02.002. Table of CONTENTS

CONTENTS EDITOR’S PREFACE AUTHOR’S PREFACE

FIRST BOOK THE INTRODUCTION PART I-THE FUNDAMENTAL IDEAS OF THE GOSPEL HISTORY Sect.1.The Incarnation of God 2.The Personality of Man 3. Organism in the Province of Personal Human Life 4.The Fulness of the Time 5.The Ideality of the Gospel History 6.The Effect of the Ideal History: The Sacred Remembrance PART II-THE MORE GENERAL RECORDS OF THE LIFE OF THE LORD JESUS Sect.1.General Survey 2.The New Testament 3.The Old Testament 4.The Theocracy, especially the Christian Church 5.The Spiritual Life of Mankind PART III-THE HISTORIC RECORDS OF THE LIFE OF JESUS Sect.1.The Phenomenon of the Four Gospels 2.The Four Gospels as Records of the Life of Christ PART IV-CRITICISM OF THE TESTIMONIES TO THE GOSPEL HISTORY Sect.1.General Survey 2.The Gospel History as Criticism 3.Antagonistic Criticism in general 4.Antagonistic Criticism in its Subordinate Principles and Aspects 5.Antagonistic Criticism in its Dialectic Dealings 6.Antagonistic Criticism, in its intermixture of Contradictory Assumptions and Opposite Modes of Treatment 7.The Christian Theological Criticism of the Gospel Narratives PART V-THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE FOUR GOSPELS Sect.1.The Ecclesiastical Corroboration of the Four Gospels in general 2.The Authenticity of the First Gospel 3.The Authenticity of the Second Gospel 4.The Authenticity of the Third Gospel 5.The Authenticity of the Fourth Gospel PART VI-THE ORIGIN OF THE FOUR GOSPELS Sect.1.Various Views of the Origin of the Four Gospels 2.The Origin of the Gospels in general 3.Origin of the Gospels in particular PART VII-THE RELATION OF THE FOUR GOSPELS TO THE GOSPEL HISTORY Sect.1.An Attempt to exhibit the Gospel History in its Unity 2.The Gospel History in the Organic Fourfold Development of its Fulness

SECOND BOOK THE HISTORICAL DELINEATION OF THE LIFE OF JESUS PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION Sect.1.The Principal Chronological Periods ascertained 2.The Periods of Christ’s Life PART I-THE HISTORICAL SPHERE OF CHRIST’S LIFE Sect.1.The Relations of Time and Place among which Christ appeared 2.The Scene of Christ’s Life, the Promised Land PART II-THE HISTORY OF THE BIRTH AND CHILDHOOD OF THE LORD JESUS Sect.1.Preliminary Remarks 2.The Angel Gabriel

3.Zacharias 4.The Virgin Mary 5.Mary and Elisabeth 6.The Birth of Jesus at Bethlehem 7.The First Homage, or the Shepherds and the Wise Men 8.The Flight into Egypt 9.The Presentation of Jesus in the Temple 10.The Settlement in Nazareth 11.The Fulfilments 12.The Development of Jesus 13.The Family Relations of Jesus PART III-THE ANNOUNCEMENT AND CHARACTER OF CHRIST’S PUBLIC MINISTRY Sect.1.Determination of the Dates 2.John the Baptist 3.The Participation of Jesus in the Baptism of John 4.The Manifestation of the Messiah to the People of Israel

5.The God-Man

6. The Tempter 7.The Spiritual Rest and Spiritual Labour of Christ in the Wilderness-the Temptation 8.The Plan of Jesus 9.The Miracles of Jesus 10.The Teachings of Christ, especially the Parables 11.The Kingdom of God PART IV-THE PUBLIC APPEARANCE AND ENTHUSIASTIC RECEPTION OF CHRIST Sect.1.The Public Testimony of the Baptist to Christ before the Jewish Rulers 2.The Testimony of John to the Dignity of Christ, uttered to his Disciples 3.The First Disciples of Jesus 4.The Marriage at Cana 5.The First Messianic Attendance of Jesus on the Passover, and the Purification of the Temple 6.The Conversation by Night with Nicodemus 7.The Last Public Testimony of the Baptist to Jesus 8.Conversation of Jesus with the Samaritan Woman 9.The Prophet in His own City of Nazareth 10.The Nobleman of Capernaum

11.The Residence of Jesus at Capernaum. The Man with an Unclean Spirit in the Synagogue. Peter’s Wife’s Mother. Peter’s Draught of Fishes. The Calling of the Apostles 12.The First Journey of Jesus from Capernaum through Galilee. The Sermons on the Mount. The Healing of the Leper

13.The Return of Jesus from His Tour through Galilee. The Centurion of Capernaum. The Candidates for Discipleship. The second Discourse on the Sea-shore. The Crossing the Sea to Gadara, and the Return Home

14.The Return of Jesus to Capernaum from His Journey to Gadara. The Throng of People. The Paralytic. The Calling of Matthew. More decided Conflicts with the Pharisees and with John’s Disciples. A Succession of Miracles 15.Preparations for a new Journey. The Separation of the Twelve Apostles. The Instructions given to the Apostles

16.The first Journey of the Apostles. The Progress of Christ through the Towns. The Woman who was a Sinner. The Followers of Jesus. The Young Man at Nain 17.The Baptist’s Embassy PART V-THE TIME OF JESUS’ APPEARING AND DISAPPEARING AMID THE PERSECUTIONS OF HIS MORTAL ENEMIES

Sect.1.Jesus in Jerusalem at the Feast of Purim. His Conflict with the Hierarchy, and its first attempt to bring about His Death

2.The Return of Jesus to Galilee. The News of the Baptist’s Execution. The first Feeding of the Multitude in the Wilderness. Christ Walking on the Sea 3.Jesus’ Discourse in the Synagogue at Capernaum concerning the Manna from Heaven 4.The Feast of the Passover in the Year of Persecution 5.Jesus accused of Heresy in the Corn-field 6.The Man with the Withered Hand. Christ’s Ministry in Retirement

7.The Public Decisive Conflict between Jesus and the Galilean Pharisees. Great Opposition between the Popular Sentiment and the Sentiment of the Hierarchy in Galilee. Animated Scenes in continuous succession. (The Healing of a Twofold Demoniacal Suffering, in one both Blind and Dumb. The second Calumniation of the Miraculous Power of Jesus. The second Demand of a Sign from Heaven. The Family of Jesus. The Disturbed Feast in the Pharisee’s House. The Crowding in of the Populace. The Warning against the Hypocrisy of the Pharisees and against Covetousness. The Discourse in Parables on the Sea-shore) 8.Accounts given by Persons returning from the Feast, of the Galileans whom Pilate had slaughtered in the Temple 9.A Fresh Sabbath Cure: the Woman who was bowed together

10.The Deputation from Jerusalem which takes the Lord to task on account of the free Behaviour of His Disciples. Jesus’ distant Mountain Journeys to the Borders of the Phœnician District, and through Upper Galilee to Gaulonitis, on the other side of the Sea. (The Canaanitish Woman. The Mute. The second Miraculous Feeding. The Passage to the Western Shore of Galilee)

11.The Public Attack made upon Jesus at Magdala, and His Return across the Sea to the Hill Country of Gaulonitis. The Healing of a Blind Man at Bethsaida. Peter’s Confession, and Peter’s Shrinking from the Cross 12.The Transfiguration of Jesus 13.The Healing of the Lunatic

14.The Private Journey of Christ through Galilee, and the Exhortation of His Brethren that He should step out of this Concealment, by taking part in the approaching Pilgrimage to the Feast. His Rejection of their Advice, and Secret Journey to Jerusalem

15.The Sudden Public Appearance of Jesus in the Temple at Jerusalem during the Feast of Tabernacles. He charges His Enemies before all the People with seeking His Death, and announces His Departure from the Jewish People

16.Jesus begins to announce the Contrast between the Old Testament Symbols of the Temple, and the Reality of New Testament Salvation in Himself. His Testimony respecting the Living Fountain in contrast to the Fountain of Siloah, on the Last Day of the Feast of Tabernacles. The Frustration of the Purpose of the Sanhedrim to take Him Prisoner 17.Jesus the Light of the World in contrast with the Lights of the Temple 18.The more distinct Announcement of Jesus, that He was on the Point of taking leave of the Jewish People 19.The Contrast between Christian Freedom and Jewish Bondage, and between the Faith of Abraham and the Seeing of Christ 20.The Cure of the Man Born Blind

21.Jesus gives the False Shepherds of Israel the Tokens by which they might know the True Shepherd, and sets Himself forth as the True Shepherd who was ready to give His Life for His Flock 22.The Last Public Appearance of Jesus at Capernaum. Discussions among the Disciples relative to the Primacy 23.The Danger of Offences 24.An Intimation of Jesus of the Falling Away of a Large Body of the People 25.The Artifices of the Pharisees

26.The Entertainment in the Pharisee’s House. The Man with the Dropsy. Observations addressed by Christ to His Fellow-Guests 27.The Train which followed Jesus in departing from Galilee. The Warning addressed to Undecided Followers 28.Christ receiving Publicans and Sinners. The Communion existing among the Disciples of Christ 29.Jesus prevented from Travelling through Samaria 30.The Sending Forth of the Seventy, and the Retrospect of Jesus on His Galilean Ministry 31.The Journey of Jesus through the Borders between Galilee and Samaria to Perea 32.The Return of the Seventy. The Narrow-hearted Lawyer and the Good Samaritan 33.Jesus’ First Abode in Perea, and His Ministry there 34.Jesus in Jerusalem at the Feast of Dedication 35.Last Stay of Jesus in Perea. The Discussion concerning Divorce. The Children. The Rich Youth 36.The Raising of Lazarus at Bethany

37.The Definite Resolution of the Sanhedrim to put Jesus to Death. The Abode of Jesus in Retirement at the Town of Ephraim, until His going up to celebrate the Last Passover PART VI.-THE FINAL SURRENDER OF CHRIST TO THE MESSIANIC ENTHUSIASM OF HIS PEOPLE

