The historicity of Jesus: a criticism of the contention that Jesus never lived, a statement of the evidence for his existence, an estimate of his relation to Christianity

THE HISTORICITY OF JESUS A CRITICISM OF THE CONTENTION THAT JESUS NEVER LIVED, A STATEMENT OF THE EVIDENCE FOR

AN ESTIMATE OF HIS RELATION TO CHRISTIANITY

HIS EXISTENCE,

y

By

SHIRLEY JACKSON CASE of the

Department of Netv

Literature

and

Testament

Interpretation

in

the Uni-versity of Chicago

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

PRESS

Copyright 1912 Bv of Chicago

The University

All Rights Reserved

Published March 19 12

Composed and Printed By The University of Chicago Press Chicago,

Illinois.

U.S.A.

PREFACE The main purpose

of the present

volume

is

to

set forth the evidence for believing in the historical reality of Jesus' existence

By way

upon

earth.

of approach, the characteristic features

more recent opinion regarding the historical Jesus have been surveyed, and, on the other hand, the views of those who deny his existence have been examined in detail. The negative arguments have been carefully analyzed in order accurately to comprehend the problem. of

In presenting the evidence for Jesus' historicity,

an

effort

made both to meet oppoand at the same time to give

has been

nents' objections

a fairly complete collection of the historical

data upon which belief in his existence

rests.

Finally, the practical bearing of the discussion

has been indicated by briefly considering Jesus' personal relation to the founding of the Christian

movement and

his significance for

modern

religion.

The needs kept in mind. will find the

of

two

classes of readers

The general public,

have been

it is

believed,

treatment suited to their tastes.

vi

Preface

By

a free use of footnotes the more technical

side of the subject has also

been presented for

the benefit of readers wishing to study the

question more minutely.

No

important phase

in the history or in the present status of the

problem has intentionally been ignored.

The author has made

free

use

of

some

opinions which he had already expressed in the

pages of the Biblical World and the American

Journal of Theology, but these materials have been largely recast in becoming an integral part of the present work.

Shirley Jackson Case The University of Chicago February

15, 191 2.

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAG€

CHAPTER I.

The Historical Jesus of "Liberal" Theology

11.

The

i

Mythical

Radical

of

Christ

Criticism III.

An Estimate ment:

Its

32

of the Negative ArguTreatment of the Tra-

ditional Evidence IV.

VI.

VII.

VIII.

-V-^'-.-C-~'

62

An Estimate

of the Negative Argument: Its Proposed Explanation of THE Origin of Christianity

...

V.

fi.

Pragmatic Tradition

Phases

The

Pauline Existence

The

Gospel Existence

Extra-Biblical Existence

of

89

Primitive 133

Evidence

for

Jesus'

178^ Evidence

for

Jesus' 202

Evidence

for

Jesus' 238

IX. Jesus the Historical Christianity

X. Jesus' Significance Religion vii

Founder

of 271

for

r,-

Modern 304

'

u^it^^

*:

CHAPTER

I

THE HISTORICAL JESUS OF "LIBERAL" THEOLOGY Is Jesus of

or is

is

Nazareth a

historical individual,

he purely a creation of fancy

commonly thought

to

While he

?

have lived

in Palestine

nineteen hundred years ago, Christendom has recently been disturbed

by occasional voices

proclaiming that this current belief

without foundation in

fact,

altogether

is

Jesus'

life

of asso-

ciation with disciples, his ministry of healing

and teaching,

his conflicts with the religious

leaders of that day, his death on the cross, in fact the

whole of his alleged earthly career

depicted in the entirely

among left

New

fictitious.

Testament

He

is

is

held to be

not to be classed

those historical founders of religion

so strong an impression

upon

temporaries that after death their held in peculiar reverence

by

who

their con-

memory was

their followers;

he belongs rather with those heroes of mythology who never had any earthly existence except that created for

them by the anthropomorphizand primitive peoples.

ing fancy of naive

This doubt about Jesus' existence

is

not an

The Historicity

2

entirely «/

new problem.

of Jesus

Its classic expression is

Bruno Bauer more than half a Yet in its modern form it has

to be found with

century ago.

new and important characteristics. Not only has it won a larger follo\\dng than formerly, but

it

has been argued in a variety of ways and

from several

different points of view.

It

is

often presented with a zeal which challenges

when the argument would not

attention even

always

command

a hearing.

Its

advocates are

occasionally accused, and perhaps not always unjustly, of displaying a partisan temper not

consistent with the spirit of a truly scientific research, yet they sometimes vigorously declare

themselves to be working primarily in the interests of genuine

position

may

religion.

Even though

their

ultimately be found untenable,

the variety and insistency with which

it

is

advocated cannot well be ignored.

There about

is

also a certain degree of pertinency

this recent protest against

toricity.

Jesus'

The problem has not been

his-

forced to

the front in a purely arbitrary fashion.

might have been expected as one

—a almost say—

paniments

of

the

life

of the

It

accom-

kind of by-product one might

modern

of Jesus.

criticism's research

When

upon

one sees how radically

The Historical Jesus of "Liberal" Theology

3

the traditional conception of Jesus' person has

been reconstructed possibility of

This

question

needed consideration even had the peculiar and

which

in

,of ten its

the

criticism,

denying his very existence

suggested.

least

by recent

it

is

at

would have not arisen in

somewhat unfortunate manner

has recently been presented.

Too

discussion has been left to those

whose

it

tastes are seemingly not primarily historical,

whom

and

for

this

query seems to have meant a strong pre-

the mere possibility of proposing

supposition in favor of a negative answer.

Moreover the

so-called

historical

Jesus of

liberal theology is the specific target at

the skeptical arguments are aimed.

is

The

as-

assuming that the traditional view of

sailants,

Jesus

which

unhistorical, believe that they can also

demolish this figure which the liberal theologians set

up

as the Jesus of history.

criticism,

through

its

rejection

Has modern of

the older

views about Jesus, set in motion a skeptical

movement which proves equally destructive when directed against its own reconstruction of the history?

This seems to be the point

from which the problem of Jesus' historicity must at present be approached.

To what

extent has the newer

method

of

The HistoricUy of Jesus

4

study provoked doubt, or even

supplied

a

plausible basis for questioning Jesus' existence ?

An

examination of the chief

critical

attempts

to reconstruct the picture of Jesus reveals the

following significant elements of the so-called

"liberal" thought.

In the positions

first

place, the philosophical presup-

formerly

underlying

speculation have been supplanted

view in which natural law

is

more absolutely dominant

christological

by a world-

given a higher and position.

Conse-

quently the gospel stories of Jesus' mighty

works are reinterpreted to bring them within the range of natural events, or else they are dismissed as utterly unhistorical.

we

The

ancients

are told were unable to distinguish critically

between natural and supernatural that

many

acti\dties, so

events which today would be ac-

counted perfectly normal, seemed in antiquity wholly abnormal and miraculous. ness

and death were connected

in

Just as sick-

thought with

the action of superhuman agencies, so to calm the excitement of a lunatic, to stimulate

by

mental suggestion the withered nerves of a paralytic, to

arouse a sick person from a death-like

coma immediately became and

resurrection.

miracles of healing

The Historical Jesus of

^^

Liber aV^ Theology

5

Or, again, events that might not of themselves

have seemed unusual

unduly magnified by an loving imagination.

may have

uncritical

To

been

and miracle-

illustrate,

it

is

held

that the generous example of Jesus and his disciples in sharing their food

of the multitude

with the members

who had no

spired a similar generosity

provisions in-

on the part

of others

the crowd, and out of this circumstance grew the gospel stories of Jesus' feeding the five thousand and the four thousand. Simiin

larly Jesus' instruction to Peter to catch a fish

and

sell it

to procure

money

for the

payment

becomes a miraculous prediction about a coin to be found in a fish's mouth. A parable about a barren fig tree grows into a of the temple tax

story of Jesus' unusual power to wither a tree

which

failed to

fast.

Many

supply him food for his break-

other miracle stories admit of a

similar explanation, so

Again, ness,

it is

it is

asserted.

thought that literary inventive-

the use of the Old Testament, legends

about the wonderful doings of the heroes of other religions, and a desire so to picture Jesus' career as to create admiration and awe may have combined to produce narratives which have not even a natural basis in the actual

'2-

The Historicity

6

To

history.

of Jesus

this class the nativity stories, the

descent of the dove at baptism, the transfigura-

and ascension and even the greater number of Jesus' alleged miracles, might conceivably be assigned. But whether they were originally tion incident, the resurrection

narratives,

unusual natural events, or ordinary happenings magnified into the miraculous, or mere creations of the narrator's imagination, the result

same

for

modern thought

of Jesus.

He

longer the miracle-working individual

the gospels portray.'

And

the gospel representation

if

is

the

is

no

whom

in this particular

perhaps

fictitious

not surprising that some persons should

it is

ask whether the whole portrait

work '

is

may

not be a

of fancy.

With the

Deistic

movement in England in the seventeenth Germany a century later, there

century, and rationalism in

appeared a pronounced tendency to rid Christianity of the miracuIn 1696 Toland wrote Chrislianily not Mysterious, a Proof lous. That in the Gospels Nothing Is Opposed to or Beyond Reason. Reiraarus (Von dem Zwecke Jesu und seiner Jiinger:

Fragment des

Wolfenbilttelschen

Noch

ein

Ungenannten, Herausgegeben

von G. E. Lessing, Braunschweig, 1778) expressed the opinion that Jesus had not worked miracles, for had he possessed this ability his failure to

meet the demand

for a sign,

and

his allowing

the crisis at Jerusalem to pass without displaying his power to the

utmost,

whom

would be incomprehensible.

des Urchristentums, Heidelberg, 1828) tives,

The

"Rationalists,"

of

Paulus {Das Leben Jesu ah Grundlage einer rcinen Geschichle explained

all

is

one of the best representa-

miracles as natural events.

But Strauss {Das

The Historical Jesus of "Liberal" Theology

Furthermore,

knowledge

religious

is

7

no

longer thought to be supernaturally acquired.

Instead of relying upon some record of a sup-

posedly supernatural revelation as a basis for authentic

human

experience

mental.

knowledge,

religious

now

It is

reason

and

have been made fundasaid that even the Bible

writers were wholly conditioned

by

their

own

mental grasp upon the world of thought surrounding them.

For then the earth was a disk

with the arched roof of heaven above, the

abode of the departed beneath, and God and spirits \

plying back and forth in these regions

n truly anthropomorphic were

all religious

fashion.

Not only

ideas limited to the intellec-

tual outlook of that age, but the religious experi-

ence of the ancients was primarily the outcome

own

of their

spiritual reaction

upon

their world.

So historical events and persons are significant for the present chiefly as a

means

of enlarging

our sphere of reality, thus supplying a domain Leben Jesu, Tubingen, 1835 and 1836) easily showed to what and he accordingly regarded the

absurdities such attempts led,

miracle stories as pure fictions.

has not concerned

itself

Since Strauss, "liberal " theology

very seriously with this problem.

By

general agreement the supernaturalistic faith of former times rejected.

The

rationalistic explanation

is

is

applied to part of the

gospel miracles, while for others the mythical theory of Strauss is

adopted.

The Historicity of Jesus

8

for the enrichment of thought

and experience.

In other words, religious knowledge must be acquired by the same laws and through the

same channels

— and

through no others

ployed for the acquirement of

—em-

human knowledge

in general. It follows that so far as religion

can claim

quaHty must inhere in it cannot be derived from an its very nature Nearly a century and a external authority. to be "truthful" this

—

half ago Lessing expressed the idea tersely in

ninth

his

"axiom":

"Religion

is

not

true

because the evangelists and apostles taught

but they taught because

it

it

because

seemed to them true, has been recorded

What

add.'

it

is

true"

it,

—or

moderns would

may

represent

the noblest thought of a past age, but no fact of history can be estabhshed so surely, and no

notion of the past stands so wholly above the

own make

limited ideas of its tion

may

norms

A

safely

age, that a later genera-

these things objective

for testing the validity of its knowledge.

world- view cannot be built on scripture, nor

Axiom lo also puts the main point clearly: "Ausihrer innern Wahrheit miissen die schriftlichen Ueberlieferungen erklaret werden, und alle schrif tlichc Ueberlieferungen konnen ihr keine innern '

Wahrheit geben, wenn sie keine hat." And again: "Zufallige Geschichtswahrheiten konnen der Beweis von notwendigen Vernunftwahrheitcn nie werden."

The Historical Jesus

of " Liber ar' Theology

9

can the highest type of religious experience result

merely from acceptance of an objectively In the opinion of "lib-

authenticated creed. eral" theologians,

the content of Christian

if

thinking today would be "truthful"

must

it

answer to the highest intellectual demands of

modern times and must be

in

harmony with

the noblest type of spiritual ideals at present attainable.

Accordingly the religious values of

life

are

no longer thought to be conditioned by the truth or falsity of alleged historic facts.

These

values have a self-attesting quality quite apart

from any supposition as to where or how the recognition of their worth first came to expresIndeed, to condition present-

sion in history.

day

religious ideals

by norms and decrees of a by past standards,

past age, or to measure values is

now thought

type

detrimental to

spiritual

of

legalism,

attainment.

whether in the realm

the highest

Bondage of

conduct, means a deadening of the genuine of

the

spirit,

"entangling history

in

life

hence the need to break the

alliance"

order

to

between give

the

religion spirit

and

liberty.

upon the life of the past may prove and even inspirational if one avoids

Reflection helpful

to

thought or

*

lo

The

thinking of

But the found

it

in

Historicity of Jesus

terms of a deadening legalism.

greatest values of religion are not to be

fossilized in

in the present

When

this

the strata of Jewish

they

Christian history;

and

await production

still

and the future. modern attitude on the general

question of religious authority

is

brought to

bear upon one's thought of the historical Jesus traditional conception of his authority

the

tain that religious knowledge

nor

made valid by

is

neither acquired

supernatural means and that

spiritual attainments

ized

is

Since the "liberals" main-

radically modified.

once and for

have not been standardtime by supernatural

all

demonstrations, even

Jesus

if

is

assumed

to be

the fountain of supernaturally revealed religious

knowledge, there

means vealed.

of

is

knowing

The

now no

just v/hat

absolutely certain

had been thus

re-

evangelists wrote about him, as

about everything

else, in

notions of their time.

terms of the limited

Their ideas

—and, so far —moved

as our information goes, his ideas too

only in the atmosphere of first-century thinking,

and

so cannot be normative for the truthfulness

of twentieth-century thought.

And since religi-

ous values today must be judged by the tests of

modern demands, past

values,

though they

The Historical Jesus

proved

of " LiheraV^ Theology

sufficient for the first century,

longer have abiding worth. their value this

may no

they do retain

not because of their historic

is

even should that be Jesus himself, but

origin, is

If

ii

wholly due to their modern

efficiency.

they never before existed, in

all

Had

probability

modern needs would have produced them just as new values are being created today to meet contemporary needs. Thus Jesus becomes so relatively insignificant as

ous matters that

an inclination

it is

in

an authority

in religi-

scarcely strange to find

some quarters

to

deny

his

existence outright.

more disturbing

Still

Jesus of "liberal"

is

the fact that the

theology

is

not a super-

natural person, at least not in any real sense of that

term as understood by the traditional

Christology.

The Johannine logos-idea and the now

Pauline notion of pre-existence are not

treated as fundamental items in one's thought of the historical Jesus;

these are rather the

product of primitive interpretation. stories

in

Also the

Matthew and Luke about unusual

happenings attending Jesus' entrance into the life of

humanity are believed

to be merely the

attempts of early faith to supply an appropriate

background

in the

imagery

of that

day

The Historicity of Jesus

1

for

its

conception of his uniqueness.

Jesus,

is af&med, can be best and most truly known as a man among men, and his personality-

it

is

to be estimated in terms of the qualities dis-

played in the ordinary activities of his earthly life.

All efforts to

are held

make

his origin supernatural

be the work

to

of

interpretation,

originating in an age which found

its

highest

thought-categories in supernaturalism.

Likewise the constitution of his personality in

general

is

regarded by the "liberals" as

belonging wholly in the natural sphere. thinking had a truly physical basis in tact with local

phenomena, and

its

its

His con-

processes,

so far as they were normal, were in line with

regular psychological laws.

If

they were ab-

normal they are to be placed on the same basis as

abnormal

mental

processes

in

general.

Descriptions of personal contact with Satan, ministrations of angels, personal communications with a

are

all

Moses

or an Elijah,

and the

like,

taken as pictures to express vividly

normally conditioned spiritual experiences of

must have been the victim Those who hold this view would not deny that Jesus' experience was of an exceedingly rich and pure tj-pe, but only Jesus; otherwise he

of hallucinations.

The Historical Jesus

aV

Theology

13

was not something miraculously given him from without. It was rather a personal

that to

of " Liber

it

attainment through the ordinary processes of

and his uniqueness lay in the exceptional way in which he cultivated these processes and in the unusual quality of perfecspiritual activity,

tion he thus attained.

With

respect

to

Jesus'

mental

activities,

have worked its view out quite so consistently and This is particuclearly as at some other points. "liberal"

interpretation

seems not

to

larly true regarding the question of his messianic

Beyond

self-consciousness.

all

question

his

mental condition as viewed by the evangelists is

explicable only

on the assumption that

his

thinking was supernaturally controlled, or that

The

he was mentally unbalanced. is

to

make

the blurred gospel picture of

responsible for the distortion, solution usually adopted tation.

alternative

Yet Jesus

is

and

him

this is the

by "liberal"

interpre-

allowed to set himself

At what sense can he have claimed messiahship and still

forward in

seriousness as the Messiah.

all

once the question

arises.

How

far

and

have preserved mental normality?

in

We

are

usually told that he arrived at this conviction experientially

;

it

was

a

deduction

drawn

The Historicity oj Jesus

14

from God.

his sense of

He

unique spiritual kinship to

transfused the current conception of

messiahship with a supremely spiritual interpretation;

yet as his work on earth failed to

bring about the complete establishment of the

kingdom, Jesus came to believe, and announced his conviction to his followers, that he would in the near future

up the kingdom individual

come upon the clouds to set But for any

in its perfection.

whose personality

ex hypothesi

is

non-supernatural, to confer upon himself the prerogatives

of

that

figure of apocalyptic

superhuman messianic

imagery

is

a severe strain

upon our notion of normal mental action even in that age.^ Hence it is not so strange that some interpreters should find Jesus making no ' DeLoosten, Jesus Chrislus vom Slandpiiiikte des Psychiaters (Bamberg, 1905), thinks Jesus was mentally unsound and so subject to delusions. For Rasmussen, Jesus: Einc vergleichcnde psycho pat hoi ogisc he Sludie (Leipzig, 1905; translated from the Dan-

ish Jesus, en

sammcnUgnende

Studie, 1905), Jesus

was an

Against these views frequent protests have been made.

epileptic.

Kneib,

Moderne Leben-Jesu-Forschimg uiiter dem Eiuflusse der Fsychiatrie (Mainz, 1908), lays the blame for these theories upon what seems to him the a-priori exclusion of supernaturalism from Jesus* person. His abnormality is to be explained by his divinity: "cntweder war Jesus Christus gcisteskrank oder er war Gottmensch." Werner, Die psychischc Gcsundhcit Jesu (Gross-Lichterfelde, 1909), contends for the mental soundness of Jesus, but, like Kneib, thinks that any interpretation which brings Jesus

human

level

must admit

his insanity.

down

to a purely

Weidel, Jesu Personlich-

The Historical Jesus of

''Liberal'^ Theology

personal claims to messiahship

more

or that the

;

radical critics should imagine

first interpreters,

who admittedly

superhuman

personality,

out of their

own fancy

15

that his

created his

may also have

evolved

the entire picture of his

earthly career.

The

religion

and worship which grew up

the Apostolic age about the

name

in

of Jesus the

Messiah formerly was thought to have been founded upon, and fostered by, special supernatural

manifestations.

But

"liberal"

the

estimate of Christianity's historical origin would

The miraculous

also eliminate these features.

resurrection of Jesus

is

undoubtedly a tenet

but to go back and establish by critical tests the any corresponding objective fact

of the first Christians' faith, of that faith reliability of keit:

Eine psychologische Studie (Halle

modern gospel

results of

criticism,

still

a.S., 1908),

adopting the

finds Jesus to

have acted

quite unusually but credits this to his possession of an unusual volitional energy.

Schaefer, Jesus in psychiatrischer Belenchtung:

Eine Kontrovcrse (Berlin, 1910), from the standpoint of a physician who is at the same time inclined to liberal theological views, protests especially against deLoosten's treatment of Jesus as a

paranoiac.

Sanday, Christologies Ancient and Modern (Oxford,

1910), though not discussing this particular topic, finds, in the

subliminal regions of Jesus' mental

which produced a unique

The left

real

problem

unsolved.

is

Cf.

life,

a special, divine influence

effect in his conscious

thus pushed a Coe,

little

"Religion

mental

activities.

farther back but

and

the

is still

Subconscious,"

Atnerican Journal of Theology, XIII (1909), 337-49.

The

i6

is

II istor icily of Jesus

held to be no longer possible.

Furthermore,

the point of departure for the early belief in Jesus' resurrection

is

said to be a conviction

on

the part of certain persons that Jesus had been seen

by them

may have

after his burial/

and these visions

been due to a combination of purely

For a long time the had been under a severe strain; they

natural circumstances. disciples

had passed

through

particularly

experiences at Jerusalem; scenes

to

of

unnerving

then they returned

former association with

where memories

of

Jesus

him were newly awakened

and former hopes revived with increased power. These circumstances brought about unusual psychic experiences interpreted by those who shared them as visions of the risen Jesus. Thus the indelible impression of his historical personality upon their lives bore its natural fruitage. He was " risen " more truly than they realized. Not ecstatic experiences induced by an over-wrought nervous condition, nor an '

In the

New Testament

tradition about the origin of the

resurrection faith, one readily recognizes the subordinate place

occupied by the empty tomb.

some member

of the

Its discovery

meant nothing

until

company experienced an "appearance."

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ (London and New York, 1907, pp. 241-53); and the present writer's article "The Resurrection Faith of the First Disciples" in the American JourCf. Lake,

nal of Theology,

XIII

(1909), 169-92.

The Historical Jesus of

^^

Liber aV Theology

17

interpretation of these experiences in terms of

current notions about the visibihty of angels

and life.

but their own renewed and increased

spirits,

spiritual

energy truly proved Jesus' return to

The

real corner-stone of the

new

religion

was not the resurrection appearances, but the "Easter faith" by which the spirit of Jesus'

own

life

found living expression in the person

of his disciples.

Similarly

whole

the

church's enthusiastic

life,

range

of

the

early

once imagined to be a

miraculous attestation of the genuineness of the

new

natural

now

faith, is

basis

explained on the purely

religious

of

psychology.

