New Testament Christianity
by J B Phillips
1. EXPLANATION
"New Testament
Christianity". The critic will probably ask as he picks up this book:
"Is this an attempt to distil the teaching of those early Christian
documents which we call the New Testament, or is it an attempt to contrast the
vigorous and vivid life of the
Since there is some truth in
what this imaginary critic is feeling, I feel there must be an Explanation at
the beginning of this book. I fear that this must of necessity be somewhat
lengthy, but I trust that the reader will read it patiently, for it is
necessary for the understanding of the burden of this book.
First, I think I may fairly
claim that as a translator of all the New Testament (except the book of
Revelation) I am in a somewhat unique position. I do not in the least mean that
I am a unique person, and indeed most of my own work of translation has been
carried out not in the seclusion of a scholar's study but in the middle of the
busy life of a Church of England Vicar. But I am in an unusual position, for not
very many people have lived in close contact with the Greek of the New
Testament for some fourteen years. The translator is bound to feel the enormous
spiritual energy, indeed, in its truest sense, the inspiration of the Gospels,
the Acts, and the Epistles. It is not, to speak personally, that particular
doctrines, or the seeds of particular dogmas, strike the mind afresh. On the
contrary, it is the sheer spiritual zest and drive of the New Testament which
fill one with both wonder and wistfulness. It is as though in these pages there
lies the secret of human life. The secret is not a mere theory or ideal, but a
fresh quality of living worked out in terms of ordinary human life and
circumstance. Above all, the general impression is of something supernatural,
of supra‑human truth and a supra‑human way of living. The
wistfulness arises, of course, from the comparison between the shining, blazing
certainty of the New Testament writers and the comparatively tentative and
uncertain faith and hope we meet so often in present‑day Christianity.
Let me explain this impression
of supra‑human quality in more detail. In translating the Gospels, for
example, like every other conscientious modem translator, I emptied my mind as
far as possible of preconceived ideas and conclusions. "Here," I
said to myself in effect, "are four pieces of Greek, comparatively simple
Greek, which it is my job to turn into the sort of English which is spoken and
written today." I did my best to be detached and disinterested, for it is
no part of a translator's job to add colour or give a slant to what he is
translating. Yet I find, on comparing notes with other translators, that I am
not alone in finding a minor miracle happening. As the work went on, steadily
and inexorably there stood up from these pages a Figure of far more than human
stature and quality. One tried to sense, and indeed to transmit, something of
the difference in the style of the four evangelists. Mark wrote in a downright
"utility" style, with neither frills nor decoration, and certainly
with a minimum of descriptive adjectives. Matthew's Gospel is careful and
precise, a conscientious and, in a sense, calculated short history to prove to
the Jewish mind that the One Whom the prophets foretold was now a Fact of
history. Luke (to whose careful research we owe such unforgettable parables as
that of the Prodigal Son and the Good Samaritan, as well as the account of the
Walk to Emmaus) writes with warm humanity. He is concerned for the Gentile, for
the outcast and unprivileged, for the poor and for the then largely despised
female sex. The Gospel of John, written in all probability much later, adds
fresh insight, supplying almost another dimension to the Figure simply portrayed
by the first three evangelists. Very naturally, a composite portrait forms in
the mind after many months of study of these four remarkable compositions. But
to the present translator it is by no means only the Figure that they succeed
in creating between them that is so impressive. The feeling grows that behind
these early attempts to set down what was reliably remembered about this Man,
there stands the Man Himself! It is His Presence, His Character, which springs
to life at the stimulation of these artless pages. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and
John are nothing but humble instruments (as I am sure they would have been the
first to admit), but Who is it, Whose
human life is it, they are trying to describe and record? The translator,
for all his assumed detachment and impartiality, has all his intuitive and
imaginative faculties set at their most sensitive, or his work would be wooden
and mechanical. And it is these very faculties which are set tingling and
vibrating by the Presence of Someone Who is almost unbearably near and alive
today. That He was properly and thoroughly human is obvious from the records;
indeed, He is seen to be more human than one thought, for the solemn majesty of
the Authorised Version frequently obscures both His humanity and His humour.
