in the gospel, as it has of the personality of Jesus. Men have swung from one extreme to the other, either considering Christian Experience everything or nothing. How much should an evangelistic sermon appeal to the emotions and how much to the understanding? A hundred years ago (and in belated sections even today) Christian Experience often completely overshadowed a simple and intelligent presentation of the gospel. The emotionalism of that day passed to the most ridiculous extremes. An example of so-called Christian Experience was seen when people ran around on all fours barking like dogs supposedly under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Today we are witnessing the intellectual extreme in the appeal to Christian Experience. The “Inner Conscience” masquerading under the title “Christian Experience” has become responsible for similar excesses. It has become the Alpha and Omega and the all-sufficient and final source of authority. Present-day rationalists hold that belief in the New Testament records of the life of Jesus — a confession of faith in Christ as the Son of God in the sense in which these terms are used in the New Testament — is immaterial. It is all a question of Christian Experience. They hold that “Christ may be either little or much according to our experience of Him.” In other words, if our experience of Christ dictates the view that He is the Son of God — well and good. But if it dictates the view that He was merely a man, then no rebuke or correction is possible for it is merely a matter of one’s “inner conscience.” Thus, “Christian Experience will prevent the formulation of any final orthodoxy.” The line of discrimination between this view and the doctrine of Christian Science is well-nigh indefinable. The Modernist attempts to derive Christ out of Christian Experience instead of deriving our Christian Experience from Christ.

Modernists’ Use of Christian Experience

Philip said, “Come and see.” He appealed to actual experience. But is it possible for us to make this appeal in the same way Philip did? Philip was not familiar with the facts of the life of Christ that are plain to us. He could not preach a full gospel. All he could do was to lead Nathanael into Christ’s presence. There Nathanael could question for himself and secure the information as well as the experience which would convince him. Christ lives and reigns today. We come to know Him and feel His presence by our daily walk with Him. This is a most precious possession. But what folly to try to use Christian Experience as the basis for a denial of the New Testament records about Jesus! Is our experience, which is purely spiritual, more to be trusted than that of His chosen disciples who were actually with Him in the flesh? It means every man could write the biography of Jesus out of his own imagination and arrange a gospel to suit his fancy.

Spiritualism and Modernism

Here is the crux of the matter. What new revelation can these radical extremists bring to us through the realm of Christian Experience by means of which to destroy the gospel? The theory of evolution? Christ reveals to them, personally, the fact that He was badly mistaken when on earth? Wonderful! Those who dethrone Christ in order to enthrone the “inner conscience” face the dilemma Professor James of Harvard flung at the Spiritualists. What new message has Spiritualism brought concerning eternity? “I am well and hope you are the same” and similar foolishness! Professor James said that judging by the messages sent back from eternity through the Spiritualistic medium, the intelligence of the folks over there is about on a par with that of the people we lock up in institutions for the feebleminded over here. And what of the Modernists? What have they added to the sum total of facts concerning Christ? What new truth have they ever enunciated in religion and morals?

Finality of the New Testament

Paul pronounced anathemas on even an angel should he preach a new gospel. Christian experience will always have its high place in the life of Jesus’ followers. But it cannot supplant or be used to destroy the only exact information which we have of the life and will of Christ. The New Testament still remains the final revelation of God. Christian Experience must always respond to the eternal norm — the Christ, the Son of God — as revealed to us by His inspired biographers. There never can be any conflict between the historic Christ and the Christ of experience.

(2) The Unnamed Disciple For several decades a furious controversy has raged over the authorship of the Fourth Gospel. The testimony it offers to Jesus as the Son of God is so strong that it can only be shaken by proving that the author was not John the apostle, an eyewitness, as the church has always held. Space forbids any lengthy discussion, but a very interesting point of evidence occurs in this first chapter of John. The name of John is not to be found in the entire book, but the titles, “The disciple,” “The beloved disciple,” “The disciple whom Jesus loved” are applied to a person who holds the place we should expect John the apostle to occupy and who can be no other. This can only be explained by the modest retirement of the author which caused him to withhold his name. The twenty-first chapter speaks of seven apostles together, two of whom are the sons of Zebedee. The “beloved disciple” is one of the group. This, together with the postscript at the end of chapter 21, makes plain the identification of the “beloved disciple” as John the apostle and as the author of the book. This first chapter offers the following evidence concerning the authorship. In John 1:35 we see two disciples follow Jesus. The name of one was Andrew (John 1:40). What was the name of the other? Why was it omitted? Andrew found his brother first, and what did the other disciple do? It is evident when taken in connection with the strange silence throughout the book that the other disciple is John the apostle or else James his brother and that he also goes and finds his brother. This fits into the picture of the Synoptics where the two pairs of brothers are called by the lake shore at the same time. It agrees with the fact that all four were from Bethsaida and that Philip also was from this town. Since the Fourth Gospel gives such accurate information concerning the disciples of Jesus, we should expect some definite statement concerning this other disciple. “But our wonder is increased when we read John 1:41. According to the correct reading which is to be accepted more because of its originality than because of strong external testimony, it is stated with marked emphasis that Andrew, the first of the two disciples, finds his own brother, which implies that after Andrew the other of the two disciples, whose name is not mentioned, also finds his brother, whose name is likewise unmentioned. To everyone who can read Greek it is perfectly clear between the lines that in addition to the two brothers Andrew and Peter there must have been two other brothers who left John and became disciples of Jesus” (Zahn, Introduction to N. T., Vol III, p. 209).