The

most men of that time, were highly emotional and superstitious. They peopled the world about them with a generous early believers, like

supply of

evil as well as good.

spirits,

Any

unusual state of nervous excitement took on a highly religious significance, and even ordinary

events were readily magnified into marvelous manifestations

of

the

supernatural.

quently the abnormal phases of largest in their vision,

region above validity

of

all

and they turned

Conse-

loomed to this

others to find evidence for the

their

search in vain.

life

new faith. Nor was their Soon they found themselves

The

1

II is lor icily of Jesus

able to speak with "tongues," they performed

"miracles,"

they

saw

visions

and dreamed

dreams, angels ministered to them in moments of special distress, and, indeed, at times

God

drew so near that the earth trembled as did Mount Sinai in days of old. For the primitive Christians these experiences were the divinely

given anticipatory signs of the coming messianic age; for moderns the whole ecstatic

life

of that

period seems to have become only an interesting

study in folk psychology.

Even

the whole scheme of theological think-

ing constructed about the person of the heavenly Christ

the

is

first

now regarded

as mainly a product of

interpreters' fancy.

Paul and his con-

temporaries built largely upon the expectation of Jesus' early return to bring

present world-order.

The

an end to the

fact of his ignomini-

ous death seemed a serious objection to the doctrine of his messiahship, so believers were

compelled to find some explanation that would bring this event into

harmony with

their

mes-

Paul was exceptionally successful effort, in that he made Jesus' death a

sianic faith. in this

fundamental element in the Messiah's saving mission. By reflection this figure of the heavenly

Messiah grew in prominence until he became

The Historical Jesus of ''Liberal" Theology

19

and worship. In fact, by degrees, behevers began to transfer to the risen Jesus many notions which they formerly would have entertained with reference In like manner the tenets of to God only. first-century Christology were worked out to meet various inclinations and necessities of contemporary thinking. Hence the religion which has Jesus as its object is to be sharply distinguished from the the object of a godlike reverence

personal religion of Jesus.

It is

now

believed

by the "liberals" that he did not set himself forward as an object for reverence and worship, but that his primary concern was to point men directly

God, the God

to

worshiped with

and mind.

As

men

for his

he himself

devotion of heart, soul,

way he entered into a rich sonship to God and he craved

In this

realization of for all

full

whom

the blessings of a similar attainment.

own

position, the attitude of deifica-

assumed by the early church after his death was farthest from his thoughts. "He desired no other belief in his person and no other attachment to it than is contained in the tion

keeping

of

commandments

his

feeling, praying,

ing individual

is

This

working, struggling, and suffera

man who

in the face of his

The Uisloriciiy of Jesus

20

God

also associates himself with other men.'"

Lessing's sentences on the ''Religion of Christ"

same time how keenly the problem was grasped more than a century ago, that we venture to repeat them slightly condensed: state the point so clearly, showing at the

Whether Christ [i.e., "Jesus," in modern usage] was more than man is a problem. That he was truly man, if he was man at all, and that he never ceased being man, is admitted. Consequently the religion of Christ and the Christian religion are two quite distinct things. The former is that religion which he himself as a man recognized and practiced, and which every man can have in common with him. The latter is that religion which assumes that he was more than a man and makes him as such the object of its worship. The existence of these two religions in Christ [i.e., in "Jesus"] as in one and the same person is inconceivable. The teachings and principles of both are scarcely to be found in one and the same book; at least it is clear that the religion of Christ and the Christian religion are

The former The

quite differently contained in the gospels. is

there expressed most clearly

latter,

on the other hand,

that there

is

is

and

distinctly.

so uncertain

and ambiguous

hardly a single passage with which any two

persons have connected the same thought.

But tolic '

in the

New

Testament story

of the

Apos-

age this supernatural figure of the heavenly

Harnack, What Is Chrislianily (London and

pp. 125

f.;

Das Wcscn

New York,

des Christentums, Leipzig, 1900).

1901,

The Historical Jesus of '^LiberaV Theology Christ

The

certainly

stands

in

early Christians' gaze

21

foreground.

the

was directed mainly Their hope was

to the future, not to the past. in

the

Coming One.

Recognition of Paul's

lack of concern with the earthly Jesus

and

his

whole-souled devotion to the heavenly Christ is

a commonplace of modern thinking.

these circumstances

must expect

it

Under would appear that we

to find the story of Jesus' earthly

career so portrayed as to traits befitting

one who

show supernatural

will later

enjoy mes-

But

sianic honors in the divine sphere. first

if

the

Christians in their religion and worship

formed

this

highly

colored

picture

of

the

Christ largely out of subjective elements of their

own

thinking, as the "liberals"

tell us,

and then carried back into an earthly career foreshadowings of his dignity and power, may not the very idea of an earthly existence have the same subjective origin ? If so, the anthropomorphizing interest was merely one of the steps in the general process of making concrete and objective those notions which seemed of greatest worth in primitive religious thinking. It is at least only fair to admit that modern critical

study has prepared the

soil

out of which

queries of this sort readily spring.

Perhaps

The Historicity of Jesus

22

they are only a mushroom growth, yet so surprising that they should

it is

seem

not

some

to

eyes to be the seedlings of giant oaks. It

must be admitted that modern

study, on

its

critical

negative side, largely discounts

the traditional history of Jesus,

does not

it

if

indeed provoke doubt about his very existence.

Yet "liberal" theology's own toricity of Jesus

W^en

is

belief in the his-

not in the least disturbed.

the traditional view of

him has been

moderns assert that they have only removed fungoid growths from his real historical form, and that they would thus virtually demolished,

not only restore his original figure but also

make him more

significant for religious thought.

Accordingly they propose to return to Jesus

not merely to the gospel representation of him,

and not even picture

of

to the oldest available sources'

him, but back beyond

"interpretations"

to

the

original

all

these

Jesus

un-

adorned by the fancy of his admiring followers.

While

this task is

possible

not easy,

by means

historical criticism.

of

it is

thought to be

a careful literary and

Its advocates

to be able to produce full

do not claim

details

of

Jesus'

career but only to restore a partial, yet real,

glimpse of his personalit}'.

The main

features

The Historical Jesus of "Liberal" Theology of his activity,

teaching,

the essential elements of his

and the deep impression which

made upon

life

23

his associates are held to

his

be

recoverable.

Of course not

all

"liberal"

investigators

agree exactly in their positive results, and this fact

is

sometimes used as an argument against

the reliability of any of their work. Yet, in what they regard as essentials, there is in the main uniformity of opinion. It is commonly

agreed that Jesus' shall

own

personal religious

life

be made the basis for estimating his

Abandoning metaphysical speculations about his origin and nature, we are asked to fix attention upon him character and significance.

as a

man among men

in order that

we may

discover the content of that religion which he

own

actually embodied in his

by example and precept realize for themselves.

and sought

life,

to persuade others to

He met

life's

issues in

a perfectly natural way, yet he shared that inspiration of spirit which

noble, normal, spiritually

For him

God and

religion

meant

is

full

available for every

minded

individual.

perfect fellowship with

loyalty to the highest ideals of per-

sonal duty toward one's fellows. this noblest

In revealing

thought of the divine, Jesus was

The Historicity of Jesus

24

revealing God, and so

was performing a saving work for mankind. Thus the historically reliable and important features of his career are not

his alleged display of miracle-working ability,

any other demonstrations and messianic authority, but or

personal religious

As with

his

impressive

life.

for his teaching,

it

was

estabhshment

the

of supernatural

of

chiefly concerned

God's

kingdom.

more specifically, meant the realization on man's part of true sonship to God, who, in This,

his essentially loving attitude

toward humanity,

was the Father. The highest privileges for men lay in becoming sons of God through the cultivation in their

quality of love.

own

Only

lives of

in

thought could the values of aright.

The human

soul

and

the life

its

this

light

divine of

this

be estimated

eternal welfare

was the thing of first importance. The soul's safety was to be insured by a life of fidelity to the divine will, the individual trusting at the

same time

in

the goodness of the heavenly

Father who was more willing to forgive and love

men than human

parents were to show a

similar attitude toward their children.

true son of God, heart righteousness

mental.

For the

was funda-

Casuistry and formality were to be

The Historical Jesus of

^^

Liberal" Theology

eliminated; only that which

genuinely

was

sincere

was

worth

formalism was set aside and

essential

and

When

while.

men

25

turned in

sincerity to the Father, salvation was assured.

was fundamentally a a salvation whose message of realization must be awaited in some far-away

Thus

Jesus'

teaching

salvation —not

time, but a present spiritual possession.

During Jesus' lifetime the significance of his work and teaching had, according to this interpretation, been but very imperfectly comprehended. Traditional notions about a Messiah who was to deliver the Jews from their bondage to foreign rulers bulked so large in men's thoughts that Jesus' emphasis upon the more distinctly spiritual values of religion received

only a feeble response. shattered

that

the disciples'

would

he

Yet when

relieve

his

death

last lingering

hopes

Israel

from

Roman

him from their among those mistaken

oppression, they did not dismiss

thoughts and count him messianic people,

agitators

since the

whom

with

the

Jewish

time of Judas of Gamala,

had become more or less of abandoning hope Jesus' the foundation of their

familiar.

Instead

disciples built,

memory

on

of personal

association with him, the daring structure of

The Historicity of Jesus

26

new hope such

proclaimed that a

who had

had ever

as no one in Israel

before ventured to surmise.

human

They

confidently

being, even a

man

was to figure as the supernatural IMessiah coming in glory on the This new messianism was not however clouds. the heart of the new faith; it was only the outward expression of an inward life-stimulus which went back to Jesus as its source. The new hope served as a vehicle to bear along for a few generations this new spiritual energ}' which had emanated from Jesus, but ultimately the History soon vehicle was to be discarded. proved that these hopes were false. Yet the died,

make a successful appeal to men, prompting new interpretations of his person and work. Thus began that struggle Jesus-life

continued to

which has sometimes caused great religious

thinking

christological

— the

struggle

speculations.

But

in

the founding and perpetuating

is

one of

life

distress in

to

readjust

Jesus'

place

of Christianity

rather than of theory, and "liberal"

interpreters are disposed to confine thought of

him

to the former realm.

We need not,

it is

picture of Jesus'

said,

life

go beyond

this simple

and teaching, the power

of which has been practically demonstrated

The Historical Jesus of "Liberal" Theology

27

in the founding of Christianity, to find those

features which give his personaKty its para-

mount stated

significance

by some

for

of the

religion

As

today.

best-known representa-

tives of the liberal view:

The nearer we draw to Jesus in the tradition the more does all dogmatic theology recede. We behold a man who, more than any other, by his clear word makes us understand ourselves, the world, and God, and who goes with us amid the needs and struggles of our time as the truest friend and guide on whom we

may

rely for comfort.'

In spite of our remoteness in time and the frequently painful uncertainty of the tradition,

we who

are thus

connected with the great story of Jesus

distantly

handed down through the centuries can still find him, God and his nearness to God, in his

in his trust in relentless

moral earnestness, in his conquest over pain,

in his certainty of the forgiveness of sins,

and

in his

eternal hope, to be the guide of our souls to God.^

This unique historical personality, apart from

all

outer forces, alone through his inner greatness created the world-encompassing spiritual tianity

He is the

of Chris-

His powerful personality constrains

as well

life

movement

founder of our inner Christian

us to share both his faith in God's holy and fatherly '

Wernle, Sources of Our Knowledge of

the Life of

Jesus (Lon-

don, 1907, p. 163; Die Quellen des Lehens Jesu, Tubingen, 1905). '

Bousset, Jesus

lish tr., Jesus,

(3. Aufl.,

Tubingen, 1907, pp. 99

London and New York,

1906, p. 211).

f.;

cf.

Eng-

The Historicity of Jesus

28 love

and

his

truly joyous

own

life

of holy love.

and happy, giving

Thus he makes us

to our

true AA'orth

life

and abiding meaning.'

Such

in

"liberal"

brief

the

is

Jesus

historical

Needless

theology.

to

say,

of this

reconstruction of Jesus' career, and this inter-

pretation of his significance, have

met with

severe opposition from different quarters.

Of

necessity adherents of the older Christology must

declare unceasing of the traditions,

war upon so free a treatment and especially upon so thorThis

oughgoing a rejection of supernaturalism. complete elimination of supernaturalism repellant

logians

to

also

the semi-liberal school of theo-

who have come

positivists."^

is

to be

known

as

"modern

All these opponents urge

that

Jesus' person and worth have been seriously

underestimated.

On

the other hand, a radical

type of interpretation

insists that too

high a

We

are told

that he has no such significance for

modern

value has been placed upon him.

religion as

ideal

even the "liberals" imagine.

individuality,

his

His

high ethico-religious

Was uns Jesus hetile ist (Tubingen, 1907, pp. 41 f.). summary of their position is given by Bousset Thcologische Rundschau, IX (1906), 287-302, 327-40,

'

A. Meyer,

'

A

convenient

in the 371-81, 413-24; and by G. B. Smith in the American Journal

of Theology,

XIII

(1909), 92-99.

The Historical Jesus of "Liberal" Theology

29

thought, and the hke, are said to be only

modern

ideas read back into his historic figure.

This process

is

held not to be different in prin-

ciple from that employed

by the

first-century

which most valuable ideas of their should embody the Furthermore this modern "Jesusism" is age. declared to be inadequate to meet the demands Ethically it does not supply of modern life. sufficient values, socially it is not closely enough

interpreters in constructing a Christology

in

touch with present-day conditions,

lectually

it

ignores

metaphysical

and philosophical problems

intel-

questions

with

general

in

too easy a conscience.

And

then come the extremists

wipe the historical Jesus entirely

They

who would

off

the slate.

subscribe to the objections raised above,

combining and supplementing them

in a

way

to prove, they think, that Jesus never lived.

The conservative

theologians also unite with

these extreme radicals in contending that the historical Jesus

whom modern

critical

study

have supplied to primitive His personinitial incentive.

posits never could

Christianity ality

is

its

too shadowy, too ordinary, to have

exerted so unique an influence

be greatly enlarged.

But

—

in

his figure

what

must

direction

The

3©

Historicity of Jesus

enlargement be made

shall the

conservatives and radicals

parting of

ways.

the

At

?

come

this point

to

a sharp

The former maintain

that a genuinely historical Jesus must be identiAvith

fied

the

latter hold that

real

supernatural

an alleged

Christ,

historical Jesus

the

must

give place to the fanciful image of a mythical

Wlien the conservatives

Christ.

rejoice over

the fate which the Jesus of liberal theology has

met

at the hands of these

modern

radicals,

they

would seem to be sounding the death knell of own christological views. For if the earthly Jesus must go, how much more completely must any supposed reality of a supernatural Christ be abandoned! Indeed he is denied existence by the very presuppositions their

of

the

Jesus

radicals' is,

thought,

at least

while

ostensibly,

the

earthly

argued out of

existence.

Hence an attempt from the conservative point of view to refute the particular t>'pe of denial

at

present urged against Jesus'

toricity could in the nature of the case

to but

little

more than the

his-

amount

assertion of one set

of presuppositions as over against another set.

no common ground on which arguments pro and contra may rest. One view places There

is

The Historical Jesus of "Liberal" Theology

31

on supernaturalism, the other dismisses supernaturahsm before argumenta-

primary

stress

tion begins. if

Therefore, for practical purposes,

on no other grounds,

the opposition at

its

own

it is

desirable to

point of attack.

meet

And

since denial of Jesus' existence proceeds directly

against the so-called liberal interpretation, the

most immediate and practical question is. Can his existence be successfully defended from the "liberal" theology's is

the present problem.

own

position?

This

CHAPTER

II

THE MYTHICAL CHRIST OF RADICAL CRITICISM

The modern without the

of

its

denial of Jesus' historicity

antecedents.

As

writers classed Christianity

not

early as the end

century

eighteenth

is

certain

among

French

the mythical

and Jesus' person took on a correspondingly shadowy form.' Both Judaism and Christianity were explained as religions of antiquity,

mainly a composite derived more

of primitive oriental ideas,

from Persia and

particularly

ultimately going back to astral myths.

Germany Bahrdt^ and introduced a skeptical movement in

Contemporaneously Venturini^

in

reaction against the prevailing supernaturalism of current interpretation. '

E.g., Volney, Les

tous les cuUes (Paris, 1794;

verehrung, Leipzig, 1910). n' a

They had no

riiines (Paris, 1791);

German

tr.,

inten-

Dupuis, Origine de

Ursprung der Golles-

Cf. Geneval, Jesus devant Vhistoire

jamais vecu (Geneva, 1874). ^

Briefc

Bibcl im Volkslon. Eine Wochenschrijl von aufdcm Landc (Halle, 1 782) Ausfiihrung dcs Plans

iihcr die

eiiiem Prcdigcr

;

In Briefen an Wahrhcil suchcnde Lcscr (11 vols., Berlin, 1784-92); Die sdmtlicltcn Rcdcn Jesu a us den Evangelisten

und Zwccks Jesu.

ausgezogen (Berlin, 1786). 3

Natiirlichc Geschichle des grossen Prophelen von Nazareth (4

vols.,

Bethlehem [Copenhagen], 1800-2, 32

1806').

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism tion

of

denying Jesus'

reconstruction of his

life

existence,

yet

33 their

so far forsook the

gospel representation as to leave his real historical

form largely a matter of conjecture.

They found

the secret of his career in his connec-

This order was believed have drawn upon Babylonia, Egypt, India, and Greece for secret wisdom. Jesus was not tion with the Essenes. to

only a

member

protege.

its

its secrets,

of this brotherhood,

he was also

In youth he had been trained in and during his public ministry he

was closely in touch with the leading brethren. Thus the Jesus of the gospels is virtually a myth, while the true Jesus was the exponent of this ancient and secret wisdom. This general interpretation has been reproduced in England by Hennell,' in France by Salvator,^ and it has been followed in Germany by von Langsdorf,^ '

An

Inquiry concerning the Origin of Christiajiity (London, Cf. Fiebig,

1838).

"Die Worte Jesu," Die

Christliche Welt, 1911,

26-29, 50-53. '

Jesus-Christ

et

sa doctrine (2 vols., Paris. 1838).

Regla (Desjardin). Jesus de Nazareth au point de vue

Also de historique,

German tr., Jesus von Nazareth, La vie inconnue de Jesus-Christ German tr.. Die Liicke im Lehen Jesu, Stuttgart, tr.. The Unknown Life of Christ, Chicago [no date]);

scientifique et social (Paris, 1891;

Leipzig,

1894);

(Paris, 18943;

1894; English

Bosc,

La

vie esoterique

du Christianisme 3

Notowitsch,

de Jesus de Nazareth

et les

origines orientates

(Paris, 1902).

Wohlgeprilfte Darslellung des Lebens Jesu

(Mannheim, 183 1).

The

34

Ilisloricily of

Jesus

von der Aim (Ghillany)/ and Noack,^ who in turn contribute some items to the views of the modern extremists. Gfrorer,^

Strauss's application of the mythical theory to the gospel narratives

piece

ful

exerted

of

much more master-

a

work and

much

a

is

it

greater

has,

accordingly,

Strauss

influence.

never seems to have doubted Jesus' actual existence, nor did he attempt, after the '

Krilische Geschichle des Urckristenlums

(2

vols.,

manner Stuttgart,

1831-38). '

Theologische Briefe an die Gebildeten der deutschen Nation

(3 vols., Leipzig, 1863); cf. also

Die Urteile heidnischcr und

licher Schrijtslcller der vier erslen christlichcn

Jesus

(ibid.,

christ-

J ahrhunderte

iiher

1864).

i Aus der Jordanwiege nach Golgatha: vier Biicher iiher das Evangelium und die Evangelien (Mannheim, 1870-71); a second edition with changed title, Die Geschichle Jesu auf Grund freier

gcschichtlicher

lien (1876).

anonymous

Untcrsuchungen

Of a similarly publications:

liche Todesarl Jesu.

iiher

das Evangelium und die Evange-

fictitious

character are the following

Wichlige Enthiillungen iiher die ivirk-

Nach einem

alien, zu

Alexandria gejundenen

Manuskriple von einem Zeitgenossen Jesu aus dem heiligen Orden der Essder (Leipzig, 18495);

Hislorische Enthiillungen iiher die

wirklichen Ereignisse der Gehurl

und Jugend Jesu. Als FortUrkunden aus dem

selzung der zu Alexandria aufgefundenen alien

Essaerorden

(Leipzig,

1849');

l^'^*"

Milteilungen eines Zeitgenossen Jesu

und

"''^''

Jesus?

iiher Gehurl,

Aulhentische

Jugend, Leben

Todesarl, sowie iiher die Mutter des Nazareners.

alien,

zu Alexandrien aufgefundenen Manuskriple.

laleinischen Berlin,

1907).

Abschrift des Originals

1906);

iiberselzl

Nach einem Aus einer

(Oranienburg bei

The Crucifixion, by an Eye-Witness (Chicago,

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism of

Bahrdt and Venturini, a Yet

tion of Jesus' figure.

the

35

fanciful rehabilita-

work prepared radicalism, Bruno

his

way for that champion of who has given classic

expression to the

Bauer,

arguments against Jesus' historicity. In the controversy which followed the appearance of Strauss's Life of Jesus, Bauer found himself compelled to oppose the contemporary apologists.

He,

belonged to the

like Strauss,

Hegelian school, from which he derived his notion of the supremacy of the idea. the idea and the reality there antithesis.

goal which

The

idea

men

sight

ultimately apprehend.

is,

as

it

is

Between

a perpetual

were, a fleeing

now and then but never Indeed the idea never

can be perfectly realized in a historic mani-

—

that would mean its death. So Bauer revolted against the current theological method of forcing Jesus' personality into a hard-and-fast system of theology, with the accompanying claim of finality. True religion, for Bauer, is attained by the self-conscious ego setting itself up in antithesis to, and struggling This victory is to triumph over, the world. not to be won through violence, through man's festation

fighting

against Nature,

miracle implies;

it is

as

the doctrine

of

brought about by man's

The Historicity of Jesus

36 realization

of

own

his

personality.

"Spirit

does not bluster, rave, storm, and rage against

Nature as a denial of

is

tion

be

inner law, but

its

way through thesis of

implied in miracle

the antithesis."

—

would be works its own

it

this

A

which men are conscious

between God and man, and overcome not by external

through an inward triumph of in his inner consciousness has

second antiis

the separa-

this too is to

means,

spirit.

but

One who

brought about the

synthesis of this double antithesis has attained

genuine religion.

Under these circumstances it is scarcely surprising that Bauer should protest against what must have seemed to him the false and grossly externalizing features in the theological think-

At the outset he apparently

ing of his day.

had no thought

of

historical Jesus.

what seemed

to

denying the existence of a

He aimed

rather to exhibit

him the falsehood and

intellect-

ual dishonesty of the apologetic methods used

by the critical ties

to

critics of Strauss. So he began a examination of the gospels, the authori-

which

the

theologians

support of their position.

Bauer

appealed first

in

demon-

strated, as he thought, that the picture of Jesus

given in the Fourth Gospel was not historical

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

37

but was a creation of primitive theological reflection.^

Attention was next directed to the

where the recent conclusions of Weisse and Wilke as to the priority of Mark were adopted. But if Mark was the main Synoptists,

source for the

first

and third

the united testimony of reality the testimony of

all

evangelists, then

three gospels

untrustworthy.