But steadily there grows in the mind the disquieting conviction that here is
much more than man. Here, through the incomplete and sometimes almost naive
records, one is in contact with something so tremendous in its significance
that at first the mind cannot grasp it, but only as it were gasps incredulously.
Previously one had accepted the teaching of the Church's Creeds ‑ that
Jesus was both Man and God, and to say one believed in the
"Incarnation" would not raise an eyebrow anywhere. But now from first‑hand
acquaintance with these early documents the truth sweeps in afresh, and the
indescribable humility of God strikes one with overwhelming awe. This little
sphere on which we live and move and have our being is, in fact, a Visited
Planet. The Creator of the vast Universe, about Whose Nature we could at the
most make intelligent guesses, slipped quietly into the stream of human life in
the only way in which that could be possible ‑ by becoming a human
being. This is the truth that pulses and vibrates behind the steady prose of
Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and shines through the more poetic works of John.
It now becomes apparent why,
though the work of translating must be done as conscientiously as possible, the
translator constantly feels not merely his own inadequacy but the extreme
difficulty of his task, for behind all that he translates is not simply a
uniquely important event of history, though that would be a profound understatement;
not simply the story of the greatest man who ever lived, though that again
would fall a long way below the truth, but the active Presence of God Himself,
God expressed in a form human beings can understand, in a form that can bring
both inestimable comfort and surprising disquiet. This astonishing sense of
spiritual attack which, it seems to me, must inevitably follow the continual
reading of the four Gospels, without preconception but with an alert mind, is
not the sole privilege of the translator. It can happen to anyone who is prepared
to abandon proof‑texts and a closed attitude of mind, and allow not
merely the stories but the quality of the Figure Who exists behind the stories
to meet him afresh. Neat snippets of a few verses are of course useful in their
way, but the overall sweep and much of the significance of the Gospel
narratives are lost to us unless we are prepared to read the Gospels through,
not once but several times. I would suggest that this be done in an unfamiliar
version, not of course necessarily my own! Familiar words and verses have
already their stereotyped reactions. It is not the significance of a single
verse that we are seeking here ‑ though Heaven knows there are enough
single verses to revolutionise our thinking - so much as the full meaning that
lies behind the total narrative. From countless conversations and from a good
deal of correspondence, I have become convinced that very few present‑day
Christians have allowed the Truth to break over them in this way. What is more,
I have a feeling, although it cannot be proved, that most of the critics of the
Christian religion have never given their serious adult attention to the Gospel
records. It is easy to criticise the many failings of the Church; it is all too
easy to criticise the lives of those who profess and call themselves
Christians; but I should say that it is almost impossible to read the Gospels
thoroughly with adult, serious attention and then dismiss the central Figure as
a mere human prophet or tragic idealist. The reaction to such study may indeed
prove to be either conversion or open hostility, but it would at least mean the
end of childish and ill‑informed attacks upon what is supposed to be the
Christian religion.
The total impression, then, of
the close study of the Gospels is an indelible conviction that the well‑nigh
incredible has happened ‑ that the Creator has visited this world in
human form. He brings with Him confirmation of our highest hopes, He endorses
our finest longings, and He confirms many of our intuitions. But of course He
does far more than this. First, He introduces a new kind of truth ‑ a
kind of "super‑sense" which transcends our earthly viewpoint.
