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

THE PRINCETON RE VIEW.
not an actual heathen chosen to figure in this character, rather
than a Samaritan who believed in Moses and was looking for
the Messiah? But into the details of exegesis it is impracticable here to enter.'
It is a strange error into which the critics fall who have said
that the author of this Gospel attaches no value to miracles,
setting them up, so to speak, merely to bowl them down. It is
true that as he looks back upon the Saviour's life, everything in
it is seen to be a manifestation of the glory that was veiled in
the servant's form. The nature of the only-begotten Son shone
out in supernatural exertions of power and mercy. That which
is censured in the Gospel is the disposition to rest in the miracles as bare facts which minister to wonder, or supply some
lower want, instead of catching their suggestion. Unbelief,
even when not denying that they were wrought, failed to look
through them. They were a language the deep import of which
was not comprehended. They were opaque facts. Hence the
Jews called for more and more. They clamored for something
more stupendous for "a sign from heaven."
This is the view of miracles which is found in the Fourth
Gospel. There is not the remotest suggestion that they are not
actual occurrences. The narrator does not stultify himself in
this manner. In every instance where Baur appeals to exegesis
in support of his view of the evangelist's intent in this matter,
he is obliged to do violence to the passage in hand. For example, when Jesus said, "Blessed are they that have not seen, and
yet have believed," there is, to be sure, a reference to the reluctance of Thomas to believe without seeing; but to believe what?
Why, the miracle of the resurrection to which the other apostles
had testified. This was the object of faith. It is not on faith
independent of miracles, but on faith independent of the ocular
perception of miracles, that Jesus pronounces his blessing.
Scattered over the pages of the Fourth Gospel are numerous
indirect proofs that the author draws his material from personal
recollection. Only a few illustrations can be here presented.
"And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was
I For a particular examination of Baur's exegesis of the Gospel, see Beyschlag (ut supra); also, BrUckner's notes to De Wette's "Kurze Erkl. d. Evang.
Johann.," and "The Supernat. Origin of Christianity" (ed. 3), p. I32, seq.
78