按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
books； and continued to hold a precarious position until after the time of the Protestant Reformation。 On the other hand； the fourth gospel； which was quite unknown and probably did not exist at the time of the Quartodeciman controversy （A。 D。 168）； was accepted with little hesitation； and at the beginning of the third century is mentioned by Irenaeus； Clement； and Tertullian； as the work of the Apostle John。 To this uncritical spirit； leading to the neglect of such books as failed to answer the dogmatic requirements of the Church； may probably be attributed the loss of so many of the earlier gospels。 It is doubtless for this reason that we do not possess the Aramaean original of the 〃Logia〃 of Matthew； or the 〃Memorabilia〃 of Mark； the companion of Peter；two works to which Papias （A。 D。 120） alludes as containing authentic reports of the utterances of Jesus。
These considerations will； we believe； sufficiently explain the curious circumstance that； while we know the Christ of dogma so intimately； we know the Jesus of history so slightly。 The literature of early Christianity enables us to trace with tolerable completeness the progress of opinion concerning the nature of Jesus； from the time of Paul's early missions to the time of the Nicene Council； but upon the actual words and deeds of Jesus it throws a very unsteady light。 The dogmatic purpose everywhere obscures the historic basis。
This same dogmatic prepossession which has rendered the data for a biography of Jesus so scanty and untrustworthy； has also until comparatively recent times prevented any unbiassed critical examination of such data as we actually possess。 Previous to the eighteenth century any attempt to deal with the life of Jesus upon purely historical methods would have been not only contemned as irrational； but stigmatized as impious。 And even in the eighteenth century； those writers who had become wholly emancipated from ecclesiastic tradition were so destitute of all historic sympathy and so unskilled in scientific methods of criticism； that they utterly failed to comprehend the requirements of the problem。 Their aims were in the main polemic； not historical。 They thought more of overthrowing current dogmas than of impartially examining the earliest Christian literature with a view of eliciting its historic contents； and； accordingly； they accomplished but little。 Two brilliant exceptions must； however； be noticed。 Spinoza； in the seventeenth century； and Lessing； in the eighteenth； were men far in advance of their age。 They are the fathers of modern historical criticism； and to Lessing in particular； with his enormous erudition and incomparable sagacity； belongs the honour of initiating that method of inquiry which； in the hands of the so…called Tubingen School； has led to such striking and valuable conclusions concerning； the age and character of all the New Testament literature。 But it was long before any one could be found fit to bend the bow which Lessing and Spinoza had wielded。 A succession of able scholarsSemler； Eichhorn； Paulus； Schleiermacher Bretschneider； and De Wettewere required to examine； with German patience and accuracy； the details of the subject； and to propound various untenable hypotheses； before such a work could be performed as that of Strauss。 The 〃Life of Jesus；〃 published by Strauss when only twenty…six years of age； is one of the monumental works of the nineteenth century； worthy to rank； as a historical effort； along with such books as Niebuhr's 〃History of Rome；〃 Wolf's 〃Prolegomena；〃 or Bentley's 〃Dissertations on Phalaris。〃 It instantly superseded and rendered antiquated everything which had preceded it； nor has any work on early Christianity been written in Germany for the past thirty years which has not been dominated by the recollection of that marvellous book。 Nevertheless； the labours of another generation of scholars have carried our knowledge of the New Testament literature far beyond the point which it had reached when Strauss first wrote。 At that time the dates of but few of the New Testament writings had been fixed with any approach to certainty； the age and character of the fourth gospel； the genuineness of the Pauline epistles； even the mutual relations of the three synoptics； were still undetermined； and； as a natural。 result of this uncertainty； the progress of dogma during the first century was ill understood。 At the present day it is impossible to read the early work of Strauss without being impressed with the necessity of obtaining positive data as to the origin and dogmatic character of the New Testament writings； before attempting to reach any conclusions as to the probable career of Jesus。 These positive data we owe to the genius and diligence of the Tubingen School； and； above all； to its founder； Ferdinand Christian Baur。 Beginning with the epistles of Paul； of which he distinguished four as genuine； Baur gradually worked his way through the entire New Testament collection； detectingwith that inspired insight which only unflinching diligence can impart to original geniusthe age at which each book was written； and the circumstances which called it forth。 To give any account of Baur's detailed conclusions； or of the method by which he reached them； would require a volume。 They are very scantily presented in Mr。 Mackay's work on the 〃Tubingen School and its Antecedents；〃 to which we may refer the reader desirous of further information。 We can here merely say that twenty years of energetic controversy have only served to establish most of Baur's leading conclusions more firmly than ever。 The priority of the so…called gospel of Matthew； the Pauline purpose of 〃Luke；〃 the second in date of our gospels； the derivative and second…hand character of 〃Mark；〃 and the unapostolic origin of the fourth gospel； are points which may for the future be regarded as wellnigh established by circumstantial evidence。 So with respect to the pseudo…Pauline epistles； Baur's work was done so thoroughly that the only question still left open for much discussion is that concerning the date and authorship of the first and second 〃Thessalonians；〃a point of quite inferior importance； so far as our present subject is concerned。 Seldom have such vast results been achieved by the labour of a single scholar。 Seldom has any historical critic possessed such a combination of analytic and of co…ordinating powers as Baur。 His keen criticism and his wonderful flashes of insight exercise upon the reader a truly poetic effect like that which is felt in contemplating the marvels of physical discovery。
The comprehensive labours of Baur were followed up by Zeller's able work on the 〃Acts of the Apostles；〃 in which that book was shown to have been partly founded upon documents written by Luke； or some other companion of Paul； and expanded and modified by a much later writer with the purpose of covering up the traces of the early schism between the Pauline and the Petrine sections of the Church。 Along with this； Schwegler's work on the 〃Post…Apostolic Times〃 deserves mention as clearing up many obscure points relating to the early development of dogma。 Finally； the 〃New Life of Jesus；〃 by Strauss； adopting and utilizing the principal discoveries of Baur and his followers； and combining all into one grand historical picture； worthily completes the task which the earlier work of the same author had inaugurated。
The reader will have noticed that； with the exception of Spinoza； every one of the names above cited in connection with the literary analysis and criticism of the New Testament is the name of a German。 Until within the last decade； Germany has indeed possessed almost an absolute monopoly of the science of Biblical criticism； other countries having remained not only unfamiliar with its methods； but even grossly ignorant of its conspicuous results； save when some German treatise of more than ordinary popularity has now and then been translated。 But during the past ten years France has entered the lists； and the writings of Reville； Reuss； Nicolas； D'Eichthal； Scherer； and Colani testify to the rapidity with which the German seed has fructified upon her soil。＇18＇
＇18＇ But now； in annexing Alsace； Germany has 〃annexed〃 pretty much the whole of this department of French scholarship；a curious incidental consequence of the late war。
None of these books； however； has achieved such wide…spread celebrity； or done so much toward interesting the general public in this class of historical inquiries； as the 〃Life of Jesus；〃 by Renan。 This pre…eminence of fame is partly； but not wholly； deserved。 From a purely literary point of view； Renan's work doubtless merits all the celebrity it has gained。 Its author writes a style such as is perhaps surpassed by that of no other living Frenchman。 It is by far the most readable book which has ever been written concerning the life of Jesus。 And no doubt some of its popularity is due to its very faults； which； from a critical point of view； are neither few nor small。 For Renan is certainly very faulty； as a historical critic； when he practically ignores the extreme meagreness of our positive knowledge of the career of Jesus； and describes scene after scene in his life as minutely and with as much confidence as if he