Sect.1.The Journey of Jesus to Jericho, and His Association with the Pilgrims to the Passover. The Renewed Prediction of His Death on the Cross. The Wish of the Family of Zebedee. The Healing of the Blind at Jericho. Zaccheus. The Parable of the Ten Servants and the Ten Pounds entrusted to them 2.Chronological Data 3.The Banquet at Bethany, and the Anointing. The Betrayal 4.The Festal Entry of Jesus into Jerusalem

5.The single Day of the Messianic Abode and Administration of Jesus in the Temple. Especially the Cursing of the Fig-Tree. The Cleansing of the Temple. The Consecration of the Temple. The Exercise of the Teacher’s Office, and the Miracles of Healing in the Temple. The Hosanna of the Children. The indignation of the Pharisees, and its Rebuke. The Greeks, and the Voice from Heaven

6.The End of the Old Testament Theocracy. The Withered Fig-Tree. The Inquiry on the part of the Sanhedrim for Christ’s Authority. The Separation between Christ and the Sanhedrim. The Parable of the Two Sons, of the Mutinous Vine-dressers, and of the Wedding Feast of the King’s Son. The Ironical Temptations of Jesus as the Theocratic King. The Counter-question of Christ. The Solemn Denunciation by Jesus of the Scribes and Pharisees. The Lamentation over Jerusalem, and the Departure from the Temple. The Look of Approval on the Widow’s Mite

7.The Retrospect of Jesus on the Temple, from the top of the Mount of Olives, surrounded by His confidential Disciples. The Announcement of the Judgment of God, of the Destruction of the Holy City and of the Temple, as well as of the End of the World. The Parables of the Ten Virgins and of the Talents. The Judgment of the World-Watch!

8.The Withdrawal of Jesus into Retirement again. Retrospect of the Evangelist John upon the Ministry of the Lord

PART VII.-THE TREASON OF THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL AGAINST THE MESSIAH. THE DECISION OF THE SANHEDRIM. THE PASCHAL LAMB, AND THE LORD’S SUPPER. THE PARTING WORDS. THE PASSION, DEATH, AND BURIAL OF JESUS. THE RECONCILING OF THE WORLD.

Sect.1.The Last Announcement of Jesus that His Death was at hand. The Decision of the Sanhedrim. The Appointment and the Preparation of the Passover Feast

2.The Footwashing. The Passover. The Institution of the Holy Communion. The Parting Words of the Lord. The High-Priestly Prayer. The going out into the Mount of Olives 3.Jesus in Gethsemane. The Struggle and Victory of His Passion of Soul

4.Jesus in Gethsemane in the Presence of His Enemies. The Traitor. The Voluntary Surrender of Jesus to be made Prisoner. The Confidence of the Disciples, and their Flight

5.Jesus before the Ecclesiastical Tribunal of the Jews. Before Annas and Caiaphas. The False Witnesses. The True Witness, with the Acknowledgment that He is the Son of God. The Sentence of Death. The Denial of Peter, and his Repentance. The First Mockery of the Lord. The Final Ecclesiastical Determination 6.Jesus brought before the Judgment-seat of Pilate. The End of Judas.

7. Jesus before the Secular Tribunal. [The Threefold Charge: that He is a stirrer up of the People, a Blasphemer of God, an Enemy of Cæsar. The Three Trials: before Pilate, before Herod, and again before Pilate. The Three Warning Tokens: the Irritation of the Sanhedrim, the Dream of Pilate’s Wife, the Assertion that Jesus was the Son of God. The Three Acquittals. The Three Attempts at Deliverance: Barabbas, the Scourging, the Final Resistance of Pilate. The Three Rejections of Jesus by the Jewish People. The Three Condemnations: the Delivery of Jesus to the Will of the People, The Scourging, the Delivery to Death. The Second and Third Mockery of Christ. The Handwashing of the Heathen. The Jews’ Imprecation upon themselves.] The Condemnation to Death 8.Jesus led away to Golgotha 9.The Crucifixion. The Death of Jesus 10.The Burial of the Lord

11.Christ’s solemn Sabbath; the Redemption and Reconciliation of the World; Christ’s Entrance into the World of Spirits, and the Mystery of His Birth from Death to New Life PART VIII.-OUR LORD’S RESURRECTION OR GLORIFICATION Sect.1.The first Tidings of Christ’s Resurrection 2.Intimation of Christ’s Resurrection brought to His Enemies 3.The Walk to Emmaus 4.The First Appearance of Christ in the Circle of the Apostles on the First Sunday Evening 5.The Second Appearance of Christ in the Circle of the Apostles on the Second Sunday: Thomas 6.The Third Appearance of Christ in the Circle of the Apostles. The First Revelation in Galilee

7.Jesus showing Himself to His Disciples on the Mountain in Galilee. His taking Leave of the Wider Circle of the Disciples 8.The Truth of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ 9.The Corporeity of the Risen Saviour 10.The Ascension PART IX.-THE ETERNAL GLORY OF JESUS CHRIST.

Sect.1.The Testimony of the Glorified Messiah in the Outpouring of His Holy Spirit, and in the Life of His Church 2.The Pre-historic Glory of Jesus Christ 3.The Post-historic Heavenly Glory of Jesus Christ

THIRD BOOK THE LIFE OF THE LORD JESUS UNFOLDED IN ITS FULNESS, ACCORDING TO THE VARIOUS REPRESENTATIONS OF THE FOUR EVANGELISTS INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

PART I.-THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW; OR, THE REPRESENTATION OF THE LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST SYMBOLIZED BY THE SACRIFICIAL BULLOCK Sect.1.General View and Distinctive Characteristics 2.The Genealogy of the King of the Jews 3.The Two Descendants of David in their Separation and Reconciliation. Mary, the Misjudged and Justified 4.Jesus is at His Birth glorified by Divine Signs as the Messiah, or King of the Jews, and God’s Son

5.Jesus submits Himself to the Baptism of John, and is by him acknowledged as Messiah, and glorified as the Son by the Father in Heaven 6.The Temptation in the Wilderness. Our Lord’s Victory over Satan

7.The Confirmation of Christ’s Renunciation of the World. His appearance in despised Galilee. The Unostentatious Commencement of His activity. Its Great Effect

8.The Sermon on (the top or summit of) the Mount; or, the Fundamental Laws and Outlines of the Righteousness of the true Kingdom of Christ, as the true Development and Fulfilment of the Old Testament Law, in contrast to its false Development in the Maxims of the Degenerate Old Testament Economy, in the Theoretical and Practical Corruptions of it by the Scribes and Pharisees 9.The Revelation of the Essential Royal Power of Christ and His Kingdom of Heaven in the Miracles which He performed

10.The First sending forth of the Disciples, and the Instruction which our Lord gave them in its Signification for all Times 11.The decided Manifestation of the great Conflict between the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of His People 12.The Unfolding of the Kingdom of Heaven in seven Parables 13.The Messiah Banished and Expelled from His own Country, and the distant Journeys He then takes

14.The First Founding of the New Testament Church in contrast to the Old Testament Church in its Degenerate Historical Form

15.Preparation for the last decisive Entrance of Christ into the Holy City; or, the Unfolding of the Fundamental Laws of the New Church, or the Kingdom of Heaven, in contrast to the Social Principles of the corrupt Hierarchic Church

16.The Entrance of the Messianic King into His City, and His Royal Residence, the Temple; and the unfolding of the grand outlines of His Royal Court on Earth, in contrast to the Princely System of the Old World

17.The Great Contest of the Messiah with the false Dignitaries of His Kingdom in the Precincts of the Temple: His Spiritual Victory and His Outward Retreat

18.The Messiah, before being judged by the World, represents Himself to His Disciples as the Judge of the World. The Announcement of the Judgment of the World in its different Stages: the Destruction of Jerusalem; the Woes of the World; the End of the World 19.The Sufferings of the Messiah; or, the Judgment of the People of Israel and the World on the King of the Jews

20.The Messiah in His Resurrection, coming forth in His Eternal Royal Glory-His Great Victory, His Endless Kingdom, His Message to the World, and His Peace PART II.-THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MARK; OR, THE REPRESENTATION OF THE LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST SYMBOLIZED BY THE LION Sect.1.General View and Distinctive Characteristics 2.The Beginning of the Gospel. John the Baptist appears as the Forerunner of Christ. Thereafter Christ Himself appears 3.The First Actions by which Christ, on His appearing, straightway reveals His Divine Power 4.The First Conflict of Jesus Christ with the Scribes and Pharisees

5.The First Withdrawal of Christ before His Antagonists. The increasing Reverence and Enthusiasm of the People for Him. The Extension of His Sphere of Operation, and the Choosing of the Twelve Apostles 6.The Decisive Public Conflict of Christ with the Pharisees of Galilee 7.The Reserve of Christ as shown in the Use of Parables

8.The Enhanced Manifestation of the Glory of Christ by Mighty Miracles, in which He reveals His Dominion over the Powers of Nature, the Kingdom of Spirits, the Domain of the most concealed Sufferings, and over the Power of Death itself

9.The Restraint laid on the Power of Christ in His Native City of Nazareth, and His Kingly Doings among the People of all Galilee

10.The Direct Hostility to Jesus exhibited by the Scribes from Jerusalem, and His Public Declaration against their Traditions. His Journeys beyond the Land through the Heathen Border Country of Phœnicia, and through the predominantly Heathen Regions of Decapolis

11.Jesus is constrained to Leave Galilee. His Return over the Sea, and the Distinct Announcement of His Approaching Death 12.The Departure from Galilee 13.The Sojourn of Jesus in Perea 14.The Departure of Jesus to Jerusalem 15.The Journey from Jericho to Jerusalem 16.The Cleansing of the Temple; the Decisive Struggle; and the Farewell to the Temple 17.General Features of the Announcement of the End of the World 18.The History of the Passion of Jesus 19.The Risen Lord in the Evidences of His Power

PART III.-THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LUKE; OR, THE REPRESENTATION OF THE LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST SYMBOLIZED BY THE FORM OF A MAN Sect.1.General View and Distinctive Characteristics 2.The Literary Preface

