New-York tribune., 1907-11-07

Having written in the Hastings Bible Die
.io,.arv the classic monograph on the life and
,orsonality Of Jesus of Nazareth: Professor San
5av now gathers up into the present volume the
Aftermath of his studies OF the five divisions
cf the book. the first is lecture on the Sym
,clisr1 Of the Bible. The second and third deal
with the ascertained results and the still open
craetions ir Ncv Testament critical research
during the last twenty years. Division four is
. sermon or the haunting problem" of Miracles.
The last division contains three book reviews;
and as an appendix there is a sermon on An
gels The materials by no means make a COM
pact unity. although an articulating thread
she title of the book is fully justified.
Any adequate survey Of the work done in
cent years in New Testament criticism and in
,be study cf the historical background Of the
Christian Gospel must necessarily take account
Of The labors Of chiefly German scholars. Not
that Or. Sunday would ignore the solid quality
If English scholarship in the period under
view. His own experience. however, is that
while he agrees more often with his own coun-
-rynen he learns more from the Germans. since
the strong point of Teutonic science is its per-
sjstent spirit of forward movement In regard
70 the Synoptic Problem which for long has
engaged the attention Of scholars of the highest
competence Professor Sunday finds unanimous
agreement I'm postElating the two documents, the
zIarls-gospel and the collection Of discourses
known as Q. as at the base Of the Synoptic
tradition. He adds: 1T may be said generally
that German writer's, whether or not they con-
tend for Aramaic. originals, coming 10 see
that the great mass Of the Ciospel-tradtion is
really redolent Of the soil Of Palestine. and that
this is great guarantee of its substantial accu-
racy
Another matter Of outstanding importance
for students Of the life of Christ has been the
increasing tendency To turn TO the Jewish apoc-
slrpses as books which undoubtedly affected
the theological climate in which Jesus and has
contemporaries lived H. the opinion of writer's
like Baldensperger. Wellhausen. Schurer and
Bausset the 2Jessianic ideals current were sueh
as the Master could accept for Himself only as
He purified them from their more material and
roJitical clements As Bousset would say. the
7fessiauic idea was the only possible form In
which Jesus could cIothe His inner conscious
ness and yet an inadequate form But me
Jewish apocalypses treat OF the Messiah as the
kingly consummator standing at the end 81
time: and there are younger scholars, like
Johannes Weiss and A. Schvcitzer, who nave
urged against the too fluent spiritualizing or
the earlier writer's. that Jesus did accept for
Himself precisely that ideal Of the Messiah
which looked for Him TO inaugurate super
natural kingdom Of God. Jesus mission was
not AZ once 10 bring in that kingdom. only 20
announce it. His moral teaching was not so
much the ethics of the kingdom as ethical
teaching that fits for the kingdom. an inter
irscthiE.
Professor Sunday is at no pains to conceal
his good opinion Of the young author, A
Srhueitzer. whom he finds. lin spite of in
genioug but untenable individualisms,' worthy
Of dociIe attention. Besides being a thorough
critic whose Investigations have helped 10 bring
xrOrf
pels. schweitzer gives TO the archaeological ele-
,neuts an importance which tends TO enhance
the significance of the Person Of Jesus. he
does not like so many critics, seek 10 reduce
The Person Of Christ 20 the common measures
Of humanity but leaves II at the %ranscen-
dental height at which he finds H." 1t is on
this question that DR.. Sunday feels the pow
ertv Of modern theological liberalism. II Is
here also that the difference between his
point Of view and that of many Of his colleagues
e-aerges as a difference in metaphysical back
ground What to them would be a symbolic
representation of moral realities is something
more concrete 70 DR.. Sunday. who believes that
the period Of our Lords earthly ministry was
really q period, so to speak of oecultation' in
which the fun display Of His divine power was
deliberately restrained and held back"
such indictments as our author brings against
liberalism in religious thought would bring cold
comfort TO that type or conservatism "IilSi III
\ sgts that for work in Biblical criticism the
ideal prepa ration IS a course of training at
Scotland Yard For it IS only against premature
modernism that DR.. Sunday brings complaint.
In the field Of Criticism he is himself work
man who need not be ashamed. The sermon
on Miracles makes clear that he entertains no
views that call for a literal dislocation of the
established natural order. Augustines golden
saying is also quoted, Miracle Is not contrary
10 nature. but only 10 what know of nat
ure" Bv premature modernism Professor
Sunday means the attempt TO bring under phil
osophical or theological categories problem
primarily historical II we ask what, then, is
the right way OF approaching the study of
Christianity the reply is as follows:
We rnoderns ought 10 begin by using every ef-
for, of reason and imagination to throw ourselves
hack into the times that we are investigating and
strictly In the light OF their own context we ought
70 exclude ourselves from the process as much as
possibly can First, let us state the facts with
the -rnoet svrnDathetic reconstruction of which
are capable Of the real conditions by which they
cent themselves 70 an observer OF thar day;
Then. and not BEFORE we may begin TO ask what
these facts or series OF facts mean for U.s.
The doctrine as Professor Sunday holds 1t. Of
the Person and Work Of Christ is more fully
treated in the concluding chapters, which are
reviews of DR. Moberly's "Atonement and Per-
sonali.ys' and Dr. Du Bosses '"The Gospel in
the Gospels and 'The Gospel According to ST.
Paul" He is not opposed to the "thoroughgoing
hunanizing" OF Jesus involved In the thesis Of
these writer's so long such a point of ap-
proach 10 Christ can prove helpful. He would
seem TO question, however, whether II sufficient
~ safeguards the doctrines of grace 1t may
be that our authors difficulty in this matter