The

in

one witness only; and

upon further examination

this

is

Gospel

of

thought to be merely a literary

also

proved

Mark was fiction,

the

product of an original evangelist's theological reflections.

were to be

A

Consequently

all

three Synoptists

set aside as entirely unhistorical.^

similar result attended Bauer's study of the

Pauline

The

literature.^

were

epistles

all

so-called

products of the second century a.d. ingly

all

He was merely '

Pauline

found to be pseudonymous Accord-

evidence for Jesus' existence vanished.

not Christianity's founder;

its fictitious

he was

product.

Kritik der evangclischoi Geschichtc des Johannes (Bremen,

1840). ^

Krilik der evangelischen Geschichtc der Synoptiker (3 vols.,

Leipzig, 1841-42); ihrcs 3

Ursprimgs

2d

ed., Kritik der

(2 vols., Berlin,

Kritik der paulinischen Briefe.

1850-52).

Evangelien und Geschichie

1850-51).

In drei Abteilungen (Berlin,

The Historicity of Jesus

38

How

then did the new

movement

originate

?

In answering this question Bauer allowed his

fancy free play/ the

new

The absence

of reference to

religion in the non-Christian writings

of the first century

was

cited as e\ddence of its

was a gradual outcome of conGraeco-Roman world of the first and second centuries a.d. In general the Stoics, and particularly Seneca, had attained a consciousness of the antithesis between man and the world; and conditions under Nero and Domitian, especially wdth the introduction of neo-Platonic ideas, showed a marked development in the spiritual history of humanity. Moreover in this period Judaism was being denationalized, as in the case of Philo and Josephus, and thus its spiritual solution for the antithesis between God and man was made

late origin.

It

ditions prevailing in the

available for the gentile world.

In this

new type of thought arose which name Christianity a compound

—

neo-Platonism and Judaism. andria were

its

two

centers,

a

received the of Stoicism,

Rome and

and

way

it first

.Alex-

attracted

public notice in the time of Trajan.

Bauer's '

results

finally

Chrislus and die Cacsaren.

Dcr

passed

almost

un-

Urspriiiig dcs Chrislcntums

ans dem romischcn Griechcnlum (Berlin, 1877, 1879').

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

39

work

noticed, yet the fundamental lines of his

are not so very different from those followed

by the modern radicals. Summarized, the main items of his criticism are: (i) emphasis upon definite speculative presuppositions, (2) an unqualified treatment of the New Testament books as tendency writings, (3) stress upon the lack of non-Christian evidence for the existence of Christianity in the first century, belief that all factors necessary to

and

(4)

a

account for

the origin of Christianity without reference to

a historical Jesus can be found in the

life

of the

ancient world.

Within the

last

decade doubts about Jesus'

existence have been advanced in several quarters,'

but nowhere so insistently as in Germany.

There the skeptical movement has become a regular propaganda.^ '

E.g., in

The present

America by W. B. Smith;

in

status of

England by

J.

M.

Robertson, Mead, Whittaker; in Holland by Bolland; in France

by Virolleaud {La

du Christ, Paris, 1908); in Italy by mai esistilo, Milan, 1904); in Poland by Germany by Kalthoff, Jensen. Drews, Lublinski, legende

Bossi {Gcsii Christo non

Niemojewski; in

and ^

phy

e

several others. Its foremost

champion

is

in Karlsruhe Technical

Arthur Drews, professor of philoso-

High School.

of his Christusmylhc in 1909 the subject has

public

by means

Since the appearance

been kept before the

of debates held in various places, particularly at

some important university centers such as Jena, Marburg, Giessen, Leipzig, Berlin.

In these debates Jesus' historicity has

The Historicity of Jesus

40

this contention for a purely

mythical Jesus

will

perhaps best be understood by observing some of its typical forms.

The

late Albert Kalthoff, a pastor in

and at one time president bund," revived the \iews

The

modifications.

Kalthoff 's view

He

idea.'

his

is

of the

of

"Monisten-

Bauer with

distinctive

slight

feature

emphasis upon

strongly against

reacts

Bremen

of

the social the

indi-

vidualism of modern Christianity, a feature in been defended by various New Testament scholars of the first rank. A debate which attracted special attention was held at Berlin under the direction of the " Monistenbund " on the evenDrews and von Soden ings of January 31 and February i, 1910. led opposite sides of the discussion, of which the complete stenographic report is published as Berliner Religionsges prdch: Hal Jesus gcJeht? (Berlin and Leipzig, 1910). The literature called forth by the general controversy is already large and is still increasing. '

Das

Beilrdgc

GruudHuien zii einer Sozialthcologie Die Entslehiing des Chrislentums: Neue

Chrislits-Problcm:

(Leipzig, 1902, 1903');

zum

Christus problem (Leipzig, 1904).

interest of Nieuwenhuis, tische

Das Leben

Abhandlung zur Aujkldrimg des

Jesii:

Cf.

the similar

Eiiie historisch-kri-

arbeite>iden Volkes (Biele-

1893), who thinks Jesus' existence may be questioned. Kalthoff's position was opposed, e.g., by Thikotter, Kalthoffs

feld,

Schrijt

"Das

Christiis problem^' beleuehtet

and Dr.

Kalthojfs Replik

(Bremen, 1903; cf. Kalthoff, D. Thikotter und das Christiisproblem: Einc RepHk, Bremen, 1903); Tschirn, Hat Christus iiberhaupt geJebt? (Bamberg, 1903); Boussct,Tra5 wissen u'ir von Jesus? Vorlrdge im Protestantenverein zu Bremen (Halle, 1904; cf. Kalthoff, Tl'as zcissen wir von Jesus? Einc Abrechnung bcleuchlel

mit Professor Boussel in Gottingen, Berlin, 1904); Kapp, Das Christus- und Christentums problem bei KalthoJJ (Strassburg, 1905); Titius, Der Bremer Radikalismus (Tiibingen, 1908).

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

41

his opinion not to

be found in the primitive

form

Originally Christianity

of this faith.

purely a socio-religious or socio-ethical

ment

and

of the masses,

so free

was move-

from individual-

ism that the notion of a personal founder was itself

wanting.

An

Jesus

may have

lived about the opening of our

era,

by the name

of

but he had no unique significance for the

rise of

the

new

was the seat

religion.

time

Not Judea but Rome

of its origin;

Jewish messianism,

and the communistic clubs

Stoic philosophy,

the

individual

supplied

its

source

elements;

of its

was a poetic creation projecting into the past the more immediate experiences of the

literature

present,

dying,

as

and

when

the picture of a suffering,

rising

Christ

typified

the

com-

own life of persecution and martyrdom. The gospel Jesus was created for practical

munity's

purposes, thus giving a concrete and so a more

permanent form

new

the '

to the principles

and

ideals of

faith.'

Socialists of Losinsky's

type

(cf.

his

Waren

die Urchrislen

wirklich Sozialistcn? Berlin, 1907) deny that Christianity has any significance for socialism; others hold more nearlj^ to the views

though their method of handling the alleged historical not always quite so radical. For example, Kautsky, Der Ursprimg des Christentums (Stuttgart, 1908), also "Jesus der Rebell" in Die neue Zeil, XXVIII (19 10, 13-17, 44-52), treats the Christian literature with so free a hand as to make Jesus a

of Kalthoff

Jesus

is

,

The

42

Ilisloricity of

Jesus

Other investigators draw more largely upon the religions of the ancient Orient for data to

As compared

explain the rise of Christianity.

with the reconstructions of Bauer and Kalthoff this

method usually

and

a different

new

faith.

results in

an

earlier date

provenance for the origin of the

While the representatives

of

the

religionsgeschichtliche school are usually content

with maintaining that the gospel accounts of Jesus

are

more or

less

by the

heightened

introduction of foreign elements/

many

of its

and social revolutionist, a typical "Marxist." For a Kautsky see Windisch, Der messianische Krieg und das Urchrislenkim (Tubingen, 1909) and "Jesus ein Rebell?" in Evangel isch-Sozial, 19 10, 33-44. IMaurenbrechcr, Von Nazareth political

reply to

nach Golgalha:

Eine Unlcrsiichimg

iiber

die

weUgeschichUichen

Zusammcnhdnge des Urchristcntums (Schoneberg-Berlin, 1909) and Von Jerusalem nach Rom: Weilere Untcrsuchungen iiber die weltgeschichtlichcn Zusammenhdnge des Urchristentiims {ibid., 1910) takes the sources more seriously than Kautsky does, yet he assigns no very serious role to the historical Jesus as the founder of He actually existed, for his life and death were the Christianity. indispensable incentive for the new religion, but the real secret of its origin is itself

the activity of the Son of

upon the person

Man myth

of Jesus after his death,

which fLxed which the Jesus had not

and

in

hopes of the common people found expression. put himself forward as Messiah. He had spoken of the Son of Man, whose coming he believed to be near at hand, only in the third person. Jesus was moved mainly by the proletarian The instinct, which also dominated the thinking of the disciples. giving of themselves to this ideal after Jesus' death was the birth-

day '

of Christianity.

Cf.

Clemen, Religionsgeschichtliche

Erkldrung

Testaments (Giessen, 1909) for a convenient literature.

des

Keiien

summary

of the

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

43

made to serve the who argue against Jesus'

conclusions can readily be interests

of

historicity.

those

The

sentation of the

New Testament repreand thought of primitive

entire life

Christianity becomes for these interpreters a

congeries of ideas

and practices borrowed from This general principle

the ancient religions. for solving the

problem

is

applied in several

different ways. J.

of

M. Robertson, who

"naturalism"

writes in the interests

against

as

"credulity

and

organized ecclesiasticism," thinks to prove that the gospels' account of both the

teaching of Jesus

myths. ^

Two

is

life

and the

a composite of pagan

lines of

evidence for this con-

clusion are, (i) the character of the "Jesus"

whom

Paul knows, who

is

not a Jesus of action

and teaching but a "speechless sacrifice"; and (2) the certainty with which everything in the gospels can be paralleled in pagan mythology. Constructively, the germ of Christianity may supposably be a primitive Semitic belief in a Palestinian Savior-Sun-God, Joshua the son of

the mythical Miriam, that

is,

Jesus the son of

^Christianity and Mythology (London, 1900); third part, Die

EvangeUemnylhen (Jena, 1910);

Christianity (London, 1902); tive

Pagan

Hierology (London, 1903).

A

German

tr.

of

Short History of Christs; Studies in Compara-

The Historicity of Jesus

44

Mary.

Thus

Christianity

primitive cult. tion of

Its

"Jesus"

ultimately

is

may

a

be a recollec-

some vague figure such as Jesus ben of the Talmud, put to death for anti- Judaic teachings, and of whom

Pandera probably

the epistles of Paul preserve only the tradition

But the more important part

of his crucifixion. is

played by the Joshua- Jesus god of the

cult.'

Jensen determines more specifically than Robertson does the source from which the

myth-making fancy

of

thought to have taken

the gospel writers

its start.

He

is

holds that

the careers of both Jesus and Paul, as recorded in the

variant

New

Testament, are reproductions in

form

Gilgamesh.

the

of

The proof

Babylonian legend of for this position is

in a series of similarities in content

found

and form

which appear on comparing the Gilgamesh epic with the gospels and the Pauline epistles."" While Jensen, in his reply to

Jiilicher, protests

This notion of a pre-Christian Jesus has been argued somehesitatingly by Mead, and with strong conviction by W. B. Smith. It has been adopted also by BoUand, Drews, Niemo'

what

and others. Das Gilgamesch-Epos

jewski, '

in der WeUUteratur (Strassburg, 1906;

see especially pp. 811-1030); Moses, Jesus, Paulas: Drci Varianlen des babylonischcn GoUmeuschen Gilgamesch (Frankfurt, 1909);

Hal der Jesus der Evangel ien wirklich Prof.

Dr. Jiilicher (Frankfurt,

geleU? Vorlrag gehalten 1910.)

zti

1910;

Marburg am

Bine Antworl an Hat Jesus Mdrz 1910, Marburg,

gclebl? cf. i.

Jiilicher,

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism against being classed

among

those

who

45 deny-

absolutely the existence of a historical Jesus, his position

says:

"Of

is,

in effect, the

same as

He

theirs.

the career of the alleged founder of

Christianity

we know

nothing, or at least as

good as nothing," and "we serve

in our cathe-

and and hut, a Babylonian god, Babylonian gods." All this is due to the remarkable vitality and perpetuative momen-

drals

and houses

of prayer, in our churches

schools, in palace

tum In

of the Gilgamesh-story.

Niemojewski's

mythology

is

tian origins.^

made

bulky

the

volume

main source

astral

of Chris-

This emphasis upon the astral

origin of religious notions

is

a revival of Dupuis'

views, recast under the influence of the

modern

Niemojewski finds that Testament writings are not altogether

school of Winckler.^

the

New

uniform in their representation of Jesus as a '

Gott Jesus

im Lichte fremder

tind eigener

Forschungen sanit

Darstellung der evangelischeii AslralstoJJe, Astralscenen

und

Astral-

systeme (Munich, 1910; from the Polish BogJezus, WarsaWjigog). Cf. also Koch, Die Sage von Jesus dem Sonnengott (Berlin, 191 1).

In the realm of gospel study a novel product of the Winckler may be seen in W. Erbt's Das arcusevangelium: Eine U nlersuchung iiher die Form der Petruserinncrungen mid die GeschicMe der Urgemcinde (Leipzig, 191 1). Mark's story of Jesus' life is thought to be constructed on a solar scheme starting with December 22, when the sun turns again on its upward course in the heavens. Thus Jesus is depicted in the gospel as the renewer. The gospel falls into twenty-eight sections, each representing one ^

school

M

The Historicity oj Jesus

46

mythical personage, except in their consistent

treatment of him as a deity. he

is

In the epistles

nothing other than a variant of Osiris,

Tammuz,

Attis, Adonis.

For Matthew he

is

For Luke the supreme deity is the Sun-god. the sun and his son is the moon. Again the

Holy Spirit is the sun. Various gospel names and characters, as Arimathea, Cyrene, Galilee, Judea, have an astral significance; while Herod the Great, Herod Antipas, Herodias, Salome, are the counterparts respectively of the constellations Hydrus, Scorpio, Cassiopeia, Androm-

eda.

The

cross of Jesus

is

the Milky

Way,

the tree of the world.

Another school

of writers finds the

key to

Christian origins in the activity of a primitive doctrine of "gnosis," or in

some type

of esoteric

by secret cults, mysteries, and similar phenomena in the life of the ancient world. Mead' suggests that such movements teaching fostered

— —

months of the year reckoning Jesus' ministry as two years and four months long and each of these sections pictures Jesus in terms of ideas which the Babylonians connected with the respective months. Peter, it is held, was responsible for It was forsaken when this arrangement of the calendar year. James became head of the church, under whose leadership Christianity reverted to a more distinctly Jewish type of thought. of the twelve

^ Did Jesus Live 100 B.C.? (London and Benares, 1903); cf. the same author's Fragments of a Faith Forgotten (London, 1900; German tr., Fragmenten eines verschollenen Glauhens, Berlin, 1902).

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

47

had already gained a footing within Judaism, Indeed he questions

prior to the Christian era.

the presence of any widespread orthodoxy in

Judaism before the days of the Mishnaic rabbis. The seventy esoteric books of II Esd. 14:46 £f., which contain "the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, and the stream of knowledge," and which are to be delivered only to "the wise

among

the people," are thought to

presuppose for an earlier date the existence of

may

which

esotericists representing tendencies

be traced in Essenism, Therapeutism, Philonism, Hermeticism,

and Gnosticism.

the origins of Christianity

members and ascetic

the pledged

munities

of

May

not

hidden among

lie

these mystic com-

orders

?

Mead

feels

himself compelled to ask this question because of (i) the impossibility of historical certainty

regarding any objective fact in the traditional narratives of Jesus' career, (2) the silence of

extra-Christian A.D.,

and

sources

in

the

first

century

(3) certain obscure data which

seem

absolutely contradictory to the current Christian tradition.

These contradictory data, found

mainly in the Talmud, the "ToPdoth Jeshu,"

and Epiphanius, are thought

to indicate that

the Jesus of gospel tradition really lived about

The Historicity of Jesus

48

He was

100 B.C.

not, however, a very sig-

new can be known

nificant personage for the origin of the

movement. Practically all that him historically is that he was a contemporary of Alexander Jannaeus, that he was called Jeshu^ ben Pandera (and sometimes ben Stada), that he had spent some time in Egypt, and that he belonged to one of the secret communities from which he was expelled for teaching its wisdom The new movement would to non-initiates. probably never have arisen out of reverence for of

this historical person, since the basal

new

of the

faith

In

mystery."

was the its

"drama

literature

thought

of the Christ-

Jesus

appears

merely as one of the characters for a "historical

romance" actual

common

and as was haggada and

into which allegories, parables,

mystery in

doings

the

woven,

are

methods

of

apocal>'ptic of that day.

The "common docu-

ment"

about 75

of the gospels arose

a.d.,

but our

present gospels are second-century products.^

Paul '

is

a genuine historical

The Talmud

in distinction

originally the ^

Cf.

usuallj'

writes

ITT"'

character w^ho

when speaking

of Jesus,

from ynU"' (Joshua), though the two names are

same

in

Hebrew.

Mead, The Gospels aud

the Gospel:

A

Study in

the

Most

Recent Results of the Lower and the Higher Criticism (London, 1902).

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

49

wrote the principal letters traditionally assigned to him, but he

is

fundamentally interested in

the Christ-mystery, a gnostic type of faith.

Moreover, when his

letters are read aright

they

show that he was writing to communities which had existed before his day and were already familiar with gnostic nomenclature. Thus before Paul's time pre-Christian Christianity

was

in existence not only in Palestine

but also

in the Diaspora,

W.

B. Smith likewise holds that Christianity

arose out of a Jesus-cult existing in the

century b.c'

From

that

concerning

baptism

John,"

of

taught

Apollos

18:25, things

Jesus it

is

first

statement of Acts

the

carefully

knowing only

"the the

inferred that Apollos

was not yet a "Christian," but that he was an enthusiastic Jesus-sect,

missionary of the pre-Christian

which at the time was particularly

strong in Alexandria.

But

this cult

strong in other centers, and Cyprus to

is

was

also

thought

have been the place whence that form of the which came to be known as Christianity

cult

took

its start.

Yet

it

Christianity arose from

must not be said that any one center; it was

^ Der vorchristliche Jesus (Gicssen, 1906, 1911^); Ecce Deus: Die urchristliche Lehre des reingotllkhen Jesu (Jena, 191 1).

50

The Historicity of Jesus

multifocal.

The "things concerning Jesus"

should not be understood, information

human a

about

the

claimed, as

is

earthly

career

of

a

Jesus, but as a doctrine about a divinity,

The

Savior-god.

emphasis

its

feature

characteristic

primitive Christianity,

was

it

of

fundamental essence,

its

upon

monotheism;

the

anthropomorphized Jesus-god of the New Testament writings is a secondary product. This

was very timely. It answered to the broader outlook which the unification of empire under Alexander and under the Romans had brought about, and it also met monotheistic

teaching

the needs of the masses

who longed

for deliver-

ance from the enslaving forces in the thought

and

life

But

of their world.

could not at

this

new teaching

be openly propagated \\ithout

first

incurring the danger of disastrous opposition,

consequently the

new

religion appears first as

a secret cult mediating to

its initiates

edge of the true God.

Now

knowledge

God was

problem

of the highest

of

Gnosticism,

the knowl-

this search for

virtually the

accordingly

many

gnostic notions have contributed to the formation of the

New

Testament thought.

Bolland, professor of philosophy in Leiden,

makes even more

of gnostic speculation as a

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

5

Encouraged

factor in the rise of Christianity.

by his behef that Vatke by philosophical inquiry in 1835 really anticipated the

outcome

of later

study upon the Pentateuch, BoUand thinks that he,

by applying a similar type

lation to the

problem

pronounce the

As a

final

of Hegelian specu-

of Christian origins,

word upon

this

can

subject.

result of his " philosophic vrij onderzoek,"

Christianity

is

found to be an evolution of

Judeo-gnostic ideas starting from Alexandria

and gradually spreading north and west. The Christian Jesus is merely an allegorical rehabilitation of the Old Testament Joshua,^ the successor of Moses,

who

led the people into the

Hence the appropriateness of the Jesus- Joshua name, since both etymologically and traditionally it stands for God's salvation. The gospels, which announce the coming of the true Joshua, are a product of

land of promise.

^Het Bijdrage 1906);

eerste tot

De

Evangelie in het Licht van Oiide gegevens:

Eene

de Wordings geschiedenis des Christendoms (Leiden,

evangelische Jozua:

Eene Poging

tot

Aanwijzing van den

Oorsprong des Christendoms (Leiden, 1907); 2d ed., Het Evangelie: Eene "vernieuwde" Poging tot Aanwijzing van den Oorsprong des Christendoms

(ibid.,

1910).

Also Gnosis

en

Evangelie:

Eene

Het Lijden en Sterven van Jezus Christ us (1907); De Achtergrond der Evangelien: Eene Bijdrage tot de Kennis van de Wording des Christendoms (1907). Cf. de Zwaan, historische Studie (1906);

"De

Oorsprong des Christendoms volgens Prof. Bolland," Theolo-

gisch Tijdschrijt,

XLV

(191 1), 38-87, 119-78.

The Historicity of Jesus

52

the allegorizing exegesis of Alexandria

a Jesus-romance.

Traces

—^purely

gnostic notions

of

New

are discovered throughout the

Testament

In the gospels, for example, these

literature.

appear in the parable of the sower, in Jesus' statement that God only is good, in the saying

about truth revealed unto babes, in the confession of Peter, in the miracle narratives, in the passion earliest

form

and resurrection

of gospel tradition

stories.

and

The

to be seen

is

in certain non-canonical fragments, particularly in the so-called Gospel of the Eg}^tians,

This was later

andrian proto-Mark.

an Alex-

re- worked,

perhaps in Rome, to produce the Judaistic

Matthew, the

Hellenistic Luke, the neutral

universalistic

Mark.

resents

Gnosticism,

and

was

all

Here Bolland

is

in line

Dutch criticism, instance by Van Manen.^

and rep-

Alexandrian written

at

spurious and are

Rome

clerical circles in

school of

'

of

probably

Paul's letters are

products of A.D.

form

Samaritan

a

Ephesus.

The Fourth Gospel

about 135

with the extreme

as represented for

Whittaker {The Origins of Christianity, London, 1904, 1909'),

adopting Van Manen's conclusions regarding the spuriousness of all the Pauline letters, pushes his doubts almost to the point of

denying Jesus' existence.

All the

New

Testament books are

placed in the 2d century, following a jjcriod of oral myth-making

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism the

Lublinski,

Weimar

late

an

traces Christianity to

Schriftsteller,

original pre-Christian

gnostic sect/ but this sect

and did not

53

was

differentiate itself

strictly

Jewish

from Judaism

until after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70

According to Lublinski, gnostic tendencies

A.D.

must have been

from the time of the Persian supremacy on, and the Jews cannot have escaped this influence. It pervaded the whole culture of the ancient world. With it came theosophy, mystery religion, secret cults, and the like. Its actual circulating in the Orient

presence in Judaism

is

thought to be seen in

such sects as the Essenes, the Therapeutes, the Gnostics of Justin, the Naassenes, and similar

movements

of

preserved.