3.The Early History of the Life of Jesus. The Parents of His Forerunner. The Annunciations. The Unbelieving Priest in the Temple, and the Heroic Faith of the Virgin at Nazareth. The Hymns of Praise 4.History of the Birth and Early Life of Jesus 5.The Human Development of Jesus 6.The Threefold Attestation with which Christ opens His Public Ministry 7.The Personal Probation of the Lord in the Wilderness 8.The Beginning of the Public Career of Jesus. His Departure from His Native Town, Nazareth 9.The Second Stage in the Pilgrimage of Jesus. He fixes His Abode at Capernaum 10.The First Journey of Jesus undertaken from Capernaum. The Departure. The Gospel in Facts. The Gospel in Words

11.The First Return to Capernaum. The Extension of the Gospel Horizon by the Healing of the Servant of the Gentile Centurion

12.The Second Journey of Jesus from Capernaum. The Continuation of the Gospel in Facts. Triumph over the Ceremonial of the People, and over Death. Triumph over the Embarrassment of the Old Testament Prophet, and the Offence thereby given to the People. Triumph over the Pharisaical Spirit: the Manifestation of the Glory of Divine Grace in the House of a Pharisee. Continuation of the Gospel in Words: the Parables concerning the Kingdom of God

13.The Third Journey of Jesus from Capernaum, and His Return across the Sea. The Manifestation of the Power of Christ over the Convulsions of Nature, the Power or Demons, and Wailings for the Dead. The Miraculous Agency of Christ, breaking through the Strongest Obstacles, and achieving the most Difficult Triumphs of His Saving Power

14.The Interest which the Galilean Court takes in the Person of Jesus, and His Retreat into the Desert The Confession of the Disciples that Jesus is the Christ, and His Announcement of His Sufferings. His Transfiguration on the Mount, and His Descent into the Vale of Sorrow. The ambitious Hopes of His Disciples, and His Humility, in which He places Himself along with the Little Ones

15.The Departure of Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem. Samaria. The Four Disciples and the Four Hindrances on the Way into the Kingdom of God. The Seventy Disciples. The Good Samaritan

16.Isolated Particulars from the Journey of Jesus from Galilee to Jerusalem. The unfolding of the Doctrine of Salvation in facts

17.The Procession to Jerusalem. The Disciples, the Leaders of the Procession, and the Beggar. Zaccheus. The Chiliasts. The Ordering of the Ass’s Colt. The Rejoicing of the Disciples, and the Weeping of the Lord, on looking down on the City of Jerusalem from the Mount of Olives. The Cleansing of the Temple, and the Ministry of Jesus in the Temple 18.The Contest of Jesus with the Sanhedrim in the Temple 19.The announcement of the Destruction of Jerusalem, of the Judgment, and the End of the World 20.Preparation for the Last Sufferings of Jesus 21.The Passion of Jesus

22.The Resurrection of the Lord. The Glorification of the Death on the Cross by the Word of Prophecy, and by the Resurrection according to the Scriptures. The Glory of the New Life of Christ, and the beautiful Combination of Heavenly Spirituality and Earthly Corporeity in His Manifestations. The Ascension of the Lord into Heaven amidst Tokens of Blessing for the Earth, and its Elevating Influence PART IV.-THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN; OR, THE REPRESENTATION OF THE LIFE OF JESUS CHRIST SYMBOLIZED BY THE EAGLE Sect.1.General View and Distinctive Characteristics

2.The Prologue. The Pre-historic Eternal Dominion of Christ. The Eternal Existence, the Glorious Advent, and the Completed Incarnation of the Logos; or, the Victorious Effulgence of the Light through the Darkness 3.Christ, as the Light of the World, finds everywhere a ready Reception among those who have Affinity with the Light 4.The Antagonism between the Darkness and the Light of the World in Christ, in its diverse Manifestations and Forms

5.The Fermentation, the Strife, and the Incipient Separation between the Elements and Followers of the Light, and the Elements and Followers of the Darkness, under the Influence exerted by Christ

6.The Separation between the Children of Light and the Children of Darkness effected by the Power of the Light in the Life of Jesus

7.Christ in the Company of the Children of the Light, as the Light of the World, who has Glorified the Father, who is Glorified by the Father, and Glorifies the Church, and by it the World

8.Christ among His Enemies; or, the Light of the World surrounded by the Children and the Powers of Darkness; and the Verification of His Victorious Power

9.The Resurrection of Christ; or, the Decisive Triumph of Light over Darkness. The Announcements of Christ, and the Removal of the Remains of the Old Darkness in the Children of Light

10.The Epilogue.-The Post-historical Eternal Administration of Christ His Continuous Administration in this Present World, in His Church generally, and in the Petrine and Johannean Types of His Church in particular, until the Completion of the Glorifying of His Kingdom in His Second Coming

INDEXES EDITOR’S PREFACE THE work of Dr Lange, translated in the accompanying volumes, holds among books the honourable position of being the most complete Life of our Lord. There are other works which more thoroughly investigate the authenticity of the Gospel records, some which more satisfactorily discuss the chronological difficulties involved in this most important of histories, and some which present a more formal and elaborate exegetical treatment of the sources; but there is no single work in which all these branches are so fully attended to, or in which so much matter bearing on the main subject is brought together, or in which so many points are elucidated. The immediate object of this comprehensive and masterly works, was to refute these views of the life of our Lord which had been propagated by Negative Criticism, and to substitute that authentic and consistent history which a truly scientific and enlightened criticism educes from the Gospel. It is now several years since the original work appeared in Germany, but the date of its first appearance will be reckoned a disadvantage only by those who are unacquainted with the recent history of theological literature. No work has in this interval appeared which has superseded, or can be said even to compete with this. So that, while it is no doubt a pity that the English-reading public should not have had access to this work long ago, we have now the comfort of receiving a book whose merits have been tested, and which claims our attention not in the doubtful tones of a stripling, but with the authoritative accent of one that has attained his majority. A cursory notice of the leading works which have more recently been added to this department of literature, may serve both to aid younger students in selecting what may suit their tastes or intentions, and to show that the present work is by no means out of date. And, first of all, there has been issued a new edition (1854) of the work of Dr Karl Hase (Das Leben Jesu), originally published in 1829. This book is intended mainly for an academical text-book; and as such its merits are willingly acknowledged. In less than 250 pages this compact volume exhibits, one may say, all the opinions and literature connected with the life of our Lord. As an index to, or compendium of, the whole contents of this department of literature, nothing more can reasonably be desired. This must, of course, be taken with that exception which we have to attach to the majority of German works, in consideration of their ignorance of our own literature. This is manifest in Dr Hase’s manual, and sometimes even absurdly so. But, with this exception, there is given in this volume a complete view of all the opinions which have been entertained regarding the ideas and incidents of the life of our Lord, accompanied by copious references to the writings where these opinions are maintained. The style is dense and clear, and the arrangement perspicuous, so that the use of the volume as a text-book is easy. Unfortunately, the author’s own opinions are not always such as can be adopted, but must rather be added as one more variety to the mass of opinions he presents to our view. His critical judgments, often useful in demolishing the profanities of the vulgar Rationalism, are themselves tainted with the meagre theology of Schleiermacher and De Wette. He denies the divinity of Christ, while he considers Him a sinless, perfect man, in whom humanity culminates and is glorified, and by whose doctrine and life the new community is founded. He at once and distinctly enounces his position, saying (p. 15), ‘Since the divine can reveal itself in humanity only as veritable human, the perfect image of God only as the religious archetype of man, the life of Jesus must be considered as simple human life; and without giving free and constant play to the human development, we cannot speak of a history of Jesus.’ To find such a view held by a man of accomplished critical ability, of vigorous and clear intellect, and great research, is not so surprising as to find it held by one who professes, as Dr Hase does, to take John’s Gospel as the most faithful representation of our Lord.

Another work of importance is that of Heinrich Ewald (Geschichte Christus’ und seiner Zeit, 1st ed. 1854, and 2d, 1857). This forms the fifth volume of the author’s History of the Hebrew People, and contains very thorough and instructive discussions of the historical circumstances of the life of Christ. The political condition of the Jews, their internal factions and their relations to the Gentile world, their religious and moral declension, are exhibited with much ability and learning; and the significance of the appearance of our Lord as a Jew in the time and place He did, is brought out with great acuteness and originality. But here again the whole work is blighted by the defective view of our Lord’s person, and the unjustifiable treatment of the documentary sources, which have spoiled so much of German criticism. Ewald views Jesus as the fulfilment of the Old Testament,-as the final, highest, fullest, clearest revelation of God,-as the true Messiah, who satisfies all right longing for God and for deliverance from the curse,-as the eternal King of the kingdom of God. But with all this, and while he depicts our Lord’s person and work, in its love, activity, and majesty, with a beauty that is not often met with, there is but one nature granted to this perfect Person, and that nature is human. He is not a man such as the rest of us, not one of the million, but the Sent of God, the Word of God, even the Son of God, prepared for through the ages gone by, attended throughout His life by the power of God, endowed with the highest gifts and imbued with the Spirit of God, so that He speaks out of God and works the works of God;-but still He on whom all this is conferred, through whom God wholly reveals and communicates Himself, and on whom the world in its helplessness hangs, is but a man. In the concluding chapter of the volume (p. 498) occurs the distinct utterance that so many former pages have seemed to contradict:-‘Even the highest divine power, when it wraps itself in a mortal body and appears in a determinate time, finds its limits in this body and this time; and never did Jesus, as the Son and the Word of God, confound Himself, or arrogantly make Himself equal, with the Father and God.’ Still, this volume is one from which a great deal may be gained. It abounds in noble, elevating thoughts, most eloquently expressed; in sudden gleams into new regions, which fire the soul. The delicate and profound spiritual insight of the author, his sense of many, if not of all, the necessities of a sinful race, enable him to apprehend and depict with wonderful power the perfect humanity of our Lord, and in part the fulfilment of His mission. A work of very different character appeared at Basle in 1858 from the pen of Professor C. J. Riggenbach. (Vorlesungen über das Leben des Herrn Jesu.) These Lectures profess to be popular, and aim throughout at the accurate apprehension of the subject on the part of the hearer, rather than at learned or ostentatious disquisition on the speaker’s part. He discards much of the conventional scientific terminology, as being nothing better than Greek and Latin fig-leaves to hide the nakedness of our knowledge. Through his own veil of popular address, however, it is easy to discern the thews and sinew of a vigorous intellect, and the careful and instructed movement of one who knows and has thoroughly investigated the numerous difficulties of his path. Here and there, too, there is inserted an excursus which enters with greater minuteness into some topic which calls for fuller discussion. In these, the author’s strength and culture are more nakedly revealed, and valuable contributions made to the solution of the questions at issue. The characteristics which this work displays, as a whole, are accuracy, taste and judgment, impartiality, reverence and spiritual discernment, and an easy, graceful, and lucid style. It is very much what there is great need of among ourselves,-a volume which should exhibit in a popular form, and in a well-arranged narrative, the results of the immense amount of labour that has recently been spent upon the Gospels.

