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！
gma。 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 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 particular one； as if its superior authority were self…evident？ But in the eye of the uncritical reader； these defects are excellences； 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 convincing 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 candour； abandoned his untenable position with regard to the age and character of the fourth gospel。 As is well known； Renan； in his earlier editions； ascribed to this gospel a historical value superior to that of the synoptics； believing it to have been written by an eyewitness of the events which it relates； and 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 labours of a whole generation of scholars； it is this； that the fourth gospel was utterly unknown until about A。 D。 170； that it was written by some one who possessed very little direct knowledge of Palestine； that its purpose was rather to expound a 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。 It is impossible； in a brief review like the present； to epitomize the evidence upon which this conclusion rests； which may more profitably be sought in the Rev。 J。 J。 Tayler's work on 〃The Fourth Gospel；〃 or in Davidson's 〃Introduction to the New Testament。〃 It must suffice to mention that this gospel is not cited by Papias； that Justin； Marcion； and Valentinus make no allusion to it； though； since it furnishes so much that is germane to their views； they would gladly have appealed to it； had it been in existence； when those views were as yet under discussion； and that； finally； in the great Quartodeciman controversy； A。 D。 168； the gospel is not only not mentioned； but the authority of John is cited by Polycarp in flat contradiction of the view afterwards taken by this evangelist。 Still more； the assumption of Renan led at once into complicated difficulties with reference to the Apocalypse。 The fourth gospel； if it does not unmistakably announce itself as the work of John； at least professes to be Johannine； and it cannot for a moment be supposed that such a book； making such claims； could have gained currency during John's lifetime without calling forth his indignant protest。 For； in reality； no book in the New Testament collection would so completely have shocked the prejudices of the Johannine party。 John's own views are well known to us from the Apocalypse。 John was the most enthusiastic of millenarians and the most narrow and rigid of Judaizers。 In his antagonism to the Pauline innovations he went farther than Peter himself。 Intense hatred of Paul and his followers appears in several passages of the Apocalypse； where they are stigmatized as 〃Nicolaitans；〃 〃deceivers of the people；〃 〃those who say they are apostles and are not；〃 〃eaters of meat offered to idols；〃 〃fornicators；〃 〃pretended Jews；〃 〃liars；〃 〃synagogue of Satan；〃 etc。 （Chap。 II。）。 On the other hand； the fourth gospel contains nothing millenarian or Judaical； it carries Pauline universalism to a far greater extent than Paul himself ventured to carry it； even condemning the Jews as children of darkness； and by implication contrasting them unfavourably with the Gentiles； and it contains a theory of the nature of Jesus which the Ebionitish Christians； to whom John belonged； rejected to the last。
In his present edition Renan admits the insuperable force of these objections； and abandons his theory of the apostolic origin of the fourth gospel。 And as this has necessitated the omission or alteration of all such passages as rested upon the authority of that gospel； the book is to a considerable extent rewritten； and the changes are such as greatly to increase its value as a history of Jesus。 Nevertheless； the author has so long been in the habit of shaping his conceptions of the career of Jesus by the aid of the fourth gospel； that it has become very difficult for him to pass freely to another point of view。 He still clings to the hypothesis that there is an element of historic tradition contained in the book； drawn from memorial writings which had perhaps been handed down from John； and which were inaccessible to the synoptists。 In a very interesting appendix； he collects the evidence in favour of this hypothesis； which indeed is not without plausibility； since there is every reason for supposing that the gospel was written at Ephesus； which a century before had been John's place of residence。 But