Of such an origin was Christianity.

But

which no records have been

gnostic thought could hardly concern itself

primarily with a man-deity, Jesus; in the ist century.

the Christian

It

was not

movement began

it

and at the same time Before that

cannot be said that Christianity existed, except as a vague

messianic

may

first

until after the year 70 a.d. that

to appear,

the story of Jesus' Hfe and death was formulated.

date

its

movement

associated with

some obscure

cult.

Jesus

not be an entirely fictitious person, yet the gospel stories are

almost wholly mythical. '

Der

urchrislliche Erdkreis

und sein Mythos: I, Die Entstehung KuUur; II, Das werdcnde Dogma

des Christenlums aus der anliken

vom

Lehcii

Jesu (Jena, 1910).

The Historicity of Jesus

54

interest could only be in a divine nature, Christ.

Hence the Jesus

and the story

of gospel history

of his followers in the first century are creations

of mythical fancy.

Drews has absorbed, perhaps more thoroughly than any of the other extremists, the main features of these radical positions.' The five theses

which he presented

for discussion at

the Berlin conference are a very good epitome of his position 1.

Before

:^

the

existed already

and a cult goes back

Jesus

of

the

among Jewish

gospels

there

sects a Jesus-god

of this

god which

to the

Old Testament Joshua, and

in all probability

with this were blended on the one hand Jewish apocalyptic ideas and on the other the heathen

notion of a dying and rising divine redeemer. 2.

Paul, the oldest witness for Christianity,

knows nothing

of a

incarnated Son of

"historical" Jesus.

God

is

His

that Jewish-

just

heathen redeeming divinity Jesus

whom

Paul

' Die Chrisliismythc (Jena, 1909, 1910^; English tr., The Christ Myth, London and Chicago, 191 1); Die Christiismythe: II. Teil,

Die Zcugnisse fiir die Gcschichtlichkeit Jesic

Eine Anlwort an die

Schrijtgclehrteii mit besoitderer BcriicksicliligtDig dcr theologischen

Mclhode (Jena, 191 1);

cf.

also

Die Pelntslegende: Ein Beitragzur

Mythologie des Christciitiims (Frankfurt, 1910). '

Berliner Religionsgesprdch, p. 34.

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

55

merely set in the center of his rehgious world-

^dew and elevated to a higher degree of ethical reflection.

religio-

.

3. The gospels do not contain the history of an actual man, but only the myth of the god-

man

Jesus clothed in historical form, so that

not only the Israelitish prophets along with the

Old Testament types Elijah, Elisha, etc.,

notions

the

of

Jews'

concerning belief in

made

a Moses,

of the Messiah,

but also certain mythical heathen

neighbors

the redeeming

their contribution to the

divinity

"history" of

that Jesus. 4.

With this method of explanation an " undis-

coverable" remainder which cannot be derived

from the sources indicated this relates

may

still exist,

yet

only to secondary and unimportant

matters which do not affect the religious belief in

Jesus;

while on the contrary

that

all

is

important, religiously significant, and decisive in this faith, as the

Baptism, the Lord's Supper,

the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection of Jesus, is

borrowed from the cult-symbolism

mythical Jesus, and owes historical fact

its

of

the

origin not to a

but to the pre-Christian

belief in

the Jewish-heathen redeeming divinity. 5.

The

"historical" Jesus, as determined

by

The Historicity of Jesus

56

any rate of so doubtand faded a form that faith in

the critical theology, ful, intangible,

him cannot

is

at

possibly longer be regarded as the

indispensable condition of religious salvation.

Thus modern mythical

radical

Christ

over

up

criticism sets

against

the

historical

Jesus of liberal theology.

While there

variety in the details, the

main

is

much

outlines of the

They

radicals' contention are clearly defined. all

its

agree in treating the evidence for a historical

Jesus as wholly unreliable.

This involves in

most instances the h>pothesis of a secondcentury date for the New Testament writings. Robertson, Mead, and Drews hold to the genuineness of the principal Pauline

letters,^

yet they so read them as to find there no proof for

Jesus'

Much

existence.

stress is usually

placed upon the paucity of the non-Christian references to the

new

founder in the

century a.d.

first

religion

and

its

On the positive

a theory of Christianity's origin

side,

structed out of

alleged

is

con-

more obscure and remote data life and thought of the ancient

gleaned from the world.

Although at

this point there are

wide

variations in the items chosen, the choice

W. tion;

cf.

is

B. Smith seems at present to be vacillating on this ques-

Eccc Dciis,

p. 150.

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

by a uniform

regulated

principle,

57

namely, ideas

not persons are the significant factors in the

As a

origin of a religion.

corollary of this

principle, it follows that a Christ-idea, not a historical Jesus,

is

the primal formative element

in the genesis of Christianity.

any unique

Not only can

founder be dispensed

historical

with, but this possibility proves so alluring that his

person

history.

forthwith eliminated from the

is

Consequently the

liberal theologians'

contention for the significance of Jesus, both as a figure in the past

the

seems

present,

and

for the

the

to

thought of wholly

radicals

fallacious.

Thus ultimately peared at

first

problem, which ap-

this

sight to be purely historical, a

question of gathering data and testing their reliability,

reaUy involves the interpretation of

the data in terms of presuppositions as to the

nature of religious origins, and especially as to the

nature

of

primitive

Christianity.

these presuppositions are inseparably

with the question of what for

religion

today.

Not

is

vitally

all

And

bound up important

writers

of

the

radical school recognize this fact so clearly as

does

Drews

—at

least

they

rarely

express

themselves so clearly on this phase of the

TJic Ilisloricily of

58

Jesus

In closing the Berlin debate he asked

subject.

two questions which he regards as fundamental:

What

the secret of Christianity's origin in

is

the light of which

it

can be revitalized for

modern times? and What can Christ be today? appeal

the

for

recognition

of

of the divine

is

It is not

significance of the Christ-myth. historical Jesus

to us

an the supreme

His reply to both questions

a

but Christ as an idea, an idea

humanity, which explains the

rise

of Christianity

and makes possible

revitalization.

Furthermore, in his preface to

modern

its

the Christusmythe Drews declares that the book was written "directly in the interests of religion from the conviction that the forms hitherto prevailing

are

no

longer

sufficient

for

the

present, that especially the 'Jesusism' of the

modern theology is fundamentally irreligious and itself presents the greatest hindrance to true religious progress."^

all '

Similarly in his second volume

"Der Kampf um die Freiheit

und

die

Drews emphasizes

Christusmythe

Kampf um

zugleich ein

this idea:

Kampf um

Selbstiindigkeit des niodernen Gcisteslebens,

die Unabhiingigkeit der Wissenschaft

Der Kampf um

ist

die 'Christusmj'the'

die Religion.

um

und Weltanschauung ist

Allc Religion

aber audi zugleich ein ist

ein

Leben aus den

Tiefen des eigenen unmittelbarcn Selbst hcraus, ein Wirken im Geist

und

in

der Freiheit.

Allcr religiose Fortschritt voUzieht

sich in der Verinncrlichung des Glaubcns, in der

Verlegung des

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism

59

This opposition to the "theologians" sometimes induces a polemical tone which tends

main

to obscure the

issues of the problem.^

becoming mere It is an obvious fact that the champions of this modern radicalism have not approached their task as

Argument

is

in

specialists

danger

in

pleading

special

the

of

a

for

"cause."

early

of

field

history, nor are they thoroughly

use the tools of that science.

Christian

equipped to

Not only

so,

but they deliberately discard those tools and

condemn the methods

of the historical theo-

logian as unscientific, because he allows Jesus

an especially significant place and refuses to push critical skepticism to what they regard the logical issue existence.

—that

is,

the denial of Jesus'

This animosity toward the theo-

logian sometimes leads to a misunderstanding, or even to a misrepresentation, of his position.

For example, Drews's

fifth

thesis

implies

a

Schwerpunktes des Seins aus der objektiven in die subjektive Welt, in der vertrauensvollen Hingabe an den Gott in uns (p. cf Drews, Die Religion ah Selbst-Bewusstsein Gottes, xviii f ;

.

.

Jena, 1906). '

Cf. Steudel,

Wir

Gelehrten

Professor D. von Sodens

Im Kampf um

die Christusmylhe.

besondere mil J. Weiss, P. (Jena, 1910),

vom Fach! Eine

"Hat Jesus

W.

Streitschrift gegen

gelebt?" (Frankfurt, 1910),

Eine Auseinandersetzung insA Ilarnack, D, Chwolson

Schmiedel,

,

6o

TJic Historicity of

Jesus

criticism of the "critical theology"

hardly just,

the

if

representatives

Nor

Germany.

study

in

again

insinuates,

that

is

to

leading

Testament

critical

reference

New

of

which

is it

these

is

true, as

Drews

scholars

think

today is to be explained and established "only through textual criticism in a philological

religion

They hold

way.'"

critical text,

Jesus,

the

the

in

number

of

neither that an accurate

nor that faith in a "historical" sense

of

doctrines

essentials

of

accepting any given

about him, constitutes

religion.

It

seems

very

evident, however, that one feature of the pres-

ent radical movement, and one which looms

many

large in the vision of

of its advocates,

is

a

hatred for "theology" and the "theologians."^

While

this

bitterness

by

aggravated

the

has,

doubtless,

scathing

been

denunciations

which the radicals have sometimes received at the hands of their opponents, its fundamental ground

is

nificance

the question of shall

be

what

attached

'

Berliner Religionsgesprdch, pp. 93

'

Drews

to

religious sig-

Jesus.

The

f.

expresses his sentiments thus (parodying Luther)

—

die Welt voll T hcologen war' uns gar verschlingcn, so fiirchten wir uns nicht so sehr: es soil uns dock gelingen!"

"Und wenn und

wollt'

The Mythical Christ of Radical Criticism "

my thologists "

be

6i

are determined that this shall

nil.

Under these circumstances our present task involves not only a critical estimate of the

by a constructive the extent and worth of the

negative arguments, followed

statement of historical

also

a

evidence

for

some consideration

historical

personage

Jesus'

existence, but

of his significance as

for

perpetuation of our religion.

the

origin

and

CHAPTER

III

AN ESTIMATE OF THE NEGATIVE ARGUMENT: ITS TREATMENT OF THE TRADITIONAL EVIDENCE Until recently the arguments of the extrem-

have been more generally ignored than

ists

criticized.

Very

little

attention

was paid

to

Bauer's work, Kalthoff's views were dismissed

by the world of New Testament scholarship, Robertson, Mead, Smith, and Jensen were hardly taken seriously, and a

rather summarily

similar fate awaited others of like opinion until

Drews appeared upon the scene. He has been more successful than his predecessors in arousing critical opposition, and this criticism has

come from field

this

of

several scholars of first rank in the

New

success

Testament study.

In view of

Drews congratulates himself on

having "hit the bull's-eye."

For the most part these refutations are

in

the form of published addresses or popular lectures, pointing out the defects of the radical

and restating the case for Jesus' historicity from the standpoint of modern critical scholarship. But these criticisms do not repre-

position

62

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

sent merely one phase or one school of

thinking;

63

modern

they emanate from various sources.

Even a Jewish rabbi has come forward defense of Jesus

'

in

though

historical personality,^

Jewish interest in this subject would naturally not be great. Nor would

it

be strange

if

Roman

Catholic scholars should dismiss this question,

on which the authority so clearly, without

work

of the

church speaks

serious discussion.

like that of Meffert^

shows an appreci-

ation of the problem and meets

from the Catholic point

Yet a

of view.

it

strongly,

The more

conservative type of Protestant thought, repre-

sented

for

example

by Dunkmann,^ while

sympathizing with the extremists' condemnation of the "liberal" interpretation of Jesus,

stoutly maintains a historical basis for

Even

Christ of faith.

the

recent writers of the

religions geschichtliclie school are quite unwilling

to carry skepticism to its extreme

limit.''

G. Klein, 1st Jesus eine hisiorische Personlichkeil? (Tubingen, from the Swedish, Aer Jesus en hislorisk personlighet? Stockholm, 19 lo). '

1910;

^

Die geschichlliche Existcnz Christl (Munich, 1904, 1910^).

3

Der

historische Jesus, der mythologische Christus iind

Jesus der

Christ (Leipzig, 1910). 4

Cf.

Zimmern, Ziim

Streil

um

die "Christusmythe":

Das baby-

Hauptpunkten dargestelU (Berlin, 1910) Evangelium (Tubingen, 1910); Jeremias,

lonische Material in seinen

Bruckner, Das fiinfle Hal Jesus Christus gelebt? (Leipzig, 191 1).

The Historicity of Jesus

64

As was to be expected, however, the chief opponents of the " my thologists " belong to the so-called

school

liberal

Von Soden

replied to

of

Drews

modern theology. at the Berlin con-

and he also issued a small pamphlet' which he sought to show the value of the

ference, in

Christian evidence and to exhibit the defects

opponents'

the

of

ture,"

position.

though written with special reference to

Jensen's

radicalism,

gives

the views of opponents

statement of the tion.

lec-

Jiilicher's

less

attention

to

than to a positive

reliability of Christian tradi-

After defining the nature of "historical"

upon the worth of our sources information and condemns Jensen 's methods

proof, he dwells of

erroneous

as

scientifically.

Especially

note-

of the radical

movement

as a

whole are made by Weinel,^

Weiss,''

and

worthy surveys

^

Hat Jesus

gelebt?

Aus den

J.

geschichtlichen Urkiinden beani-

wortet (Berlin, 1910). '

Hal Jesus geleU? (Marburg,

igio).

^Ist das "liber ale" Jesusbild widerlegt? seine " positiven"

und

Eine Antwort an

seine radikalen Gegner mil besonderer Riick-

auf A. Drews, Die Chrislusmythe (Tubingen, 1910; enlarged from the same author's "1st unsere Verkiindigung von Jesus unhaltbar geworden?" Zeilschrifl fUr Theologie und Kirche,

sicht

XX

[1910], 1-38, 89-129). *

Jesus von Nazareth, Mythus oder Geschichte?

Eine Ausein-

andersetzung mit Kalthojff, Drews, Jensen (Tubingen, 1910).

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

65

Each analyzes somewhat minutely

Clemen/

the different phases of the problem, criticizing at length the radical position

against

it

his

and

own understanding

setting over of the valid

Each author

elements of Christian tradition.

has his distinctive purpose, as the subtitles of the several

books indicate, but the writers

are in general agreement

so candidly

as

their

to

They have handled

conclusions.

main

the problem

and thoroughly that the

radicals

can no longer justly complain of inattention.^ ^Der geschichtlicke Jesus:

suchung dcr Frage: hat Jesus

Eine allgemeinverstandliche Untergeleht,

tmd was

wollte er? (Giessen,

1911). '

Further defenses of Jesus' historicity, mostly in pamphlet Beth, Hat Jesus different points of view, are:

form and from

gelchl? (Berhn, 1910);

Bornemann, Jesus

als

Problem (Frankfurt,

1909);

Brephol, Die Wahrheit iiber Jesus von Nazareth (Berlin,

1911);

Broecker, Die Wahrheit

iiber

Jesus (Hamburg, 191 1);

Carpenter, The Historical Jesus and the Theological Christ (Lon-

don, 191 1)

;

Chwolson, Ueber die Frage, ob Jesus

gelebt hat (Leipzig,

Hat Jesus Christus gelebt? (Berlin, 1910); Dietze, Kritische Bemerkungen ziir neuesten Aufage von A. Drews, 1910);

Delbriick,

Christusmythe (Bremen, 1910); Fiebig, Jiidische ten des neulestamentlichen Zeilalters

Wundergeschich-

(Tubingen, 191 1);

macher, Jesusverehrung oder Christusglaube?

Grutz-

(Rostock, 191 1);

Hauck, Hat Jesus gelebt? (Berlin, 1910); Kiihn, 1st Christus eine (Halle a.S., 1910); Loisy, A propos geschichtliche Person? d'histoire des religions (Paris, 1911 chap, v deals with the " Christmyth"); Rossington, Z)J6? Jesus Really Live? A Reply to "The Christ Myth" (London, 191 1); Schmidt, F. J., Der Christus des Glaubens und der Jesus der Geschichte (Frankfurt, 1910) Valensin, ;

;

Jesus-Christ

et I'etude

comparee des religions (Paris, 191 1).

Sur-

The Historicity of Jesus

66

In forming an estimate of the value of the negative argument, there are two important

may

questions which one /

dispose of the

cessfully

traditional

for the origin of Christianity

?

it

suc-

evidence

and, Does

it

sub-

an adequate reconstruction of the hisBruno Bauer, as we have already

stitute /

Does

ask.

tory?

observed, was gradually led to his conclusions

by

his critical

examination of the gospels and

Consequently the formu-

the Pauline epistles. of a

lation

was the process

is

new theory

Christian

of

last stage in his

work.

usually inverted.

The

to a study of the

notion of the

New

way

origins

Today this come

radicals

Testament with a

fixed

Christianity arose, hence

they are not greatly concerned with the Christtian literature except to demonstrate that its

content can be explained in accordance with

This method

their hypothesis.

may

be

legiti-

veys of the literature are made by Bacon in the Hibbert Journal,

IX

XV

(191

1),

731-53;

Case

in the

American Journal

of Theology,

(1911), 20-42; Dibelius in the Theologische Literalurzeilnng,

1910, cols. 545-52, gische Revue,

191

1,

and 1911, cols.

cols. 135-40; Esser in the Theolo1-6 and 41-47; Loisy in the Revue

d'histoire et de lilterature religieuses

(nouvelle seric), I (1910),

401-35; Mehlhorn, Prolestantische Monatslicftc, XIV (1910), 41521 and (1911), 17-27; Muirhead, Review of Theology and Phil-

XV

osophy,

VI

(1911), 577-86

and 633-46; N. Schmidt,

Intern. Journal

of Eihics, X.X.II (191 1), 19-39;

Windisch, Theologische Rundschau

XIII

and

(1910), 163-82, 199-220,

XIV

(191

1),

114-37.

An mate

if

Estimate of the Negative Argument

it

two conditions, namely, if which aside, and if its constructive

satisfies

it

treats fairly the traditional evidence

it

proposes to set

hypothesis

In the

67

is

first

otherwise properly substantiated. place,

ment testimony

is

the explicit

New

Testa-

to the existence of Jesus as a

historical person adequately disposed of

theory that he never lived at

all ?

If

he

on the is

not

a historical character this supposed testimony to his existence

is

either fictitious or else

it

has

commonly been misread. Appeal is sometimes made to each of these possibilities. It

has already been noted that several repre-

modern radical movement think all the New Testament literature is spurious, a late product of theological and literary But the general arguments for this fancy. opinion are open to serious criticism. They commonly ignore, or unceremoniously dismiss, sentatives

all

of

the

external testimony for the early existence

New Testament books. They lay great upon alleged parallelisms between Christianity and earlier or contemporary heathenism,

of the stress

inferring that this proves the secondary char-

acter of the Christian literature. fact of parallelism in

But the mere

even a large number of

points can hardly prove more than the very

The Historicity of Jesus

68

evident fact that the founders of Christianity

were

men

skill in

of their

own

Furthermore

age.

this

discovering parallels often seems greatly-

overworked, while the distinctive features of Christianity are unduly minimized.

the

New

gnostic

if

nomenclature, or appropriated ideas

and terms it is

Even

Testament writers sometimes used

still

familiar to the worshipers of Adonis,

perfectly clear that they purport to

be preaching a new

No amount

religion.

parallelism, not even demonstrable

of

"borrow-

ing," disposes of the genuineness of these writings unless

it

can be demonstrated that the

personal note contained in

and that the idea

of

them

newness

is

not genuine

is itself fictitious.

In general this radical rejection of the

New

Testament evidence seems to rest on unreliable grounds, and is not sufficiently thoroughgoing to touch the heart of the problem. Especially important in this connection

the treatment of the Pauline letters.

is

Accord-

ing to tradition they were written mostly in

the sixth decade of the

first

century, and they

are so definite in their reference to a historical

Jesus that their spuriousness, either wholly or in part,

is

commonly admitted

to be a necessary

presupposition for the denial of Jesus' historicity.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

Some would maintain is

that the whole Paul-

New

ine section of the

Testament

a pseudepigraphic product.

not of

itself

69

literature

This theory

is

impossible, particularly for an age

whose literary method was to set forth teaching under the authority of persons prominent in the past. The names of Moses, Enoch, Elijah, Isaiah, Daniel, were used in this way, so that prominent figures in early church history were similar role.

naturally

quite

And

made

to

play

a

since the Christians of the

second and third centuries rejected some writings put forward under the of Paul, because the

seemed evident,

it

marks

is

name of

of Peter

certainly proper in the

interests of accurate scholarship to ask

those

who made

and

pseudepigraphy

whether

the canonical selection were

sufficiently exact in distinguishing

genuine and the spurious.

between the

The very

fact that

some pseudepigraphic writings are known to have been in circulation opens the way for the supposition that still more may have been of

this

Indeed present-day

character.

criti-

cism of even the moderately conservative type

has accustomed us to thinking of the so-called Pastoral Epistles,

if

not indeed of some other

alleged Pauline letters,

as belonging in

this

The Historicity of Jesus

70 of

class

But

literature.

spurious, then

may

cals not only

admit

claim

it

not

some

if

all

are

letters

be so?

The

radi-

but

this as a possibility

as a probability.

From

this

conclusion

follows

it

that this

must have arisen at a time when the supposed Jesus and Paul belonged to so remote a past that there was little danger of any

literature

serious

assumed

accepting as

in

difficulty

existence.

It

that

true

is

primitive peoples historical feeling

ing in

its

is

would make the Yet it can

of this fiction possible.

hardly have been

among men who

successfully

personally

and places in which these ters were assumed to have these letters, earliest,

among

not exact-

often vague, so perhaps the

lapse of only a few decades

launching

is

their

The borderland between

demands.

fancy and fact

real

if

accomplished

knew

the times

fictitious

lived.

charac-

Therefore

not genuine, must be, at the

second-century products.

But when one examines the argument

for

the spuriousness and the late dating of the letters, he finds that it amounts to Httle more than an assertion of skepticism, which on being

repeated by the

its

credentials

advocates of

a

is

too easily given

demonstration.

In

all

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

modern

the

fairness to

may

be said that

its

radical

it

for the spurious-

the Pauline letters.

all

movement

exponents have presented

no thoroughgoing argument ness of

71

Bauer's results

and the negative

are referred to occasionally,

Dutch school represented more by Van Manen, or the skepticism of

position of the

recently Steck,

But

all

least to

the

sometimes cited in

is

of these positions

this connection.

certainly need at

be revised and supplemented before

world

expected

of

to

historical

treat

scholarship

them

seriously.

can

be

Jensen's

attempt to derive the Pauline literature from the Gilgamesh legend and W. B. Smith's criticism of

Romans

are similarly unsatisfactory.