We may find sometimes our values disconcertingly reversed, sometimes we find we
have been looking at things from the wrong angle. Now that we have this
revelation of truth, there is no need to grope or fumble. We have certain basic
truths unquestionably revealed. We have a standard by which our scale of
values and our conscience may be adjusted. It is not that all our questions are
immediately answered. It is not that everything becomes immediately plain and
that there are no more mysteries. But it is true that we now have enough light
by which to live; we see something at least of life's point and purpose, and we
know where we are going. What is more, the humble and obedient are guaranteed
an active, energetic, contemporary Spirit of Truth. In other words, although we
see the Character of God focused historically in the time and space set‑up,
we come to see and know that that human appearance is only the outcrop of what
is eternally true. (That is why the material on which a New Testament
translator works is alive under his hands.) It is almost too good to be true,
but it is true that the One Who walked and talked in the countryside, the
streets and houses of
The second important revelation
which God‑become Man gave us, and which indeed His Spirit is continually
prepared to endorse, is that this little life is lived against a background, at
present invisible, of timeless Reality. Some men have always felt that this
must be so, since man's longings and intuitions, as well as his sense of
justice, go far beyond the limits of life in this present temporary existence.
To put it in another way, there is another dimension to life altogether, the
dimension of "eternity". This present life is interpenetrated by the
Real World far more than we know. For most of us it is only very occasionally
that we get our flashes of conviction, and it is of immeasurable comfort to
know, on the authority of that Personal Visit, that our feeble intuition was
right and that this short, earthly life, important and significant though it
may be in its setting, is no more than a prelude to a share in the timeless
Life of God.
All this and much more floods
our minds as we study afresh the four Gospel records. But this wonderful
quality of living, this drawing on unseen spiritual resources, this plunging of
the sharp sword of truth into the muddle of human sins and stupidities, might
have ended with the crucifixion of Jesus. If it had, we should indeed have been
left something, for every true seer and poet and philosopher has left us the
richer. But the special glory of the New Testament is that we are not merely
shown a shining beacon of one perfect human life but we are told of what
happened after that human life was ended. The light persists, the power
continues, the wind of Heaven does not cease to blow. If you will not
misunderstand me, in one sense I have been even more thrilled as a translator
to come into contact with the highly‑charged material of the Acts and the
Epistles than I was when translating the Gospels. For if God really became Man,
the light and power and splendour of the Gospel‑story is only to be
expected. But to find that this was not merely a single unique demonstration
but the beginning of a new way of living, the founding of a new Kingdom and of
a new fellowship, is exciting indeed!
Consequently, the close study
of the book commonly called the Acts of the Apostles proved an exhilaration.
The ideas and ideals of God‑become‑Man take shape and form: the
glory has not departed, it continues and expands. For the first time in human
history we are seeing a group of men and women united in devotion to the
unseen King, joined in an unconquerable fellowship. We may be reasonably
certain that Luke was a most careful historian and was not prone to
exaggeration. Yet we find his story of the
All this is without doubt
exciting enough, but from the point of view of Christian evidence the best is
yet to be. For, after all, it might be argued, and indeed has been argued, that
the Man Jesus did exist, but that some years after His death, perhaps after a
generation or so, His followers wrote romantic and idealistic accounts of His
life. Again, it is possible to argue that Luke's second book, the Acts of the
Apostles, is something of an idealisation of the beginnings of the Christian
Church. But even if these contentions are true, if both the Gospels and the
Acts were propaganda for the Christian sect and therefore not to be wholly
relied upon as unbiased history, the critics of Christianity have still to
explain the incontrovertible evidence of the "Epistles" or Letters.
With one or two minor exceptions, these are universally accepted as authentic,
and it seems to me that Christians today do not always realise how valuable
they are as evidence for the proof of the Faith. For here we have no self‑conscious
documents, but vivid human letters, often bearing strong evidence of the
emotion under which they were written. There is some case to be made out for
arguing that the four evangelists knew what they were doing ‑ they were
writing lives of Jesus Christ to be read among Christians and possibly non‑Christians.