Such a want can scarcely be said to be supplied by Bishop Ellicott’s Historical Lectures on the Life of our Lord Jesus Christ (Hulsean Lectures for 1859);¹ though he too proposed to combine ‘a popular mode of treating the question under consideration, and accuracy both in outline and detail.’ The actual combination is, we fear, too mechanical. A work which is so loaded with footnotes is in great danger of being unpopular. The narrative flows along the top of the page easily enough, but one is always forgetting, and ignoring its intrinsic value, and counting it merely as a row of pegs to hang the notes upon. The notes themselves are a valuable digest of all the important questions which are started by this subject, and present a selection of authorities which renders the volume an admirable guide to the student. In judging of this work, too, we must bear in mind that, until its publication, the English reader had access to no similar volume, except that of Neander. Probably, however, this book is scarcely of the same value, though it may be to many of as much interest, as those admirable commentaries by which the author has won himself so much grateful and affectionate regard, and by which he has done so much to maintain among us a respect for sound theology and Christian scholarship. And lastly, there is the unhappy work of M. Ernest Renan (Vie de Jésus, 1863), the most deplorable literary mistake of this century. It reveals a lamentable ignorance on the part of the French public, that a book, which in Germany would have been out of date twenty years ago, should now create so much excited interest. But, as we have ourselves been recently taught in this country, it is sometimes the case, that a man makes use of a popular style to introduce as novelties, statements that have been slain and buried among scholars, or to start afresh doubts that belong to a past generation. This appeal to the people, which has been so much practised of late, and which can be made with every appearance of earnestness and honesty, is not always quite above suspicion. When one brings before the public questions which have exercised the ability of professional theologians, might it not be expected that the public should be made aware that these questions are not now for the first time broached, that many critics of learning and skill have spent much labour on their solution, and that the answer now propounded or insinuated is not the only answer that can be or has been given? This, however, is by no means always attended to. An old difficulty is produced as if now for the first time discovered, and set forward as that which must quite alter the old ways of thinking, and shake us out of our established beliefs; whereas it has been considered all along, and either satisfactorily answered among scientific theologians, or else reserved for possible solution when the branch of inquiry which might throw light upon it has been more fully pursued. And in no work more than in that of M. Renan, is the labour of earnest and skilful critics ignored. Theories which have been abandoned are here used as established, and statements hazarded which no one can be asked to accept who understands what has been proved about the Gospels. If this ignorance be real, then it is culpable in one who undertakes with a very unseemly confidence to instruct an erring Christendom; if assumed, then it is nothing short of the most unworthy insolence towards those who have laboured in the same field as himself. The Christ whom M. Renan depicts, is not the perfect man of Hase, still less the perfect revelation of God that Ewald delights to invest with whatsoever things are pure and lovely, but a good-hearted Galilean peasant, who gradually degenerates into an impostor and gloomy revolutionist. The ‘Rabbi delicieux’ becomes, by some unaccountable transformation of character, a morbid, disappointed fanatic when M. Renan but waves over him his magic wand. The miracles performed by him have been enormously exaggerated, and cures which a physician of our advanced age could very simply have accomplished were then looked upon as divine works. At first, Jesus was unwilling to appear as a thaumaturge; but he found that there was but the alternative, either to satisfy the foolish expectations of the people, or to renounce his mission. He therefore prudently and honourably (M. Renan thinks) yielded to his friends, and entered on a course of mild and beneficent deception. It apparently forms no part of the author’s plan to show how this picture is reconcilable with the statements of the Gospels. The references to the narratives of the Evangelists, which are to be found on almost every page, are quite useless, being often detached from their immediate connection, and frequently grossly misapplied. So that his able reviewer, M. de Pressensé, has good cause to say: ‘A chaque pas on a des preuves nouvelles de l’aisance incroyable avec laquelle M. Renan traite les documents et de l’absence de toute méthode rigoureuse dans son livre’ (L’Ecole Critique, p. 20.) His occasional references to other and more recondite sources, and his comparison of our Lord to Cakya-Mouni, may be intended to show how impossible it is for plain people to form a correct estimate of one who lived so long ago, and under such foreign influences, and to beget the feeling that there may have been hid, among the centuries and millions of the Eastern world, reformers as zealous and philosophers as divinely inspired as Jesus; but we think it likely that most readers will find a truthfulness in the simple portrait of the Evangelists, which is not to be found in M. Renan’s erudite pages, and will refuse to abandon their belief in Him whom the Evangelists represent, even though they have not read the Vedas or the Talmud at first hand. The work of M. Renan is open to three fatal objections. It has, first of all, no historical basis. He refuses to accept the only documents from which a Life of Jesus can be derived, or he has so used them as manifestly to annul their value as historical witnesses. If in one sentence he admits their truthfulness, in the next he contradicts them. The person whom he exhibits to his readers, is not the Jesus of the Gospels. He has first formed his idea of a character, and then has selected from the original sources whatever might seem to corroborate this idea, leaving altogether out of account, and without any reason assigned for the omission, whatever contradicts his idea. Now, to say nothing of the folly of so unscientific a treatment of any historical documents, or of the utter worthlessness of whatever may be produced by such a method, every one sees that the arbitrary criticism of the author has laid him open to criticism of a like kind. If it is but a matter of private judgment what we are to receive from the Gospels, and what to reject, then why is M. Renan to become my teacher? He says, that in the relation of such and such an event or discourse, Luke is to be preferred; Ewald and Hase both come forward with denial, and assure us that, beyond all contradiction, John is to be preferred. To this no reply is possible on the part of M. Renan. He has started without principle, and has no principle to fall back upon. He has arbitrarily judged the Evangelists, and arbitrarily must himself be judged.

Then, secondly, not only is the character which he depicts baseless so far as historical evidence goes, but it is inconsistent with itself, and therefore impossible. The author’s method is bad, his result is worse. He has invented a historical character, and his invention does not even meet the requirements of poetry. He has been much praised as an artist; but he lacks the highest quality of an artist, truthfulness of conception. With unusual power of representation, with a cultivated faculty for reproducing past events and transporting his readers to scenes far distant, he fails in comprehension. His work is fragmentary, not a whole. Several of its parts lack nothing in artistic beauty and power; but when we endeavour to put them together, we find that they have no affinity. All that this writer lacked in order to produce a work of incalculable influence and profit to the world, was the fellowship with his subject which would have given him the meaning and place of each event in the life, by enabling him to conceive the purpose and spirit of the whole. But starting with his own low conception, he has been forced to interpret certain acts of our Lord by causes wholly insufficient, and to exhibit a growth of character and progress of incident which a second-rate novelist would be ashamed of. He has represented the most pious of men as a deceiver, the most simple as ambitious, the most narrow and prejudice-fettered as the enlightener of all nations. No real character combines such contradictions; no dramatist who values his reputation represents his characters as passing through any such unnatural transitions. M. Renan’s book is one more proof, that we must either raise Jesus much above the level of a mere pious, pure man, or sink Him much below it.

Then, thirdly, this person depicted by M. Renan is unfit to serve the required purpose. This ‘Vie de Jésus’ is the first book of a proposed ‘Histoire des Origines du Christianisme.’ And it must occur to most readers that this figure is quite an inadequate origin of Christianity. Granting that the portrait here given us were historically correct, that the conception were consistent and truthful, yet the person represented is not that person who stands at the birth of Christianity. This is not He to whom all the ages have been looking back, and whose image all Christians have borne in their hearts. This is not the morning star. Does M. Renan answer, that it is a mistake to which we have been looking back? Still it is this mistake which has made us Christians, and not the Christ of M. Renan. We descend with him to his own level, and altogether deny that the person exhibited in his volume is He who has caused and maintained our religion. What claim has this Galilean peasant on us? What has he done for us, that for his sake we should endure all hardness, taking up our cross daily and following him? He has lived well, he has spoken well; but with how many besides must he share our respect? Is it because this man has lived, that through all these centuries men have humbled themselves? Is it this man they have been clothing in clothing the naked-this man whom they have seen represented in all that needs consolation, sympathy, and help? Is it the remembrance of this man that has made life a ministry, and death a triumph? This man makes no claim on us-does not know us, and we will not own him. This person is not he who has called forth the trust of a world; this work is not that on which sinners, in the hour of their clearest vision of God, have rejoiced to rest; this character is not that which has moulded all that has been best on our earth, and all that has shone bright in its darkest places. If this be the founder of Christianity, then we must look for Christians among the sceptical and the Deists, among the careless and profane; and we must call that better religion which men (at their own instance, forsooth) have developed, and which has been the real belief and hope of Christendom, by some other name. If this be the founder of Christianity, and if Christianity be the right belief, then all religion must cease from the earth; for not only is this character unfit to sustain Christianity, but it is unfit to sustain any religion; it wants the bond.