Jensen's treatment

is

only incidental to his

the gospels, and Smith's conhave not only suffered severely under

discussion of clusions

the criticism of Schmiedel, but,

touch the main problem.

if

When

valid, scarcely

reduced to

its

lowest terms, the argument for the spuriousness of all the Pauline writings

seems to be chiefly

a refusal to treat seriously the probability of genuineness in the case of any one of these letters.

Thus an attempt

the whole burden of proof entertains

is

made

to

throw

upon the one who

the more usual opinion

that

the

The Historicity of Jesus

72

chief epistles of

Paul are historical documents

of first importance.

mand

It is fair

enough to de-

that one justify his belief in the genuine-

ness of these letters, but

it is

equally fair to point

out that the bald assertion of disbelief

is

not an

adequate argument for spuriousness.

A

second ty^Q of this general skepticism

admits the reality of Paul as an important individual for the founding of the

but holds that his

new

religion,

letters in their present

form

are the result of considerable reworking on the

Drews

part of later Christians.

would save Paul

in particular

in so far as the latter can

cited as the exponent of a religion built faith in

an idea

be

upon

— the item which Drews regards

as central in all religion.

As might be expected,

the fundamental problems of Pauline study are scarcely

touched and no fixed principles of

critical investigation are followed.

One takes

literature what he pleases and leaves what he pleases. We are told at the start that no compelling proof for the authenticity of any of the letters can be produced, and yet from them a somewhat elaborate and confident expo-

from the

sition of alleged

Anything

Pauline thought

in these writings

to the historicity of Jesus

is

derived.

supposedly pointing is

explained other-

An wise, or

Estimate of the Negative Argument called a later insertion.

is

Finally

73 it

asserted that "the Pauline letters contain

is

any

sort for the supposition

of a historical Jesus,

and no man would be

no compulsion

of

likely to find such there

him an At once

demand

several familiar passages

explanation.

For

the

instance

ii:23ff.,

seems to point very clearly

a specific event in the

individual.

Cor.

I

supper on the night of

last

Jesus' betrayal, to

were not already

established assumption."

for

describing

if it

This

of a historical

life

difficulty

is

avoided

by

assuming that "we have here to do with a clearly later insertion," at least the reference to

the betrayal

is

"certainly inserted."

Similarly

the implication of a historical Jesus in I Cor. 15: 5 if.

is

either another interpolation, or else

these experiences are purely ecstatic in character

and do not imply, as is commonly supposed, any thought of a definite historical person whose death preceded these unusual manifestations.^ It is a

convenient elasticity of

which can allow these options. '

critical

method

Again, the men-

Similarly Steudel, speaking of these and kindred passages

"Wenn diese Stellen nicht eingeschoben sind, dann gibt es im Alten und Neuen Testament iiberhaupt keine Interpolate." Wir Gclehrlen vom Fach! p. 65. W. B. Smith also falls into line says:

here {Ecce Dens, pp. 148

ff.)-

The Historicity of Jesus

74

tion of "brothers" of the Lord, as in I Cor.

9:5 and Gal. 1:19,

is

to be understood in the

community brotherhood. Yet we are why Paul in the same context should not have included Peter and Barnabas in this brotherhood. Moreover brothers in the Lord, not brothers of the Lord, is Paul's mode of thought for the community relationship. These are typical examples of both the brevity and the method Drews uses in disposing of the sense of

not told

Pauline evidence.

ments

It is difhcult to

take argu-

of this sort seriously, particularly

when

they are presented so briefly and with no apparent ground of justification except the presupposition that a historical Jesus

must not be

recognized.

The lar

gospel evidence

manner.

To

is

disposed of in a simi-

take Drews 's method as a

sample of the radical treatment, the

earliest

external testimony to the gospels' origin aside

on the ground

unreliability."

Upon

of Eusebius'

the

fact,

is

set

"notorious

now widely

recognized, that the evangelists combined inter-

pretation with historical narrative,

is

based the

broad generalization that all is fiction. The efforts of critical study to determine more accurately the real historical background are

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

75

characterized as a "half comic, half sad performance " and a "horrible fiasco. " Yet apparently without

any suspicion

of the comic,

we

are

asked to believe that so matter-of-fact a circumstance as Jesus' association with his disciples is

merely a variation of the myth about Jason 's

search for the golden fleece.

Drews 's handling fairly

of the gospel evidence

is

representative of the radicals' general

The more

method.

modern

substantial results of the

critical school of gospel

study are not

recognized as having any value.

All emphasis

upon the negative aspects of this work, and its most extreme negative conclusions are

falls

constantly

made

set

in

of the critics'

of detail,

and

the

foreground.

Much

is

disagreement on questions

of their inability to fix

upon a

quantum of information, no item of which could conceivably be questioned. We are often reminded of the fact that none of our definite

gospels belong to Jesus'

they are in

all

own

generation, that

admittedly more or

less interested

expounding Christian doctrine, and that

many

of their ideas

may

quite likely be colored

by current Jewish or heathen notions. But what would all this prove? The immediate conclusion can hardly be, as the radicals would

The Historicity oj Jesus

76

contend, that there was no historical person

The only warranted

Jesus.

inference

would be

that the preachers of the second and third generations of Christians were primarily interested

producing edifying narrative about Jesus.

in

For example

were proved beyond question

if it

that the disciples' interpretation of his death

was phrased

in terms of

heathen notions about

the saving value of the death of an imaginary sa\dor-deity,

it

would by no means follow as a

logical imperative that Jesus' alleged death

is

In fact the logical inference would

fictitious.

seem to be that memory of his actual death was a necessary incentive for the new form of interpretation.

The

defectiveness of this treatment of the

traditional evidence

is

perhaps not so patent in

the case of the gospels as

Pauline

epistles.

There

the same. of 'for

all

external

the

cism,

saner

the

Yet is

it is

it

is

the same easy dismissal

testimony,

the same

conclusions

same

in the case of the

fundamentally

inclination

of

to

disdain

modern

criti-

attach most

value to extremes of criticism, the same neglect

and natural features of the narrative, the same disposition to put skepticism forward in the garb of valid demonof all the personal

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

77

and the same ever present predisposition against recognizing any evidence for stration,

Jesus' actual existence.

While these criticisms apply to the extremists general,

in

there

is

a distinctiveness about

Jensen's method which in a certain sense puts it

in a class

by

itself.

For most

of the

modern

radicals the question of eliminating the gospel

evidence

is

one of secondary importance in

comparison with the defence of their theory of Christian origins.

At

least

This

is

not so true of Jensen.

whatever his ultimate interest

may

be,

argument concerns itself primarily with the gospel materials. Moreover his explanation of the gospels' origin, as a phase of the modern skeptical movement, stands in a somewhat isolated position. While he is approvingly referred to as an example of skepticism, his results have not been incorporated at all extensively into the work of the later representatives of this school. For these reasons his his

views

call for

a separate examination.

His theory of gospel origins

is

''

that these

writings are merely literary imitations of the

Babylonian Gilgamesh parallels

epic.

This

is

thought

by the discovery

of a series of

between the incidents

of the gospel

to be proved

The

78

Historicity of Jesus

and the Gilgamesh story. Agreements are found not alone in individual items but also in the successive arrangement of the narrative

On

events.

much

this latter point the

Hence the

emphasis.

ment can be estimated of the

most important

by

best

At the beginning

1.

of the

by a miracle at the

created

command

of the gods.

Eabani lived

2.

far

from men

citing a section

parallels, preserving the

order of incidents as arranged

Gilgamesh legend Eabani was

author places

force of his argu-

by the author }

At the beginning

of the Jesus

miracle in accordance with an

announcement by an angel. John lived in the steppe (wil-

in the steppe (wilderness).

derness) near the Jordan.

Eabani (is hairy and) has long hair on his head. Presumably he is clad with skins.

hair uncut

3.

by a

story John was produced

John, as a Nazirite, wears his

and

He

long.

is

clad with a garment of camel's hair

and girded with a

belt of

leather or skin.

Eabani

4.

lives as the beasts

of the steppe (wilderness) on

grass

and herbs and water.

John found

lives in

on what

is

to

the wilderness:

be on

grasshoppers and wild honey, and, like a Nazirite, drinks no wine.

5.

this star, as well as

John knows (by revelation) and prophesies of Jesus' coming as the coming of a man who is stronger than he, and soon afterward this Jesus comes to

symbolic of Eabani

John.

Gilgamesh dreams of a

star resembling a host of the

heavenly Lord who than he, then of a being),

and

the man,

is

is

stronger

man (human

who thereupon comes immediately to Gilgamesh. '

Moses, Jesus, Paiilus, pp. 27-30.

An 6.

To

appearances Eabani

all

afterward

Estimate of the Negative Argument

the steppe

flees into

Jesus afterward

79 the

flees into

wilderness.

(wilderness) 7. The sun-god calls from heaven to Eabani in the steppe (wilderness) with kind words

him of delicious food or loaves and of the kissing of his feet by the kings of and speaks

to

the earth.

Immediately before

his flight

into the wilderness the spirit of

God descends from heaven upon Jesus and a voice from heaven calls him God's beloved In the wilderness, more-

Son.

someone

over,

(i.e.,

the devil)

speaks with Jesus about bread

make from and about the fact that Jesus should rule all kingdoms (which Jesus should

stones)

of the earth

if

he kissed the

devil's feet. 8.

(wilderness)

abode, the 9.

The

home

to

his

of

[the

the great

conquered by a god who comes down on a cloud ( ?) to whom the dominion of the lion is

world

is

The kingdom of heaven and God is near, which is to be introduced by Jesus' coming on of

the clouds.

to be transferred.

[Conquest of the great

Expulsion of the

demon

in

the synagogue at Capernaum.

serpent.] 1 1.

derness to his native place.

of Gilgamesh.

dominion

great serpent and]

10.

Jesus returns from the wil-

Eabani returns from the

steppe

A fever plague, Xisuthros

intercedes for plagued ity and in this

human-

way probably

the

Peter's mother-in-law

is

sick

with fever and Jesus makes her well.

plague was brought to an end. 12.

Xisuthros builds himself

a ship and keeps 13.

it

ready.

A

boat

is

kept ready

for

Jesus.

On an evening Xisuthros,

with his family and his nearest

On an

evening Jesus with his

disciples enters the boat.

friends, enters the ship. 14.

A

ceases.

storm

arises

and

A

storm arises and ceases.

The Historicity of Jesus

8o

Xisuthros lands with

15.

Jesus lands in Perca opposite

liis

family far from his abode.

his native place.

the swine, are drowned in the

Two thousand or more demons, and two thousand swine, are drowned in the sea

flood.

over which Jesus went.

16.

Sinful

humanity

and

most

beasts,

among them

also

17.

On

a seventh day, after

an interview with three

inti-

mate persons, Xisuthros comes to the top of the high mountain of the deluge and then is deified.

After six or eight days, thus certainly

week

originally

a

after

of seven days, Jesus with

most intimate persons went on to a high mountain and was glorified and called three

God's Son. 18.

The

The

voice of the invisible

Xisuthros out of the air to his ship companions says:

You

are

voice out of the cloud on

the mountain of transfiguration

says

You

:

are to hear Jesus.

to be pious.

Chumbaba

19.

adventure.

[Apparent!}' omitted but

a 20.

is in

place.]

Gilgamesh reproaches afifairs and

ing married his second wife,

done her

Herodias, and for his evil deeds.

Ishtar for her love

the

new

evils

has

she

John blames Herod

for hav-

lovers. 21.

The

bull adventure.

[Apparently omitted but quite a

22.

Eabani

new

John the Baptist

dies.

is

in

place.]

corresponding

dies (at a

place

in

the

story)

And

so

on

until the

end

of Jesus' career

is

reached. 39. [Gilgamesh dies.]

It

is

Jesus dies.

evident that no importance can be

attached to any likeness between individuals.

At

first

John

is

Eabani,

then he becomes

An

Estimalc of the Negative Argument

Gilgamesh and Jesus

is

Eabani (No.

Jesus becomes Xisuthros

Xisuthrosis God (No. 18).

Herod he dies

is

(Nos.

8i

then

5),

11-17), then

Wlien John reproves

Gilgamesh (No.

20),

but when he

consequence of this boldness he

in

Eabani

(No.

In

22).

which follow there

is

the

uncited

is

parallels

the same confusion

:

when

Jesus starts across the lake with the disciples

he

is

Gilgamesh;

when

the storm arises he

is

Xisuthros; again, Gilgamesh represents the rich

young

ruler,

but in the immediately following

incident he represents Jesus

'

disciples

;

Jesus

is

Xisuthros when he gives the loaves to the disciples

and they are Gilgamesh, but

in the

very next parallel Jesus is again Gilgamesh; then Jesus is Xisuthros and Peter is Gilgamesh,

though immediately afterward the rich man in hell is Gilgamesh and Lazarus in Abraham's

bosom

is

Eabani, notwithstanding the corre-

spondence between Eabani and John the Baptist at the time of the latter 's death. It cannot be said that the life-story of any hero

in the

Babylonian legend parallels that of any New Testament character, and indeed, so far as the support of the argument proper names list.

may

is

concerned,

the

as well be struck from the

The Historicity of Jesus

82

As

to

events,

it

content; that

in

the resemblance between individual

for example,

and often trifling in two characters are alike

each

the

is

insignificant

in

is

wilderness

—among

orientals a natural place for meditation;

one

has a hairy body, the other wears a garment

made

one eats grass, the other eats

of hair;

grasshoppers;

and, finally, both die

a remarkable fact in

when

there

is

—hardly

no resemblance

the circumstances attending their deaths.

But what

of the alleged

succession of

events"?

persons with

whom

for, as

is

This

first

not true of

is

the action

already observed,

then another

"essentially similar

is

associated,

one person and

introduced without regard to

orderly procedure.

Moreover,

it

is

not true

that the action, as arranged in these parallels, preserves the order of events in the gospels.

The

reference to Jesus' coming on the clouds

(No. 9) appears in the gospels not at the begin-

ning of Jesus' preaching but toward the

close.

The connection between holding a boat ready (No. 12) and entering the boat (No. 13) is a misrepresentation of the gospel narrative.

Xisuthros enters the ship that he prepares and holds in readiness, but the occasion on which

a boat

is

held ready for Jesus

(Mark 3:9)

is

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

entirely different

8.3

from that on which he enters

a boat to go across the lake (Mark 4:35), and an important part of his work in Galilee is done

meantime.

in the

It is exceptionally irregular

to place the transfiguration in connection with

the story of the Gadarene demoniacs (Nos. 16-

According to the gospel order a wide gap

18).

intervenes in which belong several incidents

mentioned order of

later in Jensen's series.

Mark

is

violated

sation with the rich reference

Jesus'

order of

young rich

Luke

ruler

man

The

young

to

suffers

is

the

when

when ruler

Again, the

Jesus' converis

placed before

"loaves";

and the

the story of the rich

put before the parable of the

in hades.

alleged points of likeness are even

insignificant

more

when one views them in their It is only by a generous

original contexts.

omission of the main features of the narrative that a theory of resemblance can be plausible.

To

made even

take a single illustration, the

gospel story of Jesus' baptism and temptation tells of

an individual with a new consciousness

of his mission in life reflecting in solitude

upon

means he will use for its accomplishment. Though he is hungry and has power to turn stones into bread, he will not, for God is more

the

The Historicity of Jesus

84

him than bread; nor will he ask God show him favoritism either in the display to

to of

unusual acts or in the granting of earthly dominion. temptations

These are

all

Satan

—in

of

inferior

motives

contrast \vith

ideal of perfect submission to the will of

On

the

God.

the other hand, the portion of the Babylon-

ian legend, of which the gospel narrative

is

supposed to be a reproduction, pictures Eabani as a wild creature sporting with the beasts

protecting

them from the hunter.

The

and

latter

complains to Gilgamesh, the ruler of the city of

who promises

Eabani away by means of a prostitute. The plan succeeds and finally Eabani is persuaded to enter the city and live in friendship with Gilgamesh. Later Erech,

to lure

(lacunae in the records leave the exact con-

nection uncertain) follows the so-called tempta-

no temptation but a speech of comfort and exhortation

tion parallel, which, however,

at

all

is

from Shamash the sun-god. Eabani is evidently restive under the restraints of civilization, and

Shamash says, in effect, Why, Eabani, do you long for the harlot, the prostitute ? Have you not been supplied with food and clothing at

you

the

court

to sit

of

Gilgamesh who

on an easy seat at

will

his right

allow

hand

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

and the kings

And when

feet ?

the earth

of

the

dawn

of

will

kiss

85

your

morning broke

"the words of Shamash, the mighty, loosened the bands of Eabani and his furious heart

came

These narratives certainly have no

to rest."

essential feature in

common, and a theory

of

the derivation of the gospel story from the

Babylonian, when the argument rests wholly on internal resemblance, is nothing less than absurd.

Perhaps the greatest weakness of theory

omissions.

lies in its

this

whole

Large sections of

both the gospel history and the Babylonian epic

even

have to be suppressed in order to establish the faintest semblance of parallelism.

Practically

and

all of

Jesus' teaching

his career taken as a

is

overlooked

whole has no counter-

There

is no character there whose inner experiences, whose motives and impulses, whose attitude toward men and God, and whose relations in life have the least resemblance to these traits in the gospel picture of Jesus. In no respect

part in the epic.

whose

religious ideas,

does Jensen 's hypothesis, as a theory to explain the origin of the gospels without reference to a historical Jesus,

When

once

seem the

to

have any

gospels

validity.

and the Pauline

The Historicity oj Jesus

86 epistles

have been disposed

traditional

for

by

dismissed

easily

Book

evidence

of,

the remaining existence

Jesus'

similar

is

The

methods.

of Acts readily takes its place with the

gospels and the writings of Paul, while other

New no

Testament books are said

know

either to

historical Jesus, or to contain only spurious

The testimony furnished

references to him.

by the Apostolic Fathers

To be

as of no account.

is

similarly estimated

sure, critical historians

quite generally admit that Josephus' principal reference to Jesus

language used

is

unauthentic.

The very

— the implication of Jesus

'

divin-

reference to his miracles, recognition of his

ity,

messiahship, etc'

—seems to mark the material

as a Christian interpolation.

that

Roman

It is

also

true

history yields no important data

until the second century a.d.,

and even then

the evidence is of a meager sort. Suetonius and Pliny mention Christians, but their words shed no valuable light upon the problem of Jesus' actual existence. plicitly

states that the

day traced '

Ant.,

Christians of

their origin to

XVni,

iii,

3.

The

See below, chap.

Nero's

one named Christ

reference to James, " ihe brother of

Jesus, the so-called Christ" {Ant., to doubt.

Tacitus, however, ex-

viii.

XX,

ix, i) is

perhaps

less

open

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

who was put in is

to

death

by Pontius

Pilate

Judea during the reign of Tiberius. This damaging testimony for the radical position,

but

its

force

Tacitus

is

avoided in the usual

way

:

either

merely reporting from hearsay a

is

fictitious Christian tradition, or the is

87

paragraph

a " Christian " interpolation.^ Neither explan-

ation

is

no value

shown

satisfactory.

The

first

certainly has

until the Christian tradition has

to be fictitious;

and as

been

for the second,

the very language of the paragraph, which certainly

is

testifies to

We

not Christian in

its

point of view,^

the contrary.

need not dwell longer upon the negative

treatment of the traditional evidence for Jesus '

This view

Etudes

ail siijet

is

mainly a reiteration of the doubts

of

Hochart,

de la persecution des Chretiens sous Neron (Paris,

1885). ^

Annals,

XV,

44, cf. especially the clause describing the early

spread of Christianity after Jesus' death

:

" repressaque in praesens

rursum erumpebat non modo per Judaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam, quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confiuunt celebranturque." Of course it may be urged that this only shows good historical perspective on the part of the artist interpolator. But that would imply that his main object was to testify to the bare statement of Jesus' human existence. In other words, it must be assumed that the modern radicals' problem was the supposed interpolator's problem a manifest begging of the question. It is evident from the exitiabilis superstitio

—

passage in Josephus that the Christian interpolator's interest was "theological" rather than "historical."

88

The

historicity.

Occasional monographs on special

topics,

like

Historicity of Jesus

Drews 's

Petruslegende and

W.

B.

Smith's "Judas Iscariot,"' illustrate the detailed application of the negative

arguments,

without, however, strengthening our estimate of their worth.

Taken

altogether,

they

sig-

nally fail in their proposed disposition of the

evidence which has usually been regarded as establishing belief in the historical reality of Jesus. is

If

the possibility of his non-historicity

to be entertained at all

it

must be brought

about by reconstructing, without reference to him, so strong a theory of Christian origins that the traditional view will pale before

it

as a

lesser light in the presence of a greater luminary.

Will the radicals' constructive hypothesis stand this test '

?

Uibberl Journal, IX, 3 (April, 191

Ecce Dens, pp. 295

ff.

1),

529-44; reproduced in

CHAPTER

IV

AN ESTIMATE OF THE NEGATIVE ARGUMENT: ITS PROPOSED EXPLANATION OF THE ORIGIN OF CHRISTIANITY Most proposed reconstructions of Christian origins make the idea of salvation the basal thought of the new religion. The validity of assumption

this

can

be

scarcely

Christianity from the beginning

doubted.

was unques-

tionably and pre-eminently a religion of salvation

—a

salvation which

and which

origin

is

is

primarily of divine

revealed and mediated

in the career of a Jesus

who thereby becomes

the unique object of men's faith

and reverence.

These are essential items in Christian thinking at a very early date.

What religion

is

on

the incentive which starts this its

way ?

This

which opinion divides.

is

new

the question on

Usually

it

has been

supposed that a unique historical personality,

known so

in tradition as Jesus of Nazareth,

strong

new

made

an impression upon men that a about his person. The

faith reared itself

critics

whose views we are investigating pro-

pose a very different answer. 89

They think

it

The

Qo

Historicity of Jesus

absurd to imagine that any historical individual could be given so elevated a position in the

thought of sonally

form

is

men with whom he had been His

associated.

supposed

per-

historical

merely a fanciful portrait giving a con-

crete setting to the abstract notion that sal-

vation

is

the outcome of

the

deity's

own

Thus the modern radicals hypostatize the salvation-idea, making it of itself the creative force in the genesis of the new religion. The problem of Christianity's origin then activity.

becomes the question, How did this conception come into being, and where and when are its earliest "Christian" manifestations to be found ? Bauer and Kalthoff, it will be remembered, looked for the answer to these questions in the Graeco-Roman life of the first and second centuries a.d.

Their solution

discarded even

by

the radicals,

now generally who admit that

is

in the third century Christianity

entrenched in the

Roman

date of

down

its origin

of the

too strongly

empire to bring the

as late as

Bauer and

Moreover the Jewish back-

Kalthofif proposed.

ground

is

new

religion is too evident to

permit of so unconditional a transfer of birthplace to heathen

commonly

offered

soil.

nowadays

The

solution

its

more

finds the primitive

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

91

Christians' doctrine of salvation to be less a

product of their

own

experience and more a

loan from the contemporary heathen religions. It

is

pointed out that belief in a redeeming

was current at an early date and had

divinity

found expression in nature myths, in the tenets

and practices

of secret cults,

speculations.

