The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-09-16


Testament collection, detecting-with that
inspired insight which only unfiinching dill
gence can impart to original genius-the 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 q volume. They
are very scantily presented in Mr.. Mackay's
work on the ''Tubingen School and its Ante
cedents, to which we may refer the reader
desirous of further information. We can |
here merely say that twenty years of ener- |
getic controversy have only served to estab- |
lish nearly all Baurs leading conclusions |
more firmly than ever. The priority of the |
so-called gospel of Matthew; the Pauline pur- |
pose of Luke, the second in date of our gos-
pels; the derivative and secondhand char |
acter of Mark; and the unapostohc origin of
the fourth gospel, are points which may for
the future be regarded as completely estab-
lished 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 Thessalonans-a point
of quite inferior importance so far as our
present sub ect is concerned Seldom have
such vast results been achieved by the labor
of single scholar. Seldom has any histori-
cal 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 con-
templating the marvels of physical dis
covery.
The comprehensive labors 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 modi-
fed by 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-ARostolic 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 discove-
ries 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 German. Until within the
last decade, Germany has iraeed possessed
almost an absolute monopoly of the science
of Biblical criticism; other countries having
methods, bnt even grossly ignorant of its
conspicuous results, save when some German
treatise of more than ordinary popularity
has now and then been translated. But du-
ring the past ten years France has entered
the lists; and the writings of Reville, Reuss,
Nicolas, D'Eichthal, Scherer, and Colarie
testify to the rapidty with which the German
seed has fructifed upon her soil.
None of these books, however, have
| Eid -Snraa6 thrift
SO much toward interesting the general pub
lie in this class of historical inquiries, as the
'Life of Jesus" by Renan. This pre-emi-
nence of fame is partly, but not wholly, de-
served. From a purely literary point of
view, Remains work doubtless merits all the
| celebrity it has gained. Its author writes
| style such as is perhaps equalled by that of
no other living Frenchman. 1t 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 it's faults, which, from a critical
point of view, are neither few nor small.
For Renan is certainly very faulty, as his
torical critic, when he practically Ignores
the extreme meagrenessi of our positive
knowledge of the career of Jesus, and de-
scribes scene after scene in his life as mi
nutely and with as much confidence as if he
had himself been present to witness it all
| Again and again the critical reader feels
prompted to ask, How do you know all this?
or why, out of two or three conflicting
accounts, do you quietly adopt some parti-
cular one, as if superior authority were Self
evident? But in the eye of the uncritical
reader these defects are excellencies; for it
is unpleasant to be kept in ignorance when
we are seeking after definite knowledge, and
it is disheartening to read page after page Of
an elaborate discussion which ends in con-
vincing us that definite knowledge cannot be
gained.
In the thirteenth edition of the ''Vie de
Jesus" Renan has corrected some of the most
striking errors of the original work, and in
particular has, with praiseworthy candor,
abandoned his untenable position with regard
to the age and character of the fourth Gospel
AS is we'll known, Renan in his earlier edi-
tions ascribed to this Gospel historical
value superior to that of the synoptics be-
Alievipg it to have been written by an eve
witness of the events which it relates aud
from this source, accordingly, he drew the
larger share of his materials. Now, if there
is any one conclusion concerning the New
Testament literature which must be regarded
as incontrovertibly established by the labors
of a whole generation of scholars, it is this
that the fourth Gospel was utterly unknown
until about A. ID. 10; that it was written by
some one who possessed very little direct
knowledge of Palestine; that its purpose
was rather to expound dogma than to give
an accurate record of events, and that as a
guide to the comprehension of the career of
Jesus it is of far less value than the three
synoptic gospels. 1t is impossible, in brief
review like the present, to epitomize the evil
dence upon which this conclusion rests,
which may more proitably be sought in the
Rev. j. j. Taylor's work on 'The Fourth