Before passing from this brief account of the very interesting literature of the life of our Lord, there should be mentioned two works, which, though they do not undertake a consideration of the whole subject, are yet so eminently serviceable in their special departments as to deserve careful study. One of these is the work of Lichtenstein on the Chronology of the Gospel Narrative (Lebensgeschichte des Herrn Jesu Christi in chronologischer Uebersicht. Erlangen, 1856). This author has the great advantage of writing after Wieseler; and, as the complement and corrective of the investigations of that very sagacious chronologist, his work does admirable service. With a mind well adapted for such research, scholarly, well-balanced, impartial, and clear, he has provided what is perhaps, on the whole, the safest chronological guide through the perplexing intricacies of this history. The other work is The Life of our Lord upon the Earth, in its Historical, Chronological, and Geographical Relations, by the Rev. Samuel J. Andrews. (Lond. 1863.) In this unassuming volume the various opinions of the best authorities are brought together, sifted, arranged, compared, and weighed; while the author’s own opinion, though never asserted with arrogance or parade, is always worthy of consideration. Indeed, this work is indispensable to any one who intends a thorough study of the subject, but yet has not access to the authorities themselves, or has not leisure to use them. And so extensive is the literature of the mere external aspects of this Life, that it will still be but a few who can dispense with such a handbook as this. The accuracy of his references, and impartiality of his citations, as well as the fairness and candour of his own judgments, inspire us with confidence in the author.

Such being, so far as we know, a fair statement of what has transpired since the original publication of the work of Dr Lange, and which might be thought to diminish its value, it is obvious that this work has neither been superseded nor found a rival. And, regarding these volumes herewith issued, it is not too much courtesy to ask from the reader that he judge considerately a work which enters into all the difficulties of so wide and delicate a subject, and which emerges, as this does, from the turmoil of German opinion. There are but few occasions on which even this consideration will be required, and we believe that every candid reader will instinctively and spontaneously give it. For the genius of the author and the unmistakable direction of his theology, his love of truth and openness to conviction, disarm criticism, and turn assailants into apologists, if not into partisans. The author was himself well aware of the difficult nature of the task he had undertaken, and at the appearance of the second volume of his work he made a statement which it is proper should be before the reader:-‘The author has had to enter into difficulties which have been left more or less unsolved in theological discussions. The result of his labours on these subjects he commits with confidence to the liberal and evangelical theologians of the present and the future. They who, confusing the general Church point of view with their own respective assumptions, formed as they are within the Church, meet with aught that seems strange to them in the discussion of single points, will find it a reasonable request, that they would, before passing a decided judgment, not only carefully weigh the reasons given by the author, but also compare his view with the views prevailing among Church theologians on the points in question. How very easily erroneous judgments may be precipitately formed, has often been proved. Before the bar of truth such judgments would be unimportant but though I do not, for this reason, fear them on my own account, I would yet, as far as possible, prevent others forming them, from an apprehension of the curse resting upon all error. This cannot, however, apply to those whom a gloomy fanaticism induces to be always hunting for suspicious passages. They will find much which may lie open to the attacks of their uncalled-for decisions.’

There are some branches of Theology which, as the cautious Nitzsch says, ‘are yet young and tender’-some questions on which the Church has not pronounced; and on these the author will not be found to hold invariably the same views which are currently received in this country. There is, e.g., the old question whether Christ would have come in the flesh, if Adam had not sinned? whether Christ is necessary for the perfection as well as for the redemption of humanity? This is a question which, so far as the voice of the Church goes, may be answered either affirmatively or negatively. It is a question which must be answered not so much by direct statements of Scripture, as by its connection with other and already answered questions. It would probably have been answered in the negative by the majority of our own theologians, and by the systematic divines of the seventeenth century. But the vast majority of German theologians have declared for the affirmative; Müller and Thomasius being almost solitary exceptions. It may be significant, that the theologians who have habitually treated the doctrines of grace, and from them reasoned to the person of Christ, have maintained the negative to this question; while those who have made the person of Christ their first and main study, and only from it inferred the other doctrines, have adopted the affirmative. However, it will not be thought surprising that, in the following volumes, considerable use should be made of the position, that apart from sin and the purpose of redemption, Christ would have come in the flesh-that the incarnation was required not only for the restoration but for the completion of humanity. This is not the place to urge what may be said on one side or other of the question, nor even to decide whether the question do not lie in a province altogether beyond Theology, and into which only incautious and immoderate speculation intrudes. This is not the place to show how the affirmative answer admits of a somewhat attractive application to some of the cardinal doctrines of our faith, and how many probabilities range themselves in its support; nor, on the other hand, to show that it seems to bring the nature of God unduly near to that of man (thus bordering dangerously on Pantheism), and to make light of that separation between the divine and human which has been brought about by sin. But it seems necessary, in one word, to warn the inexperienced reader, that if the incarnation of Christ were from the first and by the very idea of humanity required, then the humiliation of Christ becomes a different and less grievous humiliation than we are wont to consider it, and the aspect of Christ’s life upon earth in many points altered. But besides these questions, about which there may be private opinions, and which must be decided rather by the general tone of Scripture than by its express statements, rather by their results and bearings upon other doctrines than by their own contents, there are dogmas which it is quite easy to state abstractly, but most difficult to apply to actual cases. It is one thing to state dogmatically the constitution of Christ’s person, another to carry this dogma through the life of Christ, and exhibit the two natures in harmonious exercise. It is one thing to state that the two natures ever concur to the same resulting act, another to single out one particular act and exhibit this concurrence. Now this seems to be the great problem which those have to face who undertake a rigorous treatment of the Gospel history. It has been too much the custom of writers on the life of Christ to satisfy themselves with an occasional statement of the doctrine of His divinity, without attempting to keep the reader face to face with this doctrine throughout the whole history. In Germany the difficulty of exhibiting the perfect divinity of Christ throughout His earthly life has been so strongly felt, that their writers on Christology have revived an old and detrimental heresy, which delivers us from the necessity of attempting to exhibit full and perfect divinity in this period of our Lord’s existence. It is believed by many of their theologians¹ that the Logos, in becoming incarnate, divested Himself of some of His attributes-that the ‘emptying’ Himself of which we read in the Apostle Paul, means a self-examination whereby the divinity became as it were asleep in the person of Christ, or absent, or voluntarily incompetent for divine action,-whereby at least He really emptied Himself of the fulness of divine power. This doctrine is but the inevitable result of keeping in the background the divinity of Christ’s person. If the divinity be but the necessary substratum of His person, be an inoperative constituent of His person, then the actual presence of real, complete, active divinity becomes awkward and undesirable. But if the person of our Lord be really and indissolubly of two natures; if in each moment of His earthly life there is present the divine as well as the human nature; if in each act or word of His the divine and human natures are concurrent,-then it must be the task of one who undertakes a life of this person to exhibit the two natures, and not either in separation from the other. Doubtless there is a skill in the Evangelists which no uninspired pen will ever rival, and by which we are made to feel the presence of the divine nature throughout the human life; yet surely it is our duty to endeavour, in our expositions and developments of these inspired records, to maintain the impression which their immediate perusal produces. If they often bring out to view the divinity of our Lord, where also the very feebleness of humanity is conspicuous; if, when they show us a weary and foot-sore wanderer seated by the well in the heat of the day, they make us feel a reverential awe for that weakness, inasmuch as it is the humiliation of a divine person; if, when they show us the man hanging on the cross, faint for thirst, they show us also the divine power to speak forgiveness with His latest breath to the dying sinner by His side; if, when we see human weakness at its depth sinking in death, we hear also the divine proclamation of a willing sacrifice, the ‘It is finished’ of one whose life no man can take away;-then a life of Christ is just in so far imperfect as it effaces from our minds this distinct impression of divinity and humanity acting in the one person.

Now it need not be denied, that in these volumes there is room for improvement in respect of this leading problem. The author holds most distinctly and decidedly the doctrine of our Lord’s divinity,-of His personal pre-existence as God the Son. If this doctrine is not always in view where we might expect it, then this is not by any means because the author would thus insinuate that the person contemplated is merely human. There is not the smallest ground for suspicion of this; we almost feel that it is doing him a wrong to make this statement. Yet we are not quite sure that all readers will take up that idea of the Person which the author would desire. We think that he has sometimes ascribed to the humanity what can only be ascribed to divinity. We think that there is visible throughout the work an undue desire to attribute as much as possible to the human faculty of our Lord. Now, of course, it is not at all easy to say what is and what is not competent to human nature. We do not know, except by its exhibition in Christ, what that nature is capable of. It has only once been seen in perfect development and exercise, and that is in the case in question. So that it is often difficult to make any valid objection to one who asserts of this or that action in the life of our Lord, that it is simply human. It may be an action which demanded far more than ordinary human faculty, and yet may possibly be within the range of perfect human faculty. It is impossible to produce from human history any similar exercise of power or wisdom; and yet this being the culminating point of human history, we expect here to find unrivalled human action. In short, we are to beware of confounding perfect humanity with divinity, and, in the life of Christ, of ascribing to His divine power what ought to be attributed to His perfect human nature. But there is no necessity that we should pronounce upon every action whether it be competent to human nature or no. We are not to expect to go through the life of Christ, saying, This His humanity does, and this again His divinity. Both human and divine acts are competent to this person; and though now it is a human and again a divine act which He does, though now He forgives sin and again sleeps through weariness, His humanity and divinity are alike and together engaged in each. But sometimes it is apparent that such and such an act of His is divine, and there we can say, This person is not merely human; and sometimes it is apparent that the action is human, and there we can say, This person is not merely divine. So that there are two positions which must regulate our conception of any single action of this life. First, Every act in the life of Christ is a divine as well as a human act. The divine nature of Christ is not only present, as a spectator or sleeping partner of the human, but is energetic in every act. Especially is this true of some of those actions which are most conspicuously, and to some beholders exclusively, human. It is true of His dying. This is an act, it is shortly said, which God cannot perform. But what was this dying? It was the separation of the human body and soul of our Lord. And this God the Son did perform. He offered Himself through the Spirit. The divine nature did not die; but the dying here in question was the act of a divine person, was an act by, in, and on a divine person. If not, then this dying was little to us. If there was here a retirement of divinity that this human act might be performed; if there was a self-depotentiation of the Logos that men might work their will with the humanity, then this was not the sacrifice sufficient for our atonement. We must lay aside our natural expectation, that wherever God is, the utterance of His presence will be loud, His glory manifest, His acts appalling and stupendous. We must learn to see God stooping to lift the little children, veiling His glory in the compassionate and wistful look of a brother, that the diseased might come to the touch of His hand, and the sinner listen to His word of forgiveness; leaving the place of His glory empty, that He might follow and recover the abandoned; becoming flesh, that He might taste death for every man. On the one hand, the humanity of Christ must not be regarded as impersonal, as a thing used by God, as a collection of passive, unwilling faculties, but as fully equipped humanity,-not indeed existing as a person outside of the divinity, but neither interrupted by the divinity in the free exercise of any human faculty, nor prevented in any human weakness. And, on the other hand, the divinity must be regarded as complete and perfect divinity, not divested of any divine power by its union with the human nature, not at the incarnation laying aside nor emptying itself of any of those divine attributes which it was the very purpose of the incarnation to manifest and glorify, not in respect of any divine attribute ‘ceasing to be what He previously was’ by becoming what He previously was not. The second position is this: every divine operation in the life of Christ was immediately the operation of the Spirit. This is a simple corollary from the established theological truth, that every operation of God on things external is through the Spirit. Whatever, then, the divinity of Christ performed after His human birth, was the result of the sending forth of the Spirit from the Son dwelling in the person of our Lord. There is not merely an influence of the Holy Ghost on Jesus, a mere man, so that the miracles are performed in no sense by the divine nature in Christ, but by powers conferred from without. There is the Holy Ghost in His fulness residing in this Person, so that without this person there proceeds no power from divinity to any created thing. And it is just this which distinguishes the miracles of Christ from the miracles of a mere man; the latter being performed by virtue of a divine power which only for the time is communicated to the person, the former being the forth-putting of a power of which this Person is the proper residence. And yet the miracles are given to Him by the Father to do, and are in a sense ‘not His own works.’ For as in His whole mission the Son is the Sent of the Father fulfilling His will, so the works which He does are the Father’s works. And this both because He Himself is the Father’s commissioner on earth, and because without the Father the Spirit, by whose working this commission is discharged, is not given. So that the distinctive agency by which the miracles of our Lord were wrought was the incarnate Person dwelling in union with the Father, and possessing the fulness of the Spirit; was not the divinity of Christ without the Spirit, but was not the Spirit without the divinity.

