The Historical Proofs of Christianity [pp. 51-84]

THE PRINCE TON RE VIEW.
genuine-must be considered a product of base and vulgar imposture.
Now, the whole scheme of Baur respecting this Gospel is
built up on a false assumption as to the author's point of view.
It is assumed that the Incarnation is to him a circumstance of no
account. It is even assumed, on the basis of erroneous interpretation, that no real Incarnation is taught in the Gospel, but
rather a Docetic junction of the Logos with the man Jesus.
Whereas it is on the Incarnation as a most real and momentous
fact that the writer's thoughts are fixed. He does not spin the
history of Jesus out of the idea; he deduces the idea from
the history. In the forefront of the book, as the climax of the
prologue, stands the joyous declaration, "The Word became
Flesh." To help out his view, Baur makes verses 9-I4 of the
first chapter refer to the pre-existent Word. But they plainly
relate to the Word incarnate. Baur's interpretation is an example of the artificial exegesis, of which far more signal specimens
might be adduced, by which alone his thesis can be sustained.
Not that he is insincere or lacking in ingenuity. His treatise on
this Gospel is, in many respects, a work of great ability; but it is
a remarkable illustration of the power of a preconceived theory
to pervert the judgment of a skilful interpreter. What candid
reader of the Gospel can fail to perceive that it is the historic
Jesus, as he had actually lived, taught, consorted with his disciples, hung upon the cross, and risen from the tomb, in. whom
the author's interest centres? Here all his beliefs respecting
Christ take their rise.
That the apostle teaches dualism is a groundless allegation.
The contrast between light and darkness is represented as moral,
as having its roots in the will (John iii. I9-2I; cf. viii. 47 with
viii. 34, and xii. 35, 36 with xii. 43.) Where is there room for
dualism when " all things were made by" the Word? How can
the Jews be thought of as, metaphysically speaking, of the realm
of darkness when it is said of Christ in relation to them that
"he came unto his own"? It is manifest that John has a certain conception of Jesus, and announces it at the outset of his
narrative. The same is true of Matthew, who will show, partly
by a comparison of facts with prophecy, that Jesus is the Messiah. The only question is, Whence was that conception derived?
76