the unseen world and other essays-第16章

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！


conception　of　the　character　of　Jesus'　work。　Nevertheless；　even　here　the　cautious　inquirer　has　only　too　often　to　pause　in　face　of　the　difficulty　of　distinguishing　the　authentic　utterances　of　the　great　teacher　from　the　later　interpolations　suggested　by　the　dogmatic　necessities　of　the　narrators。　Bitterly　must　the　historian　regret　that　Jesus　had　no　philosophic　disciple；　like　Xenophon；　to　record　his　Memorabilia。　Of　the　various　writings　included　in　the　New　Testament；　the　Apocalypse　alone　（and　possibly　the　Epistle　of　Jude）　is　from　the　pen　of　a　personal　acquaintance　of　Jesus；　and　besides　this；　the　four　epistles　of　Paul；　to　the　Galatians；　Corinthians；　and　Romans；　make　up　the　sum　of　the　writings　from　which　we　may　expect　contemporary　testimony。　Yet　from　these　we　obtain　absolutely　nothing　of　that　for　which　we　are　seeking。　The　brief　writings　of　Paul　are　occupied　exclusively　with　the　internal　significance　of　Jesus'　work。　The　epistle　of　Judeif　it　be　really　written　by　Jesus'　brother　of　that　name；　which　is　doubtfulis　solely　a　polemic　directed　against　the　innovations　of　Paul。　And　the　Apocalypse；　the　work　of　the　fiery　and　imaginative　disciple　John；　is　confined　to　a　prophetic　description　of　the　Messiah's　anticipated　return；　and　tells　us　nothing　concerning　the　deeds　of　that　Messiah　while　on　the　earth。

Here　we　touch　upon　our　third　consideration；the　consideration　which　best　enables　us　to　see　why　the　historic　notices　of　Jesus　are　so　meagre。　Rightly　considered；　the　statement　with　which　we　opened　this　article　is　its　own　explanation。　The　Jesus　of　history　is　so　little　known　just　because　the　Christ　of　dogma　is　so　well　known。＇16＇　Other　teachersPaul；　Mohammed；　Sakyamunihave　come　merely　as　preachers　of　righteousness；　speaking　in　the　name　of　general　principles　with　which　their　own　personalities　were　not　directly　implicated。　But　Jesus；　as　we　shall　see；　before　the　close　of　his　life；　proclaimed　himself　to　be　something　more　than　a　preacher　of　righteousness。　He　announced　himselfand　justly；　from　his　own　point　of　viewas　the　long…expected　Messiah　sent　by　Jehovah　to　liberate　the　Jewish　race。　Thus　the　success　of　his　religious　teachings　became　at　once　implicated　with　the　question　of　his　personal　nature　and　character。　After　the　sudden　and　violent　termination　of　his　career；　it　immediately　became　all…important　with　his　followers　to　prove　that　he　was　really　the　Messiah；　and　to　insist　upon　the　certainty　of　his　speedy　return　to　the　earth。　Thus　the　first　generation　of　disciples　dogmatized　about　him；　instead　of　narrating　his　life；a　task　which　to　them　would　have　seemed　of　little　profit。　For　them　the　all…absorbing　object　of　contemplation　was　the　immediate　future　rather　than　the　immediate　past。　As　all　the　earlier　Christian　literature　informs　us；　for　nearly　a　century　after　the　death　of　Jesus；　his　followers　lived　in　daily　anticipation　of　his　triumphant　return　to　the　earth。　The　end　of　all　things　being　so　near　at　hand；　no　attempt　was　made　to　insure　accurate　and　complete　memoirs　for　the　use　of　a　posterity　which　was　destined；　in　Christian　imagination；　never　to　arrive。　The　first　Christians　wrote　but　little；　even　Papias；　at　the　end　of　a　century；　preferring　second…hand　or　third…hand　oral　tradition　to　the　written　gospels　which　were　then　beginning　to　come　into　circulation。＇17＇　Memoirs　of　the　life　and　teachings　of　Jesus　were　called　forth　by　the　necessity　of　having　a　written　standard　of　doctrine　to　which　to　appeal　amid　the　growing　differences　of　opinion　which　disturbed　the　Church。　Thus　the　earlier　gospels　exhibit；　though　in　different　degrees；　the　indications　of　a　modifying；　sometimes　of　an　overruling　dogmatic　purpose。　There　is；　indeed；　no　conscious　violation　of　historic　truth；　but　from　the　varied　mass　of　material　supplied　by　tradition；　such　incidents　are　selected　as　are　fit　to　support　the　views　of　the　writers　concerning　the　personality　of　Jesus。　Accordingly；　while　the　early　gospels　throw　a　strong　light　upon　the　state　of　Christian　opinion　at　the　dates　when　they　were　successively　composed；　the　information　which　they　give　concerning　Jesus　himself　is；　for　that　very　reason；　often　vague；　uncritical；　and　contradictory。　Still　more　is　this　true　of　the　fourth　gospel；　written　late　in　the　second　century；　in　which　historic　tradition　is　moulded　in　the　interests　of　dogma　until　it　becomes　no　longer　recognizable；　and　in　the　place　of　the　human　Messiah　of　the　earlier　accounts；　we　have　a　semi…divine　Logos　or　Aeon；　detached　from　God；　and　incarnate　for　a　brief　season　in　the　likeness　of　man。

＇16＇　〃Wer　einmal　vergottert　worden　ist；　der　hat　seine　Mensetheit　unwiederbringlich　eingebusst。〃Strauss；　Der　alte　und　der　neue　Glaube；　p。　76。

＇17＇　〃Roger　was　the　attendant　of　Thomas　＇Becket＇　during　his　sojourn　at　Pontigny。　We　might　have　expected　him　to　be　very　full　on　that　part　of　his　history；　but；　writing　doubtless　mainly　for　the　monks　of　Pontigny；　he　says　that　HE　WILL　NOT　ENLARGE　UPON　WHAT　EVERY　ONE　KNOWS；　and　cuts　that　part　very　short。〃Freeman；　Historical　Essays；　1st　series；　p。　90。


Not　only　was　history　subordinated　to　dogma　by　the　writers　of　the　gospel…narratives；　but　in　the　minds　of　the　Fathers　of　the　Church　who　assisted　in　determining　what　writings　should　be　considered　canonical；　dogmatic　prepossession　went　very　much　further　than　critical　acumen。　Nor　is　this　strange　when　we　reflect　that　critical　discrimination　in　questions　of　literary　authenticity　is　one　of　the　latest　acquisitions　of　the　cultivated　human　mind。　In　the　early　ages　of　the　Church　the　evidence　of　the　genuineness　of　any　literary　production　was　never　weighed　critically；　writings　containing　doctrines　acceptable　to　the　majority　of　Christians　were　quoted　as　authoritative　while　writings　which　supplied　no　dogmatic　want　were　overlooked；　or　perhaps　condemned　as　apocryphal。　A　striking　instance　of　this　is　furnished　by　the　fortunes　of　the　Apocalypse。　Although　perhaps　the　best　authenticated　work　in　the　New　Testament　collection；　its　millenarian　doctrines　caused　it　to　become　unpopular　as　the　Church　gradually　ceased　to　look　for　the　speedy　return　of　the　Messiah；　and；　accordingly；　as　the　canon　assumed　a　definite　shape；　it　was　placed　among　the　〃Antilegomena；〃　or　doubtful　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