Christianity represents the re-

and

sult of a

borrowing and recasting of

mental

conception.

in gnostic

this

The beginnings

fundathe

of

process can no longer be traced with certainty,

but they are assigned with confidence to preThis evolution went on both

Christian times. in Palestine

and

and

in Hellenistic Judaism,

attained the status of an independent religion at about the time Christianity

is

traditionally

have come into existence.

said to outline,

is

Such, in

the radicals' understanding of Chris-

tianity's origin. If

idea,

the kernel of Christianity, the salvation-

was thus merely a notion borrowed from

the ancient faiths, a

new

why

did

it

create for itself

and

divinity in the person of Jesus,

whence did it derive its unique vitality ? would seem to be crucial questions

These for

the

radicals' constructive hypothesis to answer.

Bauer

and

Kalthoff

attempted

to

meet

The

92

Historicity of Jesus

similar problems

human

by depicting a new

experiences

the

as

source

tianity's

new thought and power.

type

experience

of

called

forth

set

of

Chris-

of

A new

the

Jesus-

portrait, while the timely elements incorporated

The

in the picture assured his prestige.

later

representatives of the radical school do not

though

entirely discard this line of thought,

they find these new experiences to be the prod-

The

uct of a different set of surroundings. struggle of ideas in the

life

and culture

ancient world are held to have

contributions to nascent Christianity. its

success

is

of the

made important Indeed,

ascribed in no small degree to

fortunate practice of gathering to

itself

its

the best

elements in the thought of the time, yet funda-

mental to

the notion of a redeeming

all this is

savior-god, Jesus. this experience;

is

belief in

and was the norm tation of, these

He

not the product of

him was

anterior to,

for determining the interpre-

new

experiences, according to

the more recent theory of Christian origins.

But

if

Jesus' career

is

mainly a

replica, so to

speak, of the career of Adonis- Attis-etc,

was to

his figure created

embody an

meeting

?

old idea

this question

?

by

Why The

posit a

why

new god

radicals are now-

asserting that Jesus

is

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

not a new god.

93

Just as the various peoples of

wont

the Orient were

to rebaptize old divinities

with new or reconstructed attributes, so the Christian Jesus

Joshua,

who

is

merely a rehabilitation of

said to be originally the deified

is

personification of the salvation-concept of the

By

Hebrews.

thus

admitting a substantial

Jewish basis for the new

why

as to

religion,

our question

Christian thought did not revolve

about the person of some heathen deity

is

answered.

This Jesus-divinity accordingly antedates the Jesus of the gospels, and supplants

him

as the

concrete focus about which that type of think-

denominated "Christianity," Here our second question, re-

ing,

ultimately

first

gathers.

garding the secret of the also

would seem

new

religion's vitality,

to find its answer.

effectiveness for the salvation-idea

attached to the career of a person.

words

it

To it

insure

must be In other

must be dramatized, even though the As

dramatis persona be a fictitious character.

evidence of this

may

Syrians,

Persian the

demand

for personification,

one

among

the

point to the figure of Adonis

among

Attis

Mithra,

Egyptian

the

Osiris.

the

Phrygians,

Babylonian

When

the

the

Tammuz, historical

The Historicity of Jesus

94

who

Jesus,

is

usually supposed to have played

this role for Christians, disappears, his place is filled

by

this fictitious

whose personality,

it

Joshua- Jesus character maintained, supplies

is

the vitalizing element for the primitive Chris-

And by

tian faith.

a happy combination, in

this idealized person, of the best elements of

Jemsh

as well as heathen thought, he thus

becomes a uniquely powerful centrifugal force not only in the genesis but also in the expansion of the new religion, even though this new movement early grew to be a competitor in the same field with its assumed ancestral kinsmen.

Thus figure

this pre-Christian Jesus-divinity is a

of

radicals.

great It

is

importance for the modern

true that not

school place equal stress for they

do not

all

all

upon

writers of this

his importance,

give equal attention to the

minuter problems pertaining to a constructive

But just in proportion as they overlook him do they fail to make any serious attempt to show why primitive Christianity was so characteristically a theory of Christian origins.

religion of faith in Jesus the Messiah, while

they also

fail

to supply in

any plausible way a

concrete initial force for the origin of the religion.

Nor do they

pro\'ide

any

new

vital focus.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

95

even theoretically, for the distinctive thought of early Christianity.

But what

if it

should turn out upon investiga-

tion that the doctrine of a pre-Christian Jesus-

had any vogue

divinity never

Can

in ancient times

demonthe doctrine created by the

the historicity of this belief be

strated

modern

Or

?

is

skeptics in their search for a personal

—

and most of them are now taking problem seriously enough to realize the

substitute their

need

of

this

personal

substitute

alleged Jesus of gospel history

pronounce upon

this question

examination of the data.

?

—for

We

the

shall

not

without a careful

Therefore

we present

some minuteness the supposed evidence

\Adth

for a primitive belief in a pre-Christian Jesus.

To

begin with, there

is

no gainsaying the

word "Jesus" is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew "Joshua." But this coincidence cannot of itself establish any confact

that

the

nection between these individuals.

men be

different,

but the

one among the Jews.

other

According to Weinel,^

belongs to no

less

in Josephus'

narrative alone.

'

If

name the case might name is a very common

did not bear the same

it

than twenty different persons Proof for the

Isi das "llberale" Jesusbild widerlegt? p. 92.

The

96

Historicity of Jesus

contention that Jesus

the perpetuation of a

is

Joshua-deity needs a more substantial basis

than the mere identity of names.

argument

urged,

it is

by Drews

As a for

further

example,

that Joshua was a cult-god, and that the points

between

of resemblance

of Jesus, portrayed

his career

and the

life

the gospels, establish

in

the identity of the two as originally a Jewish

To

divinity.

"deliverer,"

illustrate,

each name

signifies

Joshua's mother (ac-

"savior";

cording to an Arabic tradition!) was Miriam,

and the mother

of Jesus

was Mary (Miriam);

Joshua led Israel out of distress in the wilderness into the land of promise where mUk and honey flowed, that is, the land of the Milky Way and the moon, and Jesus also led his followers into the heavenly kingdom. All this is in turn traceable to an ancient cult of the sun, the Greek legend of Jason forming the

connecting

link.

with

twelve

his

Galilee

came

Jason = Joshua = Jesus. Jesus disciples

passing

through

to the Passover feast at Jerusalem,

Joshua with his twelve helpers passed through the Jordan and offered the Paschal lamb on the other shore, Jason with his twelve companions

went

after the golden fleece of the lamb,

originally

was the myth

of the sun's

and

all

wandering

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

97

through the twelve signs of the Zodiac. Thus Joshua- Jesus was an old Ephraimitish god of the sun and of

fertility,

worshiped among

many

Jewish sects as the hero-deliverer of ancient

and the future messianic

Israel

This

weak

a bold reconstruction, but

is

some

at

asks

for

among

savior.

essential

evidence

explicit

it is

a

of

fatally

When

points.

one

Joshua-cult

the Jews he finds no answer.

Again,

is

there anywhere in Judaism a clear intimation

whom messianic

that Joshua was the hero about

hopes

And

Here

centered?

evidence

also

fails.

as for resemblances between the Jesus of

the gospels and this alleged cult-god, Joshua,

they do not touch the main features in the career

of

Take even the

personage.

either

notion of the death and resurrection of a saviorgod, which

is

much emphasized by

the item so

the radicals, and there

is

respect between Joshua

and

no parallel in

name, a feature

of

already observed,

quency

of this

The most belongs

to

name among

the identity of

the Jews.

statement

pre-Christian is

is

no consequence as we have when one recalls the fre-

explicit

Epiphanius, and

In fact the

Jesus.

only real link between them

this

times

that is

Jesus

found in

corroborated by the Baby-

The Historicity of Jesus

98

Ionian Talmud.

Epiphanius, arguing that the

high-priestly office in the church

from David/

direct succession

is

in the line of

sees a prophetic

significance in such scriptures as Ps. 132:11

and Gen. 49

f.

which affirm that David's seed should continue to occupy his throne, and the :

10,

scepter should not depart from Israel, until

whom

that final successor of David, in

the

hopes were to find consummation,

people's

On

should appear.

this basis

Epiphanius inter-

prets history as follows:^

The priesthood and kingly

in the holy church is David's throne

seat, for the

Lord joined together and gave and the high-priestly

to his holy church both the kingly dignity, transferring to TTovra

ets

throne

endured

the never-failing

it

thronc of David.

tov aiwi/a] in

of

line

[/a^ StaXet-

For David's

succession

until

the

time of Christ himself, rulers from Judah not failing until

whom

the things kept in reserve

And he was the

expectation of the gentiles."

he came "to

belonged.

With the advent

of the Christ the rulers in line of

succession from Judah, reigning until the time of the

Christ himself, ceased.

For the

line fell

away and

stopped from the time when he was born in Bethlehem

Judea under Alexander, who was of priestly and From Alexander on this office ceased from the days of Alexander and Salina, who is also of

royal race.

•

Cf. a similar interest in Justin, Dial., LII, 3.

»

Haer.,

XXIX,

3.

Cf. LI, 22

fif.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

called Alexandra, to the days of

Augustus the

Roman

99

Herod the king and

emperor.

After remarking upon the fact that Alexander

was both king and high

Epiphanius

priest,

continues

Then afterward a foreign king, Herod, and no longer who were of the family of David, put on the

those

crown; while in Christ the kingly seat passed over to the church, the kingly dignity being transferred from the fleshly house of Judah and Jerusalem;

throne

is

up

set

in the holy

God

church of

having a double dignity because of both

its

and the forever,

kingly and

high-priestly character.

its

In this argument Epiphanius' chief interest clearly

is

dogmatical rather than historical.

Thinking, as he does, that Alexander Jannaeus (104-78 B.C.) was the last of the Jewish kings

combine

to

in one person the offices of

king and high priest, he

ment

proof-texts to

immediate successor

is

led

by

his

both

Old Testa-

assume that Jesus was the of Alexander.

Then

Jesus

must have been born during Alexander's reign.' This is the logic of dogma. But with magnificent inconsistency Epiphanius returns to history and speaks of a gap extending from the

time of Alexander to the time of Herod. '

Cf. the

anachronism of Justin,

Why

A poL, I, 31, making Herod and

Ptolemy Philadelphus contemporary.

The Historicity of Jesus

100

mention an interim whose

by the names

ulterior

limit

is

Herod and Augustus? Doubtless because this limit marks the actual appearance of Jesus upon the scene, as Epipha-

fixed

nius

is

well aware.

of

Indeed he

in affirming that Jesus

is

very emphatic

was born

second year of Augustus'

reign.'

in the forty-

By

forcing

Epiphanius to read us a new lesson in history,

when he

is

primarily concerned to prove the

and high-priestly inheritance of the church in an unbroken succession from David, we do him a great injustice. We should remember that the major premise of his thinking is that no word of Scripture fails. ^ It is not at all improbable that he was well aware of kingly

the contradiction involved in placing Christ's birth

in

time

the

of

Alexander

—his

lan-

guage does not imply that he held any doctrine

about the "hiding" of the Messiah

—but

he took refuge in the pious reflection that Scripture might be enigmatical but could not

be erroneous.^

Yet

his

inconsistency

ought

not to cause serious trouble for moderns, '

Ilaer., LI, 22.

of Augustus' reign ^oiSf/ila

yap

who

Epiphanius apparently reckons the beginning from Julius Caesar's death in 44 B.C.

X^^ts ttjs ayla^ rov deou ypatpijs SiairiTrrei

3oy yap dirifiapri rt twv aTrb t^s aylai ypa<prj% aiviyfj-dTiov.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

loi

have discarded the ancient custom of using assumed Old Testament predictions as source materials

for

writing

the

of

later

history.

Epiphanius clearly was trapped by the logic

dogmatic into suggesting that Jesus was

of his

born under Alexander.

The Babylonian Talmud twice narrates the who lived in the days of King Jannaeus, and who is said to have story of a certain Jeshu

magic,

practiced

The

Israel.'

since

and corrupted and misled

Christian Jesus

"Jeshu"

is

But the

nation for him. of the story

is

parallel to this story ,^ in

of

"Jeshu."

An

desig-

historical reliability

very doubtful.

that the older Palestinian

tion

evidently meant,

is

common Talmudic

a

It so

Talmud

which there

happens

contains a is

no men-

undesignated disciple

Jehuda ben Tabai stands in his place. Evidently the Babylonian form of the story has been worked up in the interest of Jewish polemic of

And since most of the Talmudic references to Jesus seem to have been inspired by some item of Christian teaching,

against Christianity.

^

Sanhedrin 107b and Sola 47a.

Strack, Jesus, die Hdretiker jiidischen '

Hag.

Angaben 2, 2;

cf.

und

For the

(Leipzig, 1910), pp. 10

Strack, op.

cil.,

full

narrative see

die Christen nach

pp. 9

f.

f.

den

dltesten

The

I02 it is

Historicity of Jesus

barely possible that just the sort of argu-

ment Epiphanius used to prove that the church was in the line of direct succession from David, thus connecting Jesus with Alexander,

is

behind

Talmudic tradition. Epiphanius makes two further statements which are sometimes thought to point to a prethis similar

Christian

Nazarees

He

Jesus.

says

that

were and that

there

(or Nasarees)' before Christ,

Philo once wrote a treatise describing the early Christian

community

in Eg^pt.^

a well established Christian church in Philo 's day, and

if

the Nazarees were in exist-

ence in pre-Christian times, are

known

that Christianity was

we not

to infer

in the first century

Epiphanius himself says that Christians

B.C. ?

were

was Egypt in

If there

first

known

Nazorees,

as

so

that

the

names suggests a close relation two bodies. Moreover Philo, who was a man of advanced age in 40 a.d. when he headed the Jewish embassy to Rome, can hardly similarity of

for the

He

and XIX, Schwen in Protesiantische Monatshefte, XIV (1910), 208-13 and Nestle in ibid., 349 f. On the genesis of Epiphanius' phraseology, cf. Schmidtke, Neue Fragmenle mid Untersiichungen zu den Judenchrisllichcn Evange'

S,

but

lien

uses the form Nafapafot in Haer., XVIII, 1-3,

'Natrapaioi

(Leipzig,

Rundschau, '

Ilaer.,

in

1911),

XXIX,

pp.

XIV (1911), XXIX, 5.

90

373

6.

ff.;

fif.

Cf.

cf.

Bousset

in

Theologische

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

103

have seen Christianity, on the traditional view of its origin,

as

is

so firmly established in

Egypt

implied in the treatise to which Epiphanius

refers.

of the

Hence we are to look for the beginnings new religion in the first century B.C., so

the argument runs.

On

examining the data more closely

it

very

soon becomes evident that Epiphanius has no

thought of connecting Christianity with the Jewish Nazarite heresy.

He

places the latter's

and

origin before the Christian era

along with the Hemerobaptists, other hand,

whom

he

etc.

he describes Christian

designates

Nazorees

classes it

On

the

heretics

[Na^w/aaiot],

distinguishing with perfect clearness between

them and the Jewish non-Christian Nazarees. The difference is not merely one of name; they have very distinct characteristics. The Nazarees are distinguished for the their Jewish beliefs

unorthodoxy of

and practices

are pre-eminently rigid Jews

;

the Nazorees

who have added

Judaism a smattering of Christian Hence they derive their name from Jesus the Nazorite, the name by which the to

their

belief.

Christians were called before they received the

designation "Christians" at Antioch. nius'

thought

is

Epipha-

often very hazy, but on this

The Historicity of Jesus

I04

subject he

is

There was among

perfectly clear.

the Jews even before the Christian era a heresy the

of

Nazarees;

then came

the

Christian

movement, which at first was known as the sect of the Nazorees and which finds its proper continuation, as Epiphanius takes great pains

and finally who took upon them-

to prove, in the catholic church;

there

was a

third class

name

selves the primitive Christian

of

Nazorees

but who adhered so rigidly to Judaism that Epiphanius curtly remarks, "they are Jews and nothing

else.'"

Whether there ever was such an array of and Epiphanius sects bearing a similar name adds yet another, the Nazirees, represented by Samson in the Old Testament and later by

—

—

John the Baptist^ may be questioned. Judging from the same writer's skill in splitting the original Essenes up into Jessees, Ossenes, and Ossees, we may wonder whether he did not occasionally invent a name, in his ardor to defend Nicene orthodoxy against every "hydraheaded serpent sibly not.

have existed whether commonly known or But one thing at least is clear. His

Ilaer., ^

of error" that could ever pos-

Ibid.,

XXIX, 7. XXIX, 5.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

105

statements about Nazarees, Nasarees, Nazorees,

and Nazirees involve no ambiguity whatever as to the date of Christianity's origin. traditional

date

is

Those who argue

The

only one suggested.

the

for a pre-Christian Jesus

can

find nothing for their purpose here except the

bare mention of the early existence of a Jewish

Nazarite heresy. this statement,

sect

To prove

and

to

was "Christian"

the reliability of

show further that the

in character,

is

another

problem.

Epiphanius supplies no argument

for this.

He

does not even so describe the

Nazarees as to suggest characteristics which

show them to have been precursors Christian movement.

On

of

the

the other hand, Epiphanius clearly states

that there was in

Egypt a Christian community

about which Philo wrote.

If this is so,

then

in all probability it existed before, or at least

contemporaneously

Here

gospels.

it is

with,

the

Jesus

of

the

a question of tracing and

testing

Epiphanius'

He was

writing in the latter part of the fourth

century, and

sources

we may suppose

of

information.

that he availed

himself of the works of Philo, Josephus, and

Eusebius.

He may

sources of which

indeed have had other

we now have no knowledge,

The Historicity of Jesus

io6

but on the basis of these alone some of his riddles can be unraveled.^ Philo, in his tractate

Quod omnis prohus

liber,

describes a sect of Jews called Essees

['

because

character.

of

saintly

their

[ocrto?]

Eo-cratot]

These are readily recognized as the Essenes ['Ecrcn7i^ot] mentioned by Josephus.^ Their

'

The character

known

to

need

treatise''

Philo

of Epiphanius' sources of information

and the

characteristics

too

are

further comment.^

well

In another

historical value of his statements are puzzling

need reworking.

Cf. the

still

problems which

valuable works of Lipsius, Ziir

Qmllenkritik des Epiphanius (Wien, 1865) and Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzergeschichte des Urchrislcntiims

(Leipzig,

1884).

Tradition

have been a man of great learning who had traveled much and read widely, yet it is evident that he was swayed by a tremendous zeal for orthodoxy. represents

him

to

' Philo had no scruples in deriving the name of a Jewish sect from a Greek source. But the variation of spelling seems to point rather to an Aramaic original, 'I'^DH and X'^CH, which are plural forms from i^On. •5

See Schiirer, Geschichte des jiidischen Volkes im Zeilalter Jesii

Chrisli (Leipzig, 1904^, II, 561-80.

Jewish People in II, Vol. II,

the

Time

English

of Jesus Christ,

tr.,

New

History of the

York, 1891, Div.

188-218); also article "Essenes" in the Bible diction-

aries. 4

The authorship

of

De

vita content plativa, so

long debated,

seems finally to have been decided in Philo's favor. See F. C. Conybeare, Philo about the Contemplative Life (Oxford, 1895); Massebieau, "Le trait6 de la vie contemplative et la question des th6rapeutes," Revue de Vhistoire des religions, XVI (1887), 170-98 and 284-319; Wendland, "Die Therapeuten" in Jahrbiichcr filr classische Philologie,

XXII

(Suppl.), 1896, 692-770.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

describes a sect

somewhat akin

107

to the Essenes,

but less widely diffused among the Jews and more distinctly monastic in its type of

Its prin-

life.

was on an eminence on the southern Lake Mareotis near Alexandria. The members of the society called themselves Therapeutes [OepanevTai,], either meaning "healcipal colony

shore

of

ers" of men's souls, or "servants" of God.

Eusebius' day,

when

the Christians had

In

come

to prize highly the monastic ideal, this early

seemed to be the natural precursor of Eg}^tian encratic Christian orders of the sect

late

third

century a.d.

Accordingly

it

was

assumed that at this early date Christianity had been planted in Egypt through the labors And to account for Philo's of John Mark. friendliness toward the movement for he

—

wrote of the Therapeutes in terms of evident approval

—

the

place, the Essees (or Essenes) of Philo

was suggested that at the time he conducted the embassy to Rome he had met and been favorably impressed by Peter.^ When these materials pass under the magic touch of Epiphanius, what is the result? In first

it

and Josephus disappear. '

Eusebius, Hist. Eccl.,

II, 16

Epiphanius' Essenes, f.

According to later tradition

Philo became a convert under Peter's preaching (Photius, Cod. 105).

The Historicity of Jesus

io8

who

later

become Ossenes and

still

later Ossees,

are one of four subdivisions of the Samaritans.

may seem

It

very strange that he should leave

a lacuna in his array of heretics by removing

among the Jews. But does any vacancy by this removal ? Has he

the Essenes from

he leave not

filled

the gap with his pre-Christian Jewish

heresy of the Nazarees,

already spoken

of

which we have

In describing them' he

?

made

one of their chief characteristics that they

it

rejected the system of animal sacrifice connected

with the Temple; and this was a notable tenet

by Philo and Josephus. The name "Nazarees" may have been suggested by the Old Testament Nazirees, the Essenes,

of

whom

Epiphanius

from the

Thus

as

is

described

so careful to distinguish

Christian heresy of the Nazorees.

the Essenes,

who straightway become

Jessees, Ossenes, etc., are reserved for a yet

more important

service.

We may

pass

by

the Ossenes-Ossees (was the spelling suggested

by

Philo's derivation of the

without further comment.

name from Our

ocrto? ?)

interest

is

with

the Jessees.

Epiphanius adopts the Eusebian tradition that '

Christianity

Hacr., XVIII, 1-3.

was planted

in

Egjpt by

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

Mark/ and

109

that Philo's Therapeutes were the

But the

primitive Christians.

title of Philo's

Con-

was, according to Epiphanius,

treatise

cerning lessees

[irepl 'lecrcratwt'].

De

ing paragraph of

speaks of the Therapeutes in a

them

cate that he regarded

They were

(Essenes).

templative

life

the practical

In the open-

vita contemplativa Philo

way

to indi-

as a type of Essees

the Essees of the con-

in contrast with the Essees of

So

life.

it

would not have been

wholly incongruous to refer to his tractate as Concerning Essees

[Trepl 'Eo-cratwv].

came Concerning

lessees?^

But whence

Epiphanius intro-

duces the subject of the Jessees as a part of his

argument

for the continuation of the

Speak-

Davidic throne in the catholic church. ing

the

of

they were

early

first

followers

of

Jesus

called Christians at

before

Antioch,

he says: They were called Jessees after Jesse, I think. Since David was descended from Jesse, and Mary was in the direct line of succession

from the seed of David, the

Divine Scriptures according to the Old Testament are fulfilled,

of

the Lord having said to David, "of the fruit

thy loins I 'ZToer., '

The

will place

XXIX,

regular

aperCiv rb 5'.

one upon thy throne."