We are therefore under no necessity to inquire (as the author unduly does) whether or no the miracles may not be brought a little nearer human nature. They are no doubt performed through the human nature, but so is every divine act in the life of our Lord. We see the human nature active in all its faculties throughout the miracle; but we are not on that account to suppose that the miracle is explicable on human principles and laws, for all the divine acts of Christ are human acts also,-the acts of a Person in whom the Spirit of God is harmoniously co-operating with and possessing every human faculty. That we see ordinary and human means made use of in some of the miracles; that we see inquiry as to the nature of the disease, and delay in its cure; that we see many traces of human procedure; that we see humanity doing its utmost in these miracles;-all this is assuredly no reason for our seeking to ascribe to the human nature more than the most ascertained science would warrant, because in the whole life of Christ we are prepared to see the highest manifestations of divinity in juxtaposition with ordinary human action. To say that, in this case or that, the divine nature of our Lord is not manifestly exercised in distinction from the human, is only to say that here you have an instance of what must be everywhere expected in His life. And when a demand is made or a longing betrayed, that in the miracles the divine nature be exhibited without the intervention of the Spirit; or when, as a result or accompaniment of this, there is manifested a tendency to ascribe as much as possible to the human nature influenced by the Spirit, without the ascription of this very influence of the Spirit to the divine nature resident in Christ,-then there is not only a misconception of miracle, but a misconception of the Person of our Lord.

It has been thought better to make these general statements by way of preface, than to adopt the somewhat invidious expedient of interrupting the course of the author’s argument by interjectional comments. On the one hand, we have considered it unjust to an author to use for the refutation of his views the very pages which were intended to advance them; and, on the other hand, we have presumed that it would not be very interesting to the public to be informed of every instance in which the private opinion of the editor might differ from that of the author. This applies especially to the section on Miracles. No attempt has been made to put the reader in possession of a theory of miracles which might be thought more adequately to satisfy the requirements of the Gospel narratives. This would evidently have required a much larger space, and much stronger claims on the attention of the reader, than our connection with this work would allow us to assume. Where, however, any point seemed to admit of being treated in the narrow limits of a foot-note, we have used some liberty with the author, always in a respectful spirit, though not always finding room for the forms of polite deference; and where an opinion opposed to the author’s seems to have been treated with less consideration than it merits, either intrinsically or by reason of the consideration due to its advocates, we have not scrupled to produce and support such opinion. But throughout we have felt this business of annotating a delicate one, and have not altogether regretted that the time allotted for the task prevented a more frequent and substantial interference with the writings of one whose statements it is almost equally difficult to supplement and unsafe to contradict. Care has been taken to render the work as available as possible to the English reader. In the case of those books referred to by the author, which have been translated into our own language, the references have been made to the translations. Where the works have not been translated, the German titles have been left as in the original, for distinction’s sake. A full and carefully compiled index will be given in the last volume.

We sincerely wish that some abler, steadier hand could have been employed to launch these volumes, for now more than ever do we understand the grandeur of their subject and the paramount importance of its accurate apprehension; but we trust that those who most distinctly and painfully see the defects of our share in the work, will not the less earnestly desire and pray that it may diffuse juster conceptions of the Person and work of our Redeemer, and may beget an interest in His earthly life which may be the beginning of eternal fellowship with Him in the life everlasting; that those even who come but to touch the hem of His garment, to observe His movements, to speculate on His miracles, to consider the development of His character, to retire for a little from the glare and hurry of our day into the fresh and calm morning when the world awoke at the touch of its Lord,-that even these may be drawn to follow Him, and may pass from the first confession of Peter, ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,’ to the last, ‘Lord, Thou knowest all things; Thou knowest that I love Thee.’ THE EDITOR.

Edinburgh, March 1864.

AUTHOR’S PREFACE

I HAVE for many years cherished a secret inclination to attempt a delineation of the life of Jesus. It is to my present official situation, however, that I am indebted for leisure and opportunity to realize this idea. I think it necessary to state this, for the sake of preventing erroneous constructions, and especially such as might attribute the polemics of my work rather to my external relations than to my internal convictions. The fact that multitudinous works on the life of Jesus have followed each other in a succession which at present seems endless, has not availed to turn me from my purpose. The conviction that I also am called upon to promote the knowledge of this great subject, is accompanied by a good conscience, and forbids all false and conventional apologies, and only allows me to offer them for my defective fulfilment of a work entrusted to me. It seems to me, moreover, that there can be no reason for any uneasiness at the appearance of so many works on the life of Jesus. The fact that, even by professional and official theologians, direct and repeated insult has of late been done to the Gospel history, the pride and boast of Christendom, and that the attempt has been made to form this insulting theology into a distinct school, which shall institute a new treatment of the Gospels, has evoked this phenomenon. The various ‘Lives of Jesus’ of the better sort form a new theological consecration, which we may hope is not yet concluded. The old custom, however, of connecting a consecration with a fair, applies in this case also; and we must reconcile ourselves to the connection of this consecration with the motley fair of a mass of works on the life of Jesus, furnished in answer to external motives. The plan which is to guide the work begun in this volume bears reference to the foundation, the peculiar characteristics, and the development of the evangelical history, and hence to its root, its stem, and its branches. With respect to the foundation of the Gospel history, the attempt has been made, in the present Book, to furnish a clear representation of two of its essential relations: its relation, on the one hand, to the ideal and its multiform phenomena, and on the other, to criticism. In the second Book follows a continuous and synoptic exhibition of the life of Jesus. In this I hope to give distinct prominence to the chief particulars of the articulation by which the four Gospels are united into one actual history. In the third and last Book, I propose to sketch the life of Jesus in its broader features, according to that development of its infinite richness which is presented by the peculiar views of each separate Gospel. In this work, the assumption (which is still too widely prevalent) that the essential Gospel history is injured, and has become a spoilt joint history, will be emphatically opposed. The prejudice, that the four accounts are the source of a want of unity, will be met by the proof that they rather exhibit the richness of this unity. If the Lord give me health and strength, the execution of the work shall not be delayed. The relation of the Gospel history to that criticism which is antagonistic to it, is already happily and ecclesiastically decided. It is, however, the task of Theology to explain the same scientifically; and the author will feel happy if he shall in any wise have contributed to its accomplishment. It may here, however, be once for all remarked, that too sharp a distinction cannot be made between criticism in a Christian sense, and the Antichristian nuisance which now assumes that name. Christianity is, in its absolute trustworthiness and infinite depth of spiritual light and vigour, identical with true criticism. Never let us attribute to a sincere and candid testing of the Gospels, and of Holy Scripture in general, the evils appertaining to criticism falsely so called. Even the most certain facts of faith are not, in the fullest sense, our own possession, till the sharpest, most vigilant, and most practised spiritual intellect has freely admitted and appropriated them. If man is to be fully blessed, his understanding, no less than his other powers, must be fully satisfied. This pure interest has, in any case, less to do with those highly partial dialectics which would now obtrude upon it as ‘Criticism,’ than William Tell with John the Parricide; for it is the interest of ‘Criticism’ of this kind always to sever the ideal as widely as possible from the real. Hence arose the canon, that if any narrative of the Gospels shows a gleam of ideality, or betrays any symbolical light, its historical nature is doubtful. This monstrous error, followed out to its results, denies Christianity itself. For what is Christianity but the announcement of the Incarnate Word, and the glorification of the historical Christ in the light of the Spirit? This error, however, in its milder forms, has been widely propagated. It has beguiled even pious and sincere critics, such as Schleiermacher and others. When Schleiermacher, e.g., remarks (on the writings of Luke, p. 47), in contesting the historical character of the narrative of the visit of the magi, ‘Has it not, in its deepest foundations, a character wholly symbolical?’ &c.-his remark is quite in accordance with this canon. It is the very thing we demand of the primitive facts of Christianity, that they should have a wholly symbolical character, that the universe should be mirrored in them, and that not only in their deepest foundations, as if this crystal were still obscured by its crust of dull ore. Thus Von Ammon, too, lays down the rule (die Gesch, des Lebens Jesu, vol. i. p. 4): ‘Though even history only attains connection and keeping through the ideal and tendency of the world, yet the too intimate union of the ideal and the real, of the natural and supernatural, is prejudicial to the actuality of events.’ Certainly, it may be answered, the old commonplace reality may, and even must, be prejudiced by the (but not too) intimate union of the ideal and the real, it must at last perish; but this is in order that this ordinary reality, this reality invaded by the illusions of unreality, may not for ever prejudice the ideal in the realization of the true reality. Weisse, in his Evang. Gesch., repeatedly returns to the above-mentioned proposition. ‘The historical revelation of God in the Gospel (it is said, vol. i. p. 231) loses nothing of its holy contents, if a part of these contents, instead of being viewed as direct fact of a kind in which divinity exhibits itself more in jest than in earnest, and carrying on, so to speak, a paradoxical, half poetic, half prosaic jest with its own sublimest work, is rather recognised as the genial and intellectual work, in which the group of men to whom the divine revelation of Christianity was first addressed, preserved a productive creative consciousness of that Divine Spirit which descended among them, and of the mode of His agency. It is such a consciousness which has found its thoroughly fitting expression in the sacred legend.’ Here, then, the productive creative consciousness of a group of men is to surpass the productivity of the Spirit which descended among them, so that the revelation of the Logos is again overgrown by a new mythology. If Weisse had duly estimated ‘the paradoxical, half poetic, half prosaic game’ of divinity in the Gospel history as the manifestation of God,-a manifestation, on one side wholly ideal, on the other wholly actual, and therefore specifically Christian,-his writings would not have furnished so many germs, which, growing in rank luxuriance in the works of Bruno Bauer, have shot up under the assumption, consistently developed by the latter, that the creative consciousness of the group of men to whom the revelation was at first addressed produced the whole work of the Gospels. In Strauss and Bruno Bauer this severance between the ideal and reality, so far as the latter is to be described in its full force as individual reality, appears in the form of a well-defined principle.