Although they could not have foreseen the vast weight of authority that would
later be accorded to their words, they may well have known that they were in a
sense writing "holy Scripture". But this is not true of Paul, for
example, at all. For the most part he wrote to certain groups of Christians in
certain circumstances, and he had no idea that he was writing holy Scripture at
the time. In translating his letters, it is not difficult to picture that
solitary, courageous figure, writing or dictating his letters in great haste
and urgency. Sometimes he was in prison, sometimes he was in poor health,
frequently he was torn with anxiety for his new‑born converts. He wrote
to meet the needs of those for whom he was writing, completely unconscious
that in years to come millions of people would study his every word with the
deepest attention. Yet the inspiration of his words, which I believe to be
largely unconscious, strikes us forcibly today. He had no idea, certainly, that
he was composing Christian evidence! Yet the life reflected, as well as
expressed, in the pages of his unself‑conscious letters is plainly of the
suprahuman quality.
Now, if we were to compile a
history of any place or nation, one of our most valuable discoveries would be a
packet of letters reflecting the life of a certain part of that history.
Newspapers, broadsheets, pamphlets, and any other printed matter would have
their value, of course; but because they were written for the public eye and
probably to prove a particular point, we should be very wary of accepting them
as unbiased evidence. But that would not be true of a bundle of private letters
simply because they were not being written for the public at all and the
writer had no particular axe to grind. They would, in all probability, reflect
most accurately the customs, habits, and thoughts of the times in which they
were written. Now, if this is true in the field of purely secular history, it
is just as true, though of far deeper significance, when we study historically
the beginnings of Christianity. It is what the Letters say and what the Letters
imply, it is the new‑quality life revealed by these human unself‑conscious
documents, which gives us, to my mind, our most valuable Christian evidence.
What impression is left upon our minds, or, if I may again be personal, what
impression is left upon my mind after spending some years in translating these
letters? Above all, I think, that men and women are being changed: the timid
become brave, the filthy‑minded become pure in heart, the mean and
selfish become loving and generous. It is quite plain that the writers of
these letters took it as a matter of course, as a matter of observed
experience, that if men and women were open to the Spirit of God, then they
could be and were transformed. The resources of God are not referred to as
vague pieties but as readily available spiritual power. Quite clearly a positive
torrent of love and wisdom, sanity and courage, has already flooded human
life, and is always ready to flow wherever human hearts are open.
Now, critics of Christianity
have somehow got to explain this if they are to have a leg to stand on. Let
them read these Letters for themselves, and attempt to explain these
transformations of character. No one had anything to gain in those days from
being a Christian; indeed, there was a strong chance that the Christian would
lose security and property, and even life itself. Yet, reflected in the pages
of these Letters, both men and women are exhibiting superb courage and are
growing, as naturally as fruit upon a tree, those qualities of the spirit of
which the world is so lamentably short. To my mind we are forced to the
conclusion that something is at work here far above and beyond normal human
experience, which can only be explained if we accept what the New Testament
itself claims; that is, that ordinary men and women had become, through the
power of Christ, sons and daughters of God.
With all this lengthy, but I
think necessary, preamble, I now come to define my use of the term "New
Testament Christianity". I am not in the least concerned with what may or
may not be proved by the dexterous manipulation of texts. Indeed, I think we
are all of us indoctrinated more than we know by being led tendentiously from
one text to another in our impressionable years. But I am concerned with this
new quality of living which has as its spearhead the personal visit of God to
this planet in the Person of Jesus Christ. It does not, thank God, exist only
in these pages or in the lives reflected in these pages. It exists today, and I
myself have seen it in people of all ages and of many different occupations. It
has been my privilege to mix freely among many denominations, and I can
truthfully report that I have found New Testament Christians exhibiting the
same stamp of supra‑human quality in them all. What is even more
important is that I have found something very like this first‑century
fellowship among Christians of widely differing nationalities. There are the
same essentials of New Testament Christianity to be found in men and women
whatever the colour of their skin, and for the fact that I have observed this I
am profoundly thankful.
It has been my privilege during
the last few years to preach, lecture, and generally join in the fellowship of
Churches, both in this country as well as for a few weeks in the
on to 2. The Angel's Point of View