5; LI, 6.

litle

is

Tepi ^iov 6ewpr]riKov, or iK^rai

ij

irepl

no

The Historicity of Jesus

After carrying through his argument along this

Epiphanius comes back to the word " Jessees" and admits the opportunist character

line,

of his previous explanation. it

may have come from

He

"Jesse," yet

come from "Jesus," "for Jesus Therapeute

dialect signifies

physician and savior."'

thinks

still

it

may have

in the

Hebrew

[OepaTrevTijs], i.e.,

Why are we here intro-

duced to the Therapeutes

?

E\ddently because

the objective basis of the author's thought in this connection

is

Philo's Therapeutes, coupled

with the Eusebian tradition that these were primitive Christians.

Epiphanius wishes to find

them a more appropriate name, and this he has done to his satisfaction in the word Jessees. answers his purpose in several directions.

It

He

can check

it

etymologically Jesus,

oft'

theologically with Jesse,

(through

analogically with

class of

Therapeutes) Essees

(the

^^ath

general

which Philo speaks), and historically specific term used by

with Therapeutes (the Philo).

Thus Epiphanius,

as a witness for the pre-

Christian date of Jesus and of Christianity,

a

distinct

failure.

We

is

have dwelt thus at

length upon this subject because his assertion '

See ^acr.,

XXIX,

1,4.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

iii

that Jesus was born in the time of Alexander

Jannaeus, his mention of pre-Christian Naza-

and

rees,

his suggestion of a connection be-

tween "Jesus" and " Therapeutes " seem to us to represent the most substantial data which the

have to

radicals

support

in

offer

their

of

position.

There are however a few other items of evidence which they regard as giving further positive

Among

substantiation

hypothesis.

their

to

the most explicit

these

of

two

are

passages from a papyrus fragment containing

formulas of exorcism. opKit^oi ere

.... TO)v

(1.

1549)

Fj/SpaLcju

3019 f,). formula

and

l-qcrov?-

The is

They run

word

significant

vacraapi, since

lar)

•

it is

second passage

is

vacraapc

•

Kara 6eov

ae

opKit^u)

laySa

•

.

in

.

.

(11.

.

the

first

thought to be a

But the import

reference to the "Nazarite." of the

as follows:^

Kara tov fxapTrapKovpiO

much more

certain.

Here Jesus is clearly mentioned: "I adjure thee by the god of the Hebrews, Jesus, Jaba, Jae, etc."

If

the formula

is

pre-Christian

would seem to be positive evidence '

574,

The fragment Supplement

schriften

is

at Paris in the

grec).

It

for

it

the

BibUotheque Nationale (No.

has been edited by Wessely, Denk-

der philosophisch-historischen

Classe der Kaiserlichen

Akademie der Wissenschajkn zu Wien (1888,

XXXVI,

27-208).

The Historicity of Jesus

112

an early Hebrew deity by the "Jesus" or even "Jesus the Nazarite."

existence

of

name of But the manuscript from which taken

is

400 A.D.

all

this

is

conceded to belong between 300 and This fact of itself puts the document

out of court as first-hand testimony for customs in the first century B.C., especially recall

how

themselves

is

easily magical formulas gathered to

accretions quite regard-

all sorts of

rhyme

less of

when we

The word "Jesus" made by

or reason.

here evidently a pagan supplement

a copyist

who

did not distinguish between Jews

and Christians.' Another piece Christian

Jesus

of alleged evidence for a preis

This church father,

from Hippolytus.

taken

who

it

will

be recalled wrote

in the early third century a.d., cites a

hymn used

by the

gnostic sect of the Naassenes in w^hich

Jesus'

name

'

Cf.

n. 14.

He

occurs.

represented

as

Dcissmann, Licht vom Osten (Tubingen, iqoS^), p. 186, scribe may have been betrayed into the

The heathen

"God among Jewish magicians in

error of calling Jesus

of the

disposition

among Jews

Hebrews" by the custom

the Diaspora of employing names

borrowed from various sources.

some

is

And

that there was, indeed,

in the rabbinical period to use the

name of the Christian Jesus in magic, is seen in Jacob of Kephar Sama's proposal to heal R. Eleazar of snake bite "in the name of Joshua ben Pandera." Against objections raised by R. Ishmael, R. Eleazar contended that the act could be justified, but he died before the proof was completed.

(Tosephta, HitUin, 11:21-23).

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

Father's permission

asking the

men

earth in order to teach

to

visit

113

the

the secrets of

"gnosis" and thus to reheve their distressed

Both Smith and Drews use this in support of their position, but without making any serious attempt to prove that the passage originated before the Christian era. Smith excuses himself from discussing the date, while Drews says "to all appearances pre-Christian," and cites a Babylonian parallel to the hymn, which, however, may only signify that Babylonian and Christian materials were used in its condition,'

composition.

When we

own testimony we tian

elements

in

"pre-Christian."

turn to Hippolytus'

no hint that the Christhe Naassene system are

find

In fact he explicitly affirms

that the heretics themselves cited

"James the

brother of the Lord" as the source of their

Whatever

teaching.^ sect itself it is

may

the

antiquity

of

the

by Hippolytus and the supposi-

be, as described

a heretical Christian sect,

tion that the reference to Jesus

is

a pre-Christian

feature lacks support.

Two

other points

Smith as having

emphasized by W.

B.

special evidential value are the

'

Hippolytus, Rejulalion, v,

'

Ibid., V, 2.

5

The Historicity of Jesus

114

statement in Acts

18:25

that

Apollos

was

preaching "the things concerning Jesus" while

he as yet knew only the baptism of John, and the use of "Nazarite" as an appellation for

From

Jesus.

the former

it is

inferred that a

"doctrine" concerning Jesus, sufficiently definite

and

vital to

form the background

of a

vigorous propaganda, existed in pre-Christian

But

times.

this

can be maintained only by a

very liberal reading between the lines in the narrative of Acts.

passage

is

The natural meaning of the The writer of Acts,

quite different.

perhaps more from necessity than from choice, has

left

us in the dark regarding

One

early Christianity.

of

items

is

many

of these

phases obscure

the early practice of baptism.

Paul has very

to say

little

upon

Even

this subject,

yet he seems to have regarded the ordinance as typifying,

if

not effecting in some magical way,

the believer's entrance "into Christ."

sequently

it

Con-

was naturally attended by the Spirit.' Another idea

bestowal of the Holy early connected

mth

of repentance.

While both repentance and the

the ordinance

is

the notion

giving of the Spirit are connected with the rite Acts, chap.

in '

Cf. I Cor. 12:13.

2,

it

is

not improbable that

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

115

repentance baptism, such as John the Baptist

and his followers preached, was the notion adopted by the first Christians. The "mystical union" interpretation, accompanied by the doctrine of endowment by the Holy Spirit, may have been a Pauline contribution to the history of dogma. On this understanding of the situaApollos tion all becomes clear in Acts 18 25 ff had been first introduced to Christianity by non-Pauline Christians. Later he was "Paulinized" not christianized by Priscilla and :

—

.

—

Aquila.

Smith's second point rests upon an argument

from

silence.

No

mention

of the

village of

Nazareth, either before or in the early part of the Christian era, has been found anywhere

except in Christian writings.

Hence

it is

con-

cluded that this place-name has been derived

simply from the phrase "Jesus the Nazarite."

commonly supposed, called home was in Nazareth; an imaginary Nazareth was created because Jesus was called the "Nazarite." The Jesus was not, as

is

the "Nazarite" because his

real genesis of the title

must therefore be sought

Hebrew root N-S-R, meaning to watch, protect, etc. The Nazarite then is a primitive in the

cult-god worshiped as the watcher, protector,

The

ii6 savior.

It will

Historicity of Jesus

be observed that this reversal

of the ordinary interpretation of the data rests

on the assumption that the

village of

Nazareth

never existed/ a conclusion which in turn

is

derived solely from the silence of non-Christian writers.

But

this silence

town can hardly be

about a small Galilean

so very significant.

Recal-

ling the apologetic difficulties caused

by the

statement that Jesus' christological

connect him

home was Nazareth, when

speculation

mth

David's

felt

compelled

city,

Bethlehem,

to it

seems quite unlikely that Christians would have invented, or at least have failed to challenge, so unprofitable a fiction.

A

few similar "proofs," as presented by may be noted in passing. Evidence for

Drews,

a long history of the

name

Jesus

magical power attached to the

is

seen in the

name already

"at the beginning of the Christian propaganda,"

"an

entirely inconceivable fact

magic were not given to It

critical

skepticism in

would be quite sufhcient

them to know that Jesus' him now to occupy a place Cf. the

bearer had

But the ancients who used

been a mere man." such matters.

if its

for

followers believed of authority in the

view of Cheyne {Encyclopaedia Biblica,

art.

"Naza-

reth") and of Mead, that Nazareth = Galilee, a theory which does

not serve Smith's purpose.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

117

Moreover the date and extent name is a more doubtful problem than is here assumed to be the case.' Another point is made of the type of Christology in the Book of Revelation and in the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles. The "Jesus" in these books is thought to have divine realm.

of the magical use of Jesus'

"nothing in

and

common

with the Christian Jesus"

to be "in all probability" taken over

from a

But we have previously that the Christian Jesus also came Then why the variation in source.

pre-Christian cult.

been told from this type? Not only does the assertion that they have nothing in common seem ill-advised, but the differences

may

easily

be accounted for by

conditions within the history of Christianity.

The above arguments may be designated "direct" evidence for the existence of Jesus as a

The effort to find a him among the Jews results in a few

pre-Christian cult-god. place for

more arguments It is '

of a

supplementary character.

urged that the idea of a suffering Messiah

Paul gives a hint of

this practice in his

day

(Phil. 2:g

i.),

and

Acts, chap. 3, shows the early believers defending their right so

name.

But how extensively

this was done at an was natural enough for the custom to arise, in view of contemporary ideas regarding the magical significance of a name. Cf. Hcitmiiller, "I?n Namen Jesu"

to use Jesus'

early date

is

not known.

It

(Gottingen, 1903, pp. 132-222).

1

The Historicity of Jesus

18

is

not distinctively Christian but was earlier a

Jewish doctrine, having been taken over from the heathen notion of a suffering, dying, and

To be

rising god.

myths personi-

sure, nature

fying the death of winter and the re\ival to

new life in the spring are common in

the heathen

Acquaintance with

mythologies of Asia Minor.

these on the part of the Jews is possible and even probable, but evidence that these notions

formed an important part of their messianic

hope

in the construction

is

scanty.

Certainly

a mere collection of isolated points suggesting similarities of ideas

not sufficient proof of

is

borrowing, particularly ture shows so

little

Isaiah, chap. 53,

is

when

the Jewish litera-

to confirm the supposition.

sometimes cited in

this con-

But granting that its thought may be heathen origin and its significance mes-

nection. of

—both

doubtful points

official

Judaism did not interpret the

sianic'

that

—

it

is

suffering servant of Isaiah messianically

did

early

Christianity,

which

ex

true

still

;

nor

hypothesi

represents the unofficial side of Jewish thought,

make

extensive

whom Drews '

So

use

will

Gressmann,

Der

of

the

passage.

Paul,

concede to be a historical Ursprung

der

Eschalologie (Gottingen, 1906), pp. 302-53-

israeliiisch-jiidischen

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

119

personality of primal importance for the

movement, employs the idea victim in the Jewish

the offered

of

sacrificial

system rather

than that of the "suffering servant." gospels

show that

Jesus'

new

The

personal associates

were utterly unprepared for his death, and Paul says that the early Christian preaching about

a dying Messiah was a stumbling block to Jews

and

foolishness

to

strange situation

if

Greeks.

This

is

a very

the notion was originally

heathen and had been early adopted by Judaism.

The

primitive Christians had too

difficulty in

much

defending their belief in a suffering

Messiah to allow us to suppose that they found the idea current in Judaism, or even that the

heathen notion of a dying and rising

divinity

was recognized

as having

any

essential

similarity with their preaching about "Jesus

Christ and

him

The attempt

crucified."

to locate a pre-Christian Jesus

Judaism is implicitly admitted by the radicals to be hopeless. Hence they resort

in orthodox

whose worship, ritual, and dogma centeied about this Jesus-god of the cult. That there were divers sects within to the hypothesis of secret sects

Judaism

in pre-Christian times

established

fact.

Philo,

is

a fairly well

Josephus,

the

New

1

The Historicity of Jesus

20

Testament, the early Fathers, and the Talmud, all

support, more or less strongly, this opinion.

We

hear of Samaritans, Pharisees, Herodians,

Essenes, Therapeutes, to say nothing of groups of followers collected

from time to time by

messianic pretenders,

and the possible pre-

Christian origin of various heresies mentioned at a later date in the Patristic literature

and

Talmud. From the time of Antiochus Epiphanes down to about the close of the first century a.d., the Jews were passing through the

when

factions

mthin

turbulent

experiences,

and

from without were strongly affecting

forces

and thought. It is not at all impossible that by the end of the first century a.d. there may have been in circulation a body of their life

literature

roughly answering to the seventy

books of II Esd. 14:46. But what value have these facts for the idea Is he mentioned of a pre-Christian Jesus?

anywhere in connection with these sects, or in any of the non-canonical Jewish writings that have come to us from this period? He cerIn what we know of the tenets tainly is not.

and practices

of these sects

to indicate his existence?

is

there anything

Here, too, specific

evidence for an affirmative answer

fails.

It is

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

121

movements is Yet given by Philo and

true that our knowledge of these relatively

meager and mostly secondary.

such descriptions as are

Josephus are usually thought to be

and nothing appears here

reliable,

to indicate that the

worship of a special cult-god characterized any

known.

of the sects or parties then

A recently

discovered document published by Schechter is

of great importance.'

It gives us

new

in-

formation about one of these obscure Jewish

movements, but there

is

not

the

slightest

worshiped a

intimation that

these

special cult-god.

They looked back with reverwho was

sectaries

ence to a "teacher of righteousness"

the founder of their society, and awaited the

time when "the teacher of righteousness shall

days" and "the anointed shall and Aaron." Whether the teacher yet to appear was the same who had died is disputed,^ but at any rate this individual arise in the last

arise

from

Israel

Documenls of Jewish Sectaries, I, Fragments of a Zadokite Edited with Translation, Introduction, and Notes by Schechter (Cambridge University Press, igio). '

Work.

' The editor of the document thinks a resurrection is impHed; G. F. Moore is of the contrary opinion ("The Covenanters of Damascus; a Hitherto Unknown Jewish Sect" in the Harvard Theological Review, IV [191 1], 330-77). Cf. Kohler, "Dositheus, the Samaritan Heresiarch, etc.," in the American Journal of Theology, (191 1), 404-35, who sees here an example of the Samaritan doctrine of the ^Messiah's disappearing and reappearing

XV

at will.

The Historicity of Jesus

122 is

no dying and

rising Adonis-like sa\'ior-deity.

Jehovah the God of Israel is the sole object worship. So in general the thought-content

of of

Jewish parties or heresies, as far as known at present, did not concern itself with the worship of

any

special deities,

but with the best means

common

of rendering acceptable service to the

god

of their fathers.

often

Thus the

separatists,

rigid

sectaries

were

but they were not

worshipers of other deities.

The extremes in their

to

which the radicals are driven

endeavor to make room for the pre-

Christian Jesus of their hypothesis

is

illustrated

Drews's assertions regarding secret cults in Judaism. He says that not only have the in

world-views

of

Babylonians,

and

Persians,

Judaism Greeks but from the beginning, side by side with the priestly and officially accentuated view of the polytheistically,

influenced

One God, went a

faith in other gods, a faith

which not only received constantly

new nour-

ishment from foreign influences but, above

which seemed to be fostered in the secret

all,

sects.

This seems to be a very injudicious statement of the situation.

That the main

contained syncretistic elements recognized,

and

the early

line of

is

now

Judaism

generally

and continued

activity

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

123

cannot be and widespread

of separatist parties of various types

disputed, but the perpetual existence

the Jews

of

secret

polytheistic

cults

by any

not supported

is

among

substantial

evidence.

name can be connected with these sects, which are alleged to have worshiped him as a cult-god, only by a precarious process of etymologizing, a method by which one may usually argue much and prove nothing. Already we Jesus'

have noted the futility of the argument based on the equation, Joshua = Jesus. As a sample of the

way he

is

discovered to have been the

special object of reverence

among

the Essenes

and Therapeutes, we are reminded that Philo whose name means "pious," "God-fearing," and the Therapeutes, meaning "physicians." Also indicates a kinship between the Essenes,

Hebrew "helper," "de"The Therapeutes and Essenes looked upon them"Jesus"

liverer."

selves

signifies

Then

as

in

the argument proceeds:

physicians"

—did

the

Essenes?

"especially as physicians of souls, accordingly it is

not at

all

improbable that they worshiped

name," that

their cult-god

under

name

Can an argument

Jesus.

establish even a

this

shadow

is,

the

of this sort

of likelihood, not to

1

The Historicity of Jesus

24

mention probabilities the

will

are also told that

by

mentioned

Nazarees

pre-Christian

Epiphanius

We

?

unquestionably have worshiped

the "Nazarite" whose attributes as protector, savior (Jesus), have already been derived from

Hebrew

the

root N-S-R.

In addition to this

point of Smith's, Drews notes that the

word

netzer, the

in Isaiah,

"shoot out of Jesse" mentioned

the symbol of the

is

"Redeemer"

his character of a deity of vegetation

"an

idea which also

in the

name

arguments

may have made The

of the Nazarees." of

Hebrew

this

sort

and

life,

itself felt

futility of

self-evident,

is

in

even

without noting their occasional absurdity from a purely linguistic point of view.^

When

the doctrine of a pre-Christian Jesus

is

applied more specifically to the origin of Christianity, the

comes

instance, '

inadequacy of the hjpothesis be-

still

more

we may

evident.

As

a

concrete

take Drews's application of

We can imagine that the Zadokite sectaries, to use Schechter's by the application

argument maj^ also For do we not find in their writings the statement that God "made bud for Israel and Aaron a root of a plant to inherit his lands" ? To be

designation,

be

made

sure, the

of a similar

worshipers of the pre-Christian Jesus.

Hebrew

for root

similar to Isa. 60:21,

where

is

shoresh, but the thought

netzer occurs.

gression shoresh, netzer, "Nazarite," the cult-god Jesus. lous indeed, but hardly impossible, sufifering

from chronic "etymologitis."

is

very

So we have the pro-

we should

Ridicu-

think, for one

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

125

the theory to explain the Christianity of Paul.

In Tarsus, flourished,

where heathen

religious

notions

Paul had heard of a Jewish sect-god,

Jesus.

Paul's sympathies, however, were with

official

Judaism, and he studied to become a

teacher of the law.

The

gospel of "Jesus,"

which was originally "nothing other than a Judaized and spiritualized Adonis-cult," was first

preached by

men

Cyprus and Cyrene,

of

and Paul opposed this preaching because the law pronounced a curse upon everyone who hung upon a tree. Then suddenly there came over him a great enlightenment. The dying Adonis became a self-sacrificing god, surrendering his life for the world. This was "the

moment

of Christianity's birth as a religion of

Paul."

This attempted derivation of Pauline Christianity

because its

from the it is

cult of

Adonis

fails

not only

too highly fanciful, but because of

serious omissions.

On

the one hand, im-

portant features in Adonis' career find no place in Paul's picture of Jesus

—

for example,

the

youthful god slain by the wild boar, and the

mourning

of his goddess sweetheart.

significant is the failure of the

to

suggest

some

of

the

most

But more

Adonis legend specific

and

1

The

26

Historicity of Jesus

important items in Paul's thought of Jesus, such as his

human

ancestry and family connections/

his

association with

life^

lived in worldly poverty," his self-sacrificing

his

disciples,^

righteous

heavenly exaltation as a reward

service,^ his

for obedience,^ the circumstances of his death,^

the awakening of faith through his appearances,*

and

finally the stress

Paul puts on the Messiah's

future coming, and his present significance for

the spiritual

of believers.

life

doubtful whether the idea of a

It is also

suffering deity

so genetically vital to Paul's

is

thought as Drews assumes.

Man-god

Jesus or the

Is it the

corner-stone of the Pauline gospel

not forget that for Paul there

supreme

deity,

manifest in

1:3;

I

God

Cor. 9:5;

is

Rom. 5:18

II Cor. 8:9; cf. Phil. 2:5

s

Rom. Rom.

f.;

sent

him from the dead and

Gal. 1:19; f.,

God who

still it is

raised

4

4:4.

etc.

II Cor. 5:21. ff.

15:3; II Cor. 10:1. 1:4; Phil. 2:9

'I Cor. 11:23; 3.nd 1

^vill

Although Jesus was a

3

8

but one

voluntarily surrendered

'I Cor. 15:5; Gal. 1:17

'

must

who

to earth,

'Rom.

is

We

all things.

heavenly position,

him

?

the activity of whose

pre-existent being his

God-man

Jesus that stands as the

f.

numerous references

Cor. 5:5-8; Gal. 1:12, 16.

to his crucifixion.

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

delegates to

and

him the conduct

of the

127

judgment,

God at last he submits all things in order God may be all in all. It is true that Paul

to

that

speculates about the activity of Jesus in the angelic realm in subordination to God, but the significance of this activity in

man's behalf

lies

not in the abstract thought of an incarnated

redeeming divinity but in an actual

human

terminated by a violent death.

Not some

life

hypothesis about his becoming a man, but the

way he man,

lived

and the outcome

his success in contrast

of his career as a

with the

first

failures, his restoration of the ideal of

man, these are the phases

make him rection life

of his activity

truly the savior of

men.

man's

a perfect

which

His resur-

and his present activity in the spiritual community are the further assurance

of the

of his saving power.

pre-existence

is

In

all this

the thought of

never the stress point.

The

heavenly man, the earthly Jesus, the exalted Christ (Messiah), the heavenly Lord, are

all

but the point of supreme importance for his gospel, that which he makes the central item of his preaching, is

features in Paul's system;

the transition from the second to the third stage of this progression,

and him

crucified."

from "Jesus" to "Christ

The

128

Historicity of Jesus

In like manner the application of the preChristian Jesus-theory to the gospels

take

account

depicted.

the

of

that

the effect

is

there

illustra-

a citation from

is

Mark was an

Wrede

apologetic

aiming to prove to gentile readers that

Even granting

Jesus was the Son of God. it

to

departure for his treatment

of the gospel material

to

situation

Again using Drews as an

tion, the point of

treatise

actual

fails

not the same as saying that

this,

Mark was

primarily interested in showing that the Son

God was

of

Nor

Jesus.

his conclusion that

do not with a

justified in

"in the gospels we have to

deified

man but

anthropomorphized god. It does

qualifications.