Strauss will not allow that the ideal was in Christ also the historical (vol. ii. p. 690), though the divine consciousness is said to have been in absolute force in Him (p. 689). It cannot, indeed, be understood how the absolute force of divine consciousness should remain behind the representation of the ideally historical, unless it had to contend with the inflexible material of an obscure primitive substance, in which case the ‘absolute’ force is mere word. At length Bruno Bauer found the matter of reality so obstinate, that he found it most convenient to view the Gospel history as originating in the vacant space of the fixed idea of the Evangelists, instead of suffering it to struggle in that swamp of Ahriman, which reality seemed to him to form. ‘The author,’ says he in his Kritik der Evang. Gesch., &c., vol. i. p. 57, speaking of the presentation of Jesus in the temple-‘yes, the author has been at work here. Reality does not manage matters as easily as he does. Reality does not present the appearance of being a work of art, in which, whether in a picture or on the stage, all that is forcible is artistically arranged, so as to suit the spectators and its own component parts; it interposes a dull and scarcely penetrable mass-it interposes years and conflicts with the refractory material of the intellectual public, between its heroes and those with whom they stand in historical connection,’ &c. ‘Criticism,’ it is said, p. 59, ‘is constrained to point out the true historical reality of the ideal, in opposition to the nullity of the supposed facts.’ Thus, however, the reality of the ideal remains, though contrasted in a shadowy manner to the nullity of the facts. Criticism, however, is progressive; for in vol. iii. p. 311, it is said, ‘If we so view the Gospels as to overlook their mutual contradictions, i.e., if we abstract from their confused contents a general image, as simple, unprejudiced faith is wont to do, we shall be in the highest degree amazed that they could have possibly occupied mankind for the space of eighteen centuries, and indeed have so occupied them that their secret was not discovered. For in not one, not even in the shortest paragraph, are there wanting views which injure, insult, and irritate mankind.’ Here, then, even the ideals which the Gospels contain are condemned as culprits. But the same author informs us, vol. i. p. 82, how the Gospels must have originated. He leads us into the factory of an Evangelist, in which the religious self-consciousness is occupied with the work of creative self-development in the production of a Gospel. How then is this work going on? ‘As religious self-consciousness, it is entirely possessed by its own matter: it cannot live without it, nor without continually producing and stating it; for it possesses therein the experience of its own certainty. But as religious consciousness, it views itself, at the same time, as entirely distinct from its essential matter, and so soon as it has developed, and at the same moment that it develops and exhibits it, this matter becomes to it reality, existing independently, above and beyond itself, as the absolute and its history. That this is said with reference not to the gradual productivity of the Church, but to the literary labour of the Evangelist, is proved by the whole context, and especially by the following remark: ‘Belief in these productions is further secured by the fact, that the incentive to their composition, and the first material used therein, was furnished from without, and even by the belief of the whole Church.’

If the above psychological portraits of certain religious authors were laid before a medical college of our days for their opinion, and the precaution used of naming neither the originals nor the artist, they could scarcely pass any other judgment than that these authors were deranged. The author had already thus depicted the Evangelists, before the decision of the Evangelical Theological Faculty of Prussia had appointed him to his theological office. The critical tendency here pointed out proceeds, then, from a philosophical principle opposed to the perfect union of the actual and the ideal. This tendency has already settled down into the constant practice of suspecting a Gospel fact to be unhistorical, if similar facts occur in the Old Testament. Neither, in this respect, has it been thought sufficient to compare together mere accessory incidents of the Old and New Testaments. When, e.g., in the one, Moses, coming down from the mount, finds the people in the midst of wild amusements, and in the other, Christ, descending from the mount of transfiguration, finds a helpless multitude, perplexed disciples, and in the midst of the sad group the demoniac boy and his afflicted father, this is said to be a similarity which makes the New Testament narrative suspicious. (Bauer, vol. iii. p. 59.) ‘Moses, indeed, when he ascended the mountain, left Aaron and Hur and the seventy elders below, that whoever had any matter might apply to them. So also were the disciples left at the bottom, while the Lord was on the mount, and so was a matter actually brought before them.’ It is well known, too, how the later books of the Old and New Testament, and similarly related phenomena, have been placed in battle array against each other. Such a mode of procedure must, however, be protested against for the sake of the ideal itself. If in proportion as history becomes rich in significance, refers in its accounts of great persons to still greater, alludes in its statements of extraordinary events to the most extraordinary, and, being more and more penetrated by the eternal light, points with increasing plainness to the rising of an eternal sun of reconciliation between the ideal and the actual, it is to be viewed with suspicion, this amounts, however unconscious the organs of such criticism may be of the fact, to a progressive theoretic brutalization of reality;-a process at first confined to its memorials, but, after their destruction, extended to its very self. (See Apokal. xiii.)

We now pass from the theoretic to the ethical motives of this criticism. It is evident that many of the assumptions lately made in criticising the Gospels, and the Scriptures in general, can only be explained on the supposition that those who hold them must occupy a doubtful position with relation to the moral sublimity of primitive Christianity and its instruments. If any one were to assert that Schiller, in his Wilhelm Tell, intended to depreciate the Germans in comparison with the Swiss, that Göthe, in his Faust, intended to undervalue German students and citizens, every one would zealously protest against points of view so very subordinate and insufficient. If, moreover, an acute observer were to maintain that he could still perceive in the glowing ruby traces of its material basis, the clay, and that in its ruddy hue he still saw the remains of the red soil, or that in the sparkling diamond he could recognise its primitive parent, the common black charcoal, so acute a natural philosopher would be dismissed with a smile. The canon would be acted on, that in the matured phenomena of a higher grade of existence, the agents of the decidedly surpassed grade can no more appear as factors, or in unbroken masses and forms. It is according to this rule also, that we must judge those critical representations which suppose they have discovered in the fourth Gospel, now a neglect of Peter in comparison with John, now an over-estimation of Andrew; or in the third, a miserable tendency to a compromise between Pauline and Ebionitic Christianity; or in the Acts, an effort to exalt Paul by the juxtaposition of his history with that of Peter. Did not the disputes of the disciples for precedence end with Good Friday? Can we doubt their maintenance of their new point of view, when they could so freely confess their old one to the world, and speak of it as the sinful folly of a former time? Could they have again so pitiably sunk from the sublime height of suffering and triumphing with Christ? Is it not rather this over-refined criticism, which insists on seeing the red clay in the ruby, which must be designated as deeply degenerated-as fallen from the heights of Christian theology, which believes in the article of the Holy Ghost in the Church, to the point of view of ‘Kabale und Liebe,’ to a condition in which it discovers even in the Gospels the well-known fruits of literary intrigue, because it seeks everywhere only its own flesh and blood? Hence arises the miserable assumption, which seems to have almost formed itself into a school, that primitive Christianity was radically an Ebionite, and therefore a mutilated Christianity; and that it was not till afterwards that a pure catholic Christianity cast off this mutilating element.

It cannot be denied that Ebionite elements existed as accidental, suppressed, restrained principles in many members of the pentecostal Church. But if even the fundamental principles of this Church had been attacked by this Ebionitish nightmare, we should then obtain an image of a redeeming, world-moving fact, which had itself entered the world crippled and needing redemption. But primitive Christianity passes by such observations in its pure New Testament purity, and it is the task of true criticism to get rid of combinations which transform into moral caricatures the glorious forms of the Gospel narrative. It is in the nature of things that the methods of spurious criticism should correspond with its principles. We have said what seemed most necessary in this respect in the body of the work, and have also adduced proofs; while for the more detailed corroboration of our assertions we have referred to the best known works on this subject. As, however, it might seem to many but reasonable that more copious proofs should be adduced, we here cite some which are met with in the works of Strauss and Bruno Bauer, contrasting the actual facts with the treatment they have experienced at the hands of the above-named writers.

