The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1897-02-27

later ana better, instead of the ObsO-
lete and exploded conclusions7 Moth
ing in the historical literature of
Christianity is better settled by the
consensus of those who accept and
those who reject Christianity as a
supernatural revelation, than that the
documents on which it rests were
written INN ediately after the death
OF its founder, by witnesses, or by
those who received the testimony Of
eye witnesses, and that their state
ments were regarded as authentic
and accurate histories by the friends
and the foes of the new religion
within century of the death of
Christ.
This is the candid confession of
Professor Reuss, of Strasburg Notes
in French Bible, First Three Cos
pels): Gail which the Apostles
know, think, and teach, is at bottom
and essentially "reminiscences; a re-
Election of what they have seen and
learnt at another time; reprodCc-
ton of lessons and impressions re-
ceived." Of Professor Reuss no less
person than Professor Huxley
says, (Nineteenth Century, 1899,
"One of the most learned, acute and
fair minded of those whose works l
have studied"
So whether we go to Tubingen
and investigate the absurd "tenden-
cy" theory of the inidel Baur, or
the thrice exploded mythical scheme
of Strauss; or examine the untenable
legendary hypothesis of Renan in
Paris, or their allies and coadiutors
in Heidelberg, Schenkel, Hitzig,
Glass;, and Hoffman, or Kuenen in
Holland, or Hase, Paulus, DeWette,
Hansratb, Keim, Volkmar, Harnack,
Reuss, PAeiderer, and Wellhausen;
or study Tholuck and Muller in
Halle, or Schleiermacher, Neander
and Dorner in Berlin; or Luthardt,
Delitzsch and Tischendorf in Leipsig;
or Meyer, Herzog and Christlieb-we
shall find that all, believers and non
believers, Christians and sceptics
alike, admit that the Gospels date
within century of the death of their
divine subject, and are literal his
tories of the actual events in his ca
reer. As candid critics, even those
who began by subdating the New
Testament documents to centuries
subsequent to the time when they
we're written, have been compelled to
agree with Christian scholars that
they were written directly after the
occurrence of the events they narrate.
All who have doubts on this SUBJ
ject should consult Thayer's "Infideli-
ty;" Lardner's "Credibility;" Canon
Mosley's hampton Lectures" Can
on Rowe's hampton Lecture" Stan
ley Leathe's Lecture on Modern
Scepticism," j. Oswald Dykes arti-
Gle in the British and Foreign Evan
gelical Magazine, No. cxi, witness
of St. Paul to Jesus Christi" Meyer
on the New Testament; Professor
|
Peabody's christianity and Sci
ence;" Dr. Salmon's Introduction to
the New Testament" Harnack's
History of Dogmas" and similar
works, to discover that the assailants
of the authenticity of the New Tes-
lament have no case. The historical
chain is unoroken.
The weakness of the assaults on
the historical evidence of Christiani-
ty is strikingly illustrated by the eff
forts of one of the most celebrated of
| the modern assailants of our religion.
The author of the famous novel,
"Robert Elsmere," undertakes to &C.
complish by means of fiction what
learning failed to do. She not only
selected "an emotional dwarf" as her
rationalistic hero and the exponent
of non miraculous Christianity, but
she puts arguments into the mouths
of her sceptical characters that a
callow theologue in the divinity
school should be able to dispose of
carTente calamo.
And in her labored article in the
Nineteenth Century" March 1889
1.-THE New Reformation in which she
undertakes to reinforce the positions
of her book, and defend herself
against her critics, the facts she con-
cedes and the admissions she makes
sustain the contentious of Christian
scholars. In the course of CONVEX
sation between Rolands and Merri,
man, Mrs. Ward makes the advocate
of historical Christianity say: What
is the whole history of German criti-
cism but series of brilliant failures,
from Strauss downward? One theo-
rist follows another. Now Mark is
uppermost as the ur-evangelist, now