Papias, one of the Fathers, expresses himself in the following manner concerning a Gospel of Matthew: ‘Matthew wrote λόγια (a Gospel writing) in the Hebrew language. And this every one explained (or translated) as best he could.’ Thus Papias refers (1) to a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew; (2) to efforts at explanation, or translation of the same, of varying value. This fact is thus treated by Strauss: ‘The Fathers, indeed, referred this testimony expressly to our first Gospel; but there is not only no (it should have been no decided) reference thereto in the words of the apostolic Father, but the apostolical writing of which he speaks cannot be directly (this directly is needless) identical with it, because, according to the evidence of Papias, Matthew wrote ἑβραίδι διαλέκτῳ, while the fact that our Greek Gospel of Matthew is a translation of the original Hebrew, is merely assumed (it ought to have been added, in agreement with the evidence of Papias) by the Fathers.’ The same Papias says of St Mark, that, as companion and interpreter to Peter, he received his Gospel orally from that apostle, and afterwards committed it to writing. The above-named critic says, ‘Our second Gospel cannot have been derived from remembrances of the tradition of Peter, and thus from an original source peculiarly its own, because it is evidently compounded from the first and third, even if only from recollections of these. Here we have (1) the much disputed hypothesis, that St Mark’s Gospel was derived from St Matthew’s and St Luke’s, laid down as an established fact; (2) it is represented as an impossibility that a man’s own remembrances should take the same form in which others had expressed the same experiences. Two wonderful delusions!

Again, there is no evidence existing that Polycarp, the disciple of the Apostle John, knew the fourth Gospel, or described it as the work of that apostle. Irenæus, the disciple of Polycarp (who, however, mentions St John as the author of the fourth Gospel), adduces no such evidence. An early statement of the critic is as follows: ‘There is no evidence given by Polycarp, who is said to have known John, not even in what remains of his writings (viz., a single short epistle), that John was the author of this Gospel: even Irenæus, the disciple of Polycarp, cannot appeal to one sentence of his master in favour of its genuineness’ (directly opposed to fact). In a later statement he says, ‘It must excite surprise that Irenæus, who already had to defend John’s authorship of this Gospel against opponents, neither on this, nor any other occasion, &c., appeals in this matter to the most important authority of this apostolic man.’ Would, then, this appeal to his own youthful reminiscences have been a public means of proof? His declaration at least leaves this reminiscence to be inferred. But what if Irenæus, in proof of his own declaration, had said: It is the case, for Polycarp once told me so?

Once more, Mary receives the message of the angel that, by the miraculous agency of God, she shall become the mother of the Messiah, and ‘is found with child of the Holy Ghost.’ Joseph learns her condition, probably from herself, though we are not told so; he mistrusts her, and is about to put her away; but the information of an angel gives him the confidence he needed. The critic says, ‘They who insist that Mary did not act in the manner which the Evangelists certainly do not assume (viz., concealing the secret from Joseph), must suppose her to have communicated the angelic message to her betrothed immediately after its reception, and that he gave no credence to her information, and will then have to find some way of clearing the character of Joseph.’ What kind care for the character of Joseph! The critics would certainly have believed the most extraordinary event on the word of the pious Virgin. Joseph did not, which made him a character, and preserved him, by the bye, from the opposite reproof of the critic, that he was without a character. According, however, to the present requirements of the critic, Joseph ought, on the mere assurance of his betrothed, to have met the reproaches of the whole world, and said: The miracle is certain, for Mary herself tells me so!

Again, Christ did not, when dealing with the Jews, appeal to His miraculous origin. The fact is easy of explanation. This mystery is conceivable only by those who are initiated into the depths of the Christian faith, and is one which could not be announced to the profane, as being, more than any other, liable to profanation. Our critic says, ‘All his contemporaries esteemed Him a son of Joseph (as indeed in a civil point of view He was), and not seldom (twice at least) was this contemptuously and reproachfully expressed in His presence, and a decided opportunity thus afforded Him of appealing to His miraculous conception.’ That is to say, of declaring: This mystery is true; my mother Mary told me so. Certainly ‘Criticism’ would forthwith have believed Him.

According to the Gospel of St Luke, a family relationship existed between Mary and the family of John the Baptist. It might consequently be presumed that John was acquainted with Jesus before the Baptism of the latter. This seems, too, to have been actually the case, since, according to Matthew, the Baptist, on the appearance of Jesus, immediately uttered an exclamation expressive of the deepest reverence. According however, to the fourth Evangelist, the Baptist said, with a retrospect to a time prior to that when the heavenly manifestation at Jesus’ baptism had accredited Him as the Messiah: I knew Him not. The remarks of our critic are as follow: ‘If John were personally acquainted with Jesus, in conformity with Luke’s account of the relationship existing between them, it is impossible that he should not early enough have received the information, how solemnly Jesus had been announced as the Messiah, both before and after His birth; nor could he have subsequently said that he knew nothing of it (I knew Him not!) till he received a sign from heaven, but would have stated that he had not believed the account of the former signs, one of which had actually occurred to himself’ (as he perhaps remembered, in his mother’s womb). That is to say, that unless the Baptist wished to appear as an unbeliever, incredulous even concerning his earliest impressions, in his mother’s womb, he would, in consequence of his youthful reminiscences, have announced with prophetic confidence and authority that Jesus was the Messiah; and if questioned concerning his divine assurance and credentials, have answered: My mother Elisabeth told me so. Thus would criticism have it, assuring us it would have given more credit than believers in the Bible could have done to the assurances of the pious women in this great theocratic vital question, nay, that it would have inconsiderately believed them, and, with an entire misconception of its office, have preached the mystery upon their authority. How sublime, on the contrary, is the conscientiousness of the Baptist when he says, I knew Him not! But after the striking sign from heaven he knows Him. In the kingdom of God affairs are conducted with more diplomatic exactness than most critics imagine.

One of the most pointed and sublime of the sayings of Jesus is that recorded by St Luke (ch. 13:33): ‘I must walk to-day, and to-morrow, and the day following; for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.’ Every unprejudiced reader must at once feel and understand the greatness of this saying. The critic Bruno Bauer makes the remark, ‘Where is the dogma written, that no prophet can perish out of Jerusalem, or what antecedents could lead Jesus to a dogma of this kind?’

If Christ demands of His hearers, at one time, that they should believe, at another, that they should watch and pray, or even that they should fast with anointed face, we are nevertheless convinced that His demands are everywhere identical, because prayer is the expression of faith, and fasting is to be grounded on the heartfelt devotion of faith. The same critic observes, concerning the narrative of Mark 9:14-29, ‘It is certainly a contradiction, when the Lord, in the same breath, requires faith, and fasting, and prayer, as the condition of one and the same work.’

According to Matthew 18:1-5, Jesus places a child in the midst of His disciples to reprove their ambition, and says the words: ‘Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ The critic says, in answer to the childish question of the disciples, Jesus takes a child-we should like to know where it came from, since, according to the original narrative, the transaction took place in the house in which Jesus and His disciples were resting after their journey; we should like also to have seen the perplexed face of the poor child, placed in the midst of the disciples, to serve for a lecture to them-and after He had set it in the midst of His disciples-a piece of cake would have pleased it better,-He said, &c.’ ‘We should like to know where it came from!’ ‘A horse, a horse! my kingdom for a horse!’ As the fugitive despairing king cries out for a horse, so does the critic seem here to be crying out for a child to save the veracity of the Gospel history, which has been committed to his keeping. Or does not the matter rather stand thus: if in this place a child were anywhere to be had, if a child should but have stepped into the midst, the critic is annihilated.

We must indeed remark, that all the regular mental activity which, under the name of criticism, has presented so strange and meteor-like an appearance in the province of New Testament theology, ‘has surpassed itself’ in misrepresentations, contemptuous jokes and blasphemies, in the third vol. of Bruno Bauer’s Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte.

It were much to be wished that some young theologian, endowed with a sufficient amount of good-humour, would bring out a harmony of the principal modern critics of the Gospels. If the great discrepancies of these writers were collected together, or arranged for contest with each other in only a moderately striking manner, a sad exhibition would be presented. It would be seen that here, as formerly in the camp of the Philistines (1 Samuel 14:20), ‘every man’s sword was against his fellow,’ and there would be ‘a very great discomfiture.’ The scene would, however, be followed by the conviction, that there is in this world nothing more uncertain than a certain ‘knowledge,’ viz., the knowledge of those knowing ones who, as a reviewer in Tholuck’s Anzeiger strikingly remarks, make their inferences with ‘arguments like blackberries.’ It may be hoped that times more propitious for the scientific development of the theological material of the Gospel history will very soon appear, when the produce of decidedly antagonistic criticism may be disposed of in very short archæological foot-notes. Meanwhile, the contest must be carried on, on this field, in spite of the ill-will and disgust of him who wages it. It must not, however, be forgotten, that the first and more formidable leaders of antagonistic criticism have not concerned themselves with mere Gospel pictures alone, but also with the frames in which the older harmonistic theology had enclosed them. The steady, clear, and discerning eye of a connoisseur will not indeed let itself be prejudiced against the tranquil beauty of an old picture by the inappropriateness of its frame; but the frame may, by its contrast of tawdry finery and repulsive dirt, prejudice even against the picture one who bestows upon it a more hasty though candid inspection. Those critics who have misconceived the Gospel, must take it into account that anxiety with respect to the agreement of the evangelical records was already in the house before they so violently assaulted the door, and that the anxiety disappeared in proportion to the violence of their attack. The first unbelief was ecclesiastical official zeal, which forced the letter of the Gospels into harmony, because it had neglected, nay, almost forgotten, their internal unity. The work which I have commenced shall, by God’s help, take its part in the efforts now making to exhibit the internal unity of the Gospel history. The first part is sent forth with a lively feeling of its known and unknown defects. The book, however, certainly stands prepared to be ‘annihilated’ by one party, to be possibly ignored, or even unworthily treated, by another. They who, with the author, recognise the manifestation of eternal life in the centre of humanity, of the world, and of time, or who at least have not suffered the great and simple sense of this eternal life to be perplexed by the phantom-like contest of ancient and modern delusions in our days, will receive the work in a friendly spirit. May it, if in ever so small a measure, contribute to those signs of spring which foretell an approaching vernal season to the Church! THE AUTHOR.

Zurich, Nov. 5, 1843.