Drews

is

'

'

rather with an

This assertion needs

not truly represent the

order in which gospel thought proceeds, nor the

situation

in

which the early Christian

apologists found themselves.

What new

troubled the

religion

first

missionaries of the

was not the reluctance

of their

hearers to believe that a god had become a man,

but their hesitation about believing

that

a

an obscure Jew who had been ignorniniously put to death, was really the Son

man, of

especially

God.

The

oldest type of synoptic tradition

does not connect either Jesus' activity or his

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

teaching with a deified past. first is

129

At baptism he

appears as God's son, and his Hfe history

interpreted constantly with reference to his

His teachings

future rather than to his past. are not of

any angeKc world out

has come, but of the earthly spiritual fellowship

of

which he

to be lived in

life

with God, and the future

welfare of himself and his followers.

and exaltation

in the resurrection

starting-point

for

theological

Belief is

the

elaboration

in

of Jesus

gospel tradition, and the interpreter's task

is

seen to be not the problem of reading the divine

out of Jesus' career but of so narrating the story of his activity itself to

that

it

might

the later faith in

him

fittingly

relate

as the exalted

Only in the later stages of the tradiFourth Gospel and in the nativity Matthew and Luke, does the process

Messiah.

tion, as in the

stories of

of elevation reach

back as

far as the pre-earthly

side of Jesus' career.

Consequently the idea of a pre-Christian cult-god, as the starting-point for the gospel religion,

does not answer the requirements of

A similar objection holds against

the situation.

Kalthoff's supposition that Jesus

community's perishing.

is

merely the

ideal personified to save

On

the

contrary,

gospel

it

from

thought

The Historicity oj Jesus

130

moves

in the opposite direction.

from the person to

from

the

ideal

It

proceeds

his ideaHzation rather

to

than

The

personification.

its

extent to which the evangeHsts' narratives are historical

another problem, but unquestion-

is

ably this literary activity moves out from the idea of a historical Jesus

heavenly Christ, and so

who has become

is

the

the object of unique

devotion and reverence.

When

all

evidence

the

historicity

Jesus'

is

brought

surveyed

it

is

against

found to

contain no elements of strength.

All theories

that would explain the rise of the

New

Testa-

by making it a purely fictitious and the arguments for a preChristian Jesus are found to lack any substan-

ment

literature

product

fail,

tial basis.

One

of the serious defects of the

negative procedure

is

way

the

in

which the

great bulk of testimony for the origin of Christianity

is

unceremoniously set aside in favor

of a hypothetical reconstruction

obscure and isolated points.

promiscuous forcing of

all

based upon

This results in a

data into line with

an otherwise unverified theory as to how the new religion might possibly have arisen. So it

has happened that no advocate of the negative

position, at least

none since Bauer, has con-

An

Estimate of the Negative Argument

131

cerned himself primarily and comprehensively

with the principal data in the

example

the

that

letters

field,

of

showing for

Paul and

the

primitive gospel tradition are wholly spurious.

A

theory of

foisted

Christianity's

origin

has been

upon our attention before the way has

been cleared for

it

in a field already occupied.

Moreover when the credentials of the negative hypothesis, and its application to Christian

origins,

are

minutely examined,

their

unsubstantial and fallacious character becomes evident.

The

chief

negative position

data on which

is

strength

of

the

whole

the intangibility of the

it rests.

whose

It is built

upon a few

argumentative

isolated

points

value

in the fact that in their present setting

lies

chief

some uncertainty as to their exact Thus they lend themselves to liberal hypothesizing. We have already observed that the detailed items advanced as evidence for a pre-Christian Jesus are of this character. But on closer inspection not only do we find no well-attested references to him but there is also no appropriate place for him in the history of the period where he is supposed to belong. The argument for his existence may sometimes have a semblance of plausibility but this is there

is

meaning.

The Historicity of Jesus

132

because the data offered in

its

support are

obscure either as to context or content, so that

generous

reading

between the Hnes,

etymologizing, and the

liberal

become the main

like,

stock in trade for these theorists.

They

can, to

be sure, claim a certain degree of immunity

from the weapons however,

fact,

is

of adverse criticism.

This

not to be taken, as they would

sometimes have us believe, as attesting the strength of their theory.

It

the intangible character of their

argument cannot

easily

detailed scientific rebuttal. it is

is

its

just because of

premises that

be submitted to

As Weiss remarks,

the most difficult task in the world to prove

to nonsense that

it is

nonsense.

CHAPTER V PRAGMATIC PHASES OF PRIMITIVE TRADITION The argument

against Jesus' historicity has

already been found to lack adequate support.

Unless

can

advocates

its

offer

more valid

reasons for their skepticism, and can

make

the

constructive presentation of their hypothesis

agree more closely with

all

the data in the field

of primitive Christian history, they can scarcely

hope to find a substantial following. ent the prospects of

At

pres-

success for the radical

contention seem to be slight, and no necessity is

generally felt even for asking.

Did a

his-

torical Jesus ever live ?

Yet when

question

this

is

asked can an

affirmative answer be formulated sufficiently

strong to prove, beyond the possibility of a

reasonable doubt, that Jesus was a genuinely historical character?

priate to set forth

believing

those

in

his

who adhere

It

some

may

not be inappro-

specific

historicity,

reasons for

especially

since

to the opposite view some-

times claim that they are not obliged to justify ^33

The Historicity of Jesus

134

argument

their skepticism unless a valid historicity

We

advanced.

is

cerned to determine the

full

information about Jesus

shall

amount

now

The

of reliable

available;

confine attention to the single issue,

ever live

for

not be con-

we

Did Jesus

?

radicals will not allow us to point as

proof to the uniformity of Christian opinion today, or merely to cite the Christian tradition

They

of the past.

insist,

and quite

rightly, that

not the Jesus of history but rather the risen and

heavenly Christ of faith has held the central position in believers' thought from the earliest

times

down

to the present.

It is

pointed out

that this state of affairs existed even as early as the time of Paul,

who had

relatively little

to say of an earthly Jesus in comparison with his

emphasis upon the heaven-exalted indi\ddual

who was soon

may

sure, it

to

be

come

in

difficult to

judgment.

To be

imagine that the

first instance have occupy the place he did without the reality of an earthly Jesus, but to assume this connection as a presupposition would be to beg the question at issue. In fact, those who deny

Christ of faith could in the

come

Jesus' sible

to

historicity

maintain that

it

is

impos-

to believe in the reality of his earthly

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

135

career just because of the very exalted place

he occupied in the primitive theology.

They

say that memory of his human limitations would have prevented that idealization of him which Consequently we is found in early tradition. are asked to show that early Christian speculation has room for the actual career of an earthly Jesus.

On

we may note that the men was not unusual in this world's history. And if it is

general grounds

deification

of

period of the that

Jesus

belief in

him

objected

prompt

had done

nothing

to

as a heaven-exalted hero

—that he was no world-conquering Alexander —one may say that heroic suffering was the his

pathway by which he ascended honors.

urged,

If is it

company

a-priori

considerations are to be

not quite impossible to imagine a

of believers declaring themselves to

have been companions of a reverencing

him even

in this situation

fictitious

There are two factors

which distinguish

anthropomorphizing

general.

The

already

been

order seen

person and

to the extent of sacrificing

their lives for his cause ?

mythical

to heavenly

of

to

Christian interpretation,

progress,

show is

it

of

from the

deities

in

which has

itself

in

from Jesus the

early

man

The Historicity of Jesus

136

to Christ the heavenly Lord and emphasis falls upon the proximity of the events. It is true that no New Testament book may be held to ;

give us the exact views of a personal follower of Jesus, yet the great bulk of early tradition

gives the reader the vivid impression that the

New Testament and the person whom it reverences, are not projected into some remote past but have unique phenomena behind the

faith,

appeared within the memory of

On

men

living.

still

hand we have to admit that the Testament may contain features created

the other

New

by the pious fancy of the early believers, hence a request for more specific proof that the earthly figure of Jesus

is

not a mere product

of this interest in interpretation

is

not out of

place.

The obscurity makes our task a

of

Christianity's beginnings

difficult one.

ample evidence that the new

While there religion

existence about the close of the A.D., there is

beginnings, life

first

was

century

no contemporary account

much

less

is

in

of its

such an account of the

of its alleged founder.

He

left

no written

records of his teaching, and none of the New Testament writings can be assigned with absolute certainty to the pen of a personal disciple

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

At

of Jesus.

the adherents of the

first

137

new

faith apparently had no idea of any prolonged

propaganda, or

of a

time after the

first

genera-

tion of Christians should have passed

away

when written documents would be needed

to

supply information about the early days of the It

faith.

is

now

well

known

that the literature

which purports to narrate the story career does not, in

its

of Jesus'

present form, come from

Mark, was written at a time when the author would be compelled to thread his way back to Jesus through from thirty to forty years of development in the thought and life of the church, and that too in a period when tradition was in its most fluid the

generation

first

though the

The

state.

Christians.

of

earliest gospel,

other

evangelists

were under a

similar necessity, the difiiculty being perhaps

greater in their case since they were chronologically

events.

farther

removed from the

original

Paul's letters are the earliest extant

Christian writings, yet they were not composed

with

any deliberate purpose

of

instructing

posterity on questions of history, or even of

expounding the content

of

contemporary think-

They aim rather to meet special exigencies among the churches. Hence the modern hising.

The Historicily oj Jesus

138

must

torian

rely

upon secondary sources

in his

effort to recover the Jesus of history.

It

is

true

that

the

do distinctly

gospels

emphasize the career of Jesus, but their portrait is

of

soon discovered to be colored by the interests

dogma.

developing

critical

This

necessitates

a

handling of the material in order to

distinguish earlier from later phases of tradition.

Mark

has been found to be the earliest of the

gospels, while

still

earlier written materials, in

addition to Mark, are thought to have been

used by the writers of Matthew and Luke. The Fourth Gospel is now believed to have originated last, and to have been written more especially as

personality.

an interpretative account

Thus our

sources

of

of Jesus'

informa-

tion, in inverse chronological order, are

John,

Matthew, Luke (or Luke, Matthew), Mark, and the non-Markaji sections of Matthew and Luke which have so strong a verbal resemblance that the use of earlier common-source material may be safely assumed. With these generally accepted results of modern gospel criticism before us it might seem an easy matter to discriminate, at least in the main outlines, between later

data.

accretions

and the primitive

historical

Will not the earliest document be the

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

139

purest historically, while the other documents will

be estimated according to chronological

position

?

This method far as

it

undoubtedly valuable as

is

goes, but

does not meet the ultimate

it

needs of historical inquiry, inasmuch as the oldest source

may

quite likely be itself influ-

enced by theological interests. there

was a primitive period

Christianity

when

The

idea that

in the history of

doctrine was "pure," the

recovery of which would give one the quintessence of Christianity,

generally as a fiction; error to imagine

tradition rative

an

is

but

now is it

when only Simon-pure The

not a kindred

ideal period in the primitive

about Jesus'

circulation?

treated quite

life

historical nar-

and teaching was

earliest writer

may

in

indeed

have had the best opportunity to learn the actual facts,

and

so his narrative will naturally

be prized the most highly by historians, but

what if the situation in which he found himself demanded an "interpretation" of the facts! This demand must have become evident almost at the beginning of the new community's life, and those who advocated the new faith must have early felt the desirability of rising to this occasion. Otherwise there would have been

The Historicity of Jesus

I40 little

them

incentive for

and

to speak

still less

likelihood that their words would have been

remembered. It

does not follow that the early apologetic

had no

basis in fact, but

we must

recognize that

the point of view from which the framers of the tradition presented their material, as well as the controlling interest in

elaboration, were largely determined

own

And

historical situation.

evangelists are concerned,

they were by no means writing the bare

aim was

the

count in favor of the interpretation

church found

of

early

the

to

life

Their related

which they

them

data.

as the

What

the

which molded

this its theologians, in all

science, naturally for in the

they

in

thinking and doing, as the

itself

result of the circumstances life,

history.

t}q3e of faith

of

their

evident that

is

history

preached, and which appealed true

by

so far as our

solely interested

outlines

make

to

it

and

selection

its

its

good con-

endeavored to find warrant

and teaching

Had

of Jesus.

evangelists failed to appreciate this

the

demand

of

their times there would have been but slight

occasion for

and still what they wrote would be must grant at the outset that

them

to write anything,

less probability that

preserved.

We

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

141

our present sources of information about Jesus are literary products framed subsequently to his career,

and that they may indeed have been

shaped to favor pragmatic fore in using these

There-

interests.

documents today

for purely

historical purposes it is desirable to recognize

at least

some

of the

main pragmatic demands

of that period.

What must

the primitive Christians' gospel

contain in order to insure

its effectiveness in

the thought-world of their

day? In the first it must offer an

place,

and above

all

else,

The notion of

assurance of salvation.

salvation

did not originate with Christianity, nor was Jesus the

first

a deliverer.

upon as

individual to be looked

The ancient

Babylonia, and Persia of salvation for

all

religions of

Egypt,

entertained the hope

humanity, and pictured more

or less vividly the idea of redemption. syncretistic faiths of the

Roman

day show

Even

similar traits.

the

Roman poet,

Vergil, voiced sentiments of this sort

to think

Men

Augustus had ushered

and seemed

new

in the

age.

everywhere hoped for deliverance, a deliv-

erance ultimately to be effected by the deity. alone could avert fate,

The

world in Jesus'

evils,

He

destroy enemies, control

and give humanity a triumphant

salvation.

Tlie Ilistoricily of

142

Among

the Jews this idea became highly

God would one day

specialized.

chosen

Jesus

people

destroying

from

all foes

their

deliver his

enemies,

or else converting

either

them

the hope of political freedom was

into

While

obedient subjects of Israel's sovereign. still

strong,

the golden age awaited the appearing of an ideal earthly ruler, the descendant of the hero-

prince, David.

But the period

of

temporary

independence under the Maccabeans proved so disappointing that in some circles less thought was given to the human mediator

political

of the divine salvation

upon the divine

activity

either in person or else his

from the

and more emphasis itself.

fell

God would,

through a messenger of

spirit-world, suddenly

demonstrate

up a new regime in a renovated earth. In the meantime it behooved men to wait upon the divine pleasure, and thus to insure for themselves if possible a favorable reception when God should While there was diversity in matters of act. detail, the main ambition of Judaism when Christianity appeared upon the scene was to his

power

to abolish

all evil

and

to set

win God's favor, thus establishing

for

man an

assurance of salvation.

Under these circumstances thought

of Jesus

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition after his death could scarcely itself

even to his

have commended

much

disciples,

143

less to outr

had they not connected him in some substantial way with the hope of salvation. Otherwise a propaganda in his name would have been impossible. He would have been as unconditionally dismissed from further consideration as were Judas of Gamala and other discredited messianic aspirants. Nor was it siders,

possible for the

first

Christians to hold that

had given the actual demonstration of his saving mission, for he had died and deliverance had not yet been fully realized. In this his career was like that of Judas and the others; but he was unlike them in that the Jesus' earthly

life

future held in store for him, so they asserted, the opportunity to effect the salvation.

He was

clouds

establish

to

soon to the

consummation of return upon the

kingdom.

However

moderns may be disposed

to regard this feature

of early belief,

was an indispensable

it

certainly

item in the primitive interpretation of Jesus.

What had

Jesus' earthly

saving mission

?

life

to

Seemingly very

earliest stages of interpretation.

do with his little in

Even

the

in the

synoptic gospels the tardiness of his followers in attaining faith during his lifetime

is

every-

The

144

Jesus

Ilistoricity oj

When

where admitted.

they do at last confess

they are

their belief in his messiahship

still

unprepared to hear of his death, they do not comprehend the reference to his resurrection, and they disband seemingly without hope after his crucifixion, all of

whatever his

messianic hope they

of

t}q)e

have entertained

which surely implies that

may

for Jesus during his lifetime,

death brought about a very substantial

The

transformation of their faith.

now became more

of salvation

other-worldly in glory.

distinctly

awaiting Jesus'

affair,

The

realization

chief evidences that Jesus

the coming Messiah were not found at

an

advent

was

first in

history but in the present experiences of the

Christians

themselves.

interpretation

—and

At

least

we have

in

little

Paul's

reason to

think that at this point he differed widely from other

early

Christians

—the

primary

and

offered are (i) Jesus' resurrection

proofs (2)

the

spiritual gifts displayed in the lives of believers,

thus attesting Jesus' present lordship. Belief in Jesus' resurrection to

Paul's

faith.

pointing out that

He it is

testimony of persons

defends

is

scriptural, still

fundamental

this

by

living

belief

by

citing the

who have

witnessed visions of the risen Lord, and finally

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

by pledging

his

own word:

been raised then faith also

is

is

void;

he raised up

and we are found

new

religion in

which a

we

Christ."^

when defending

occasion,

"If Christ has not

our preaching void, your

yea,

witnesses of God, because that

145

false

God

witness of

On an

earlier

the superiority of the

comparison with the assurance

legalistic religion offered,

Paul throws

out a test question: "This only would I learn

Received ye the Spirit by the works of

of you,

the law or

by the hearing

therefore that supplieth to

of faith ?

you the

.

.

.

Spirit

.

He and

worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith ?"^

Evidence of Jesus' lordship is thus proleptically displayed in these adumbrations of the

new age soon

Lord's "parousia."

to be ushered in

by the

Hence, for Paul, to con-

and to believe that God raised him from the dead guarantees salvation, It would seem, therefore, that Paul did not ask his hearers to go back into Jesus' earthly

fess Jesus' lordship

career at

•

I

all for

evidence of Jesus' messianic

Paul did note features in Jesus'

dignity.

Cor. 15:4-8, 14

^

Gal. 3:

3

Rom.

2,

5;

10:9.

cf. I

life,

f.

Cor. 12: iff.; II Cor. 12:12;

Rom. 15:18

f.

The Historicity of Jesus

146

such as his Davidic descent and his death on the cross, which were important preHminaries the

in

coming

program,

savior's

but these

things in themselves did not officially authenticate

him

the Messiah.

as

By

these

marks

alone no one could be expected to recognize in

him the promised

deliverer.

True, Paul does

think that Jesus was potentially the Messiah

even before he appeared upon earth, but he did not receive the insignia of office and the

stamp of divine authentication until he was "declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead.'" Almost identically the same interpretation is given in Acts 2:325., where the disciples' witness to the resurrection, and the ecstatic life of the community in confinal

sequence of Jesus' exaltation, are cited as proof that

"God hath made him both Lord and

Messiah,

this

Again

Acts

in

Jesus

13:33

whom Jesus'

mentioned as a fulfilment '

Rom.

1:4; cf Phil. .

2

:

9

ye

crucified."^

resurrection

of Ps. 2:

"Thou

is

art

f

where a miracle wrought by the disciples in Jesus' name is evidence that God "hath glorified his Servant Jesus," and where the disciples' testimony to the resurrection is '

Cf. Acts 3: 13-15,

again aflirmed.

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

my son,

this

day have

I

begotten thee."

147

These

passages must represent an early type of thinking,

even though they stand in so late a work

They will not have been created in an age when the notion had become current that divine sanction had already been officially as Acts.

upon Jesus at the

set

transfiguration,'

or

previously at his baptism,^ or even before his birth.3

While the

disciples,

resurrection faith life,

may have

on the basis of their

and the community's

ecstatic

been content to wait for further

proof of Jesus' messiahship in what was yet to

happen, others, and particularly Jews, must have demanded a more immediate basis for faith.

How could the early preachers plausibly

ask their hearers to believe that Jesus would

come on the clouds with a divine commission to deliver Israel

some Jews

We

?

have already noted that

hope of a heavenly Messiah to be sent forth from God with miraculous power to deliver the faithful. at this time cherished the

Others were willing to connect the idea of

= Matt.

i7:5 = Luke 9:3S>-

'

Mark

9:7

'

Mark

i:ii

3

Matt. 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-38,*''

= Matt.

3:i7 = Luke 3:22.*^

The Historicity of Jesus

148

messiahship with an earthly individual

who

would exemplify the characteristics of their idealized warrior-prince, David, and under God's guidance deliver Israel from political But Christians were asking the oppression. Jews to identify the heavenly Messiah his lifetime

had

satisfied

none

accepted tests of messiahship

of the

who during

future with an earthly individual

of the generally

—an

individual

who had

in fact

been discredited by an igno-

minious

death.

If

he

had

failed

messianic standards while on earth, surprising that there

was

meet

to

it is

hardly

difficulty in antici-

pating for him any future display of messianic

Therefore Christian interpreters were

dignity.

obliged

not

only

to

the

justify

heretofore

unheard-of procedure of identifying the man-

Messiah with the heavenly Messiah;

but

if

Jesus was the Messiah to be, it was not unreasonable to demand some foreshadowings of this fact in his earthly life. These necessities, as we shall presently see, were met by exhibiting, in what must have seemed at first at least to

Jews

if

not

to

Christians

—a

—

non-messianic

career of Jesus on earth, elements that

messianic

significance;

meant the transference

and

this

of his saving

had

ultimately

work from

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

149

domain

the realm of eschatology into the

of

history.

Paul remarks that

Jews to

it

was

demand "signs"

Christians'

characteristic of

proof

in

the

of

Evidently

estimate of Jesus.'

it

was Jesus' death to which exception was taken. This seemed to Jews a mark of weakness, so they demanded signs of Jesus' power. instead of pointing out evidences of

But power in

Jesus' historical person, Paul replied that Christ crucified

God

the power of

is

—witness

the

and the charismatic endowments accompanying the propagation of the new faith. resurrection

Similarly in synoptic tradition the

demand

unmet, so

a sign during Jesus' lifetime

is left

far as the actual request

concerned.

is

Jewish authorities sought a sign cally

"a

sign

from heaven"

away impatiently with generation no sign substitutes

for

—more

The

specifi-

—but Jesus turned

the curt reply, "to this

shall

be

given."

Some

were suggested in the tradition,

such as the sign of Jonah, the signs of the times, or the sign of Jesus' resurrection;

but early

Christian tradition uniformly recognized that the particular type of sign

demanded by the

Jews as evidence that the earthly Jesus was to >I Cor. 1:22

£f.

The

150

Historicity of Jesus

be identified with the expected Messiah could not be historically produced.'

What was

the real sign from heaven which

Jesus so uniformly refused his

own

generation

?

can hardly be that Mark, for example,

It

thought the Pharisees were asking for a miracle of the sort Jesus had already performed. There would not be anything distinctive about this, for they had already witnessed Jesus' miracles on various occasions. Their request was rather for a special demonstration "from heaven" which should leave no doubt in their minds that he was the final minister of salvation, the Messiah. There was one pre-eminent sign that would satisfy the Jews, namely, for Jesus to present himself riding upon the clouds in glory. This was the one supreme test, regarded on all hands as final, for a messiahship of the

type Christians were claiming for Jesus. this proof

of Jesus'

was

own

generation.

make

tation could not

but must treat the narrative of

on the part '

it

this

Christian interpre-

a matter of history

as an item of faith.

Mark

Thus

in

the "leaven" of disbelief

of the Jewish leaders sets off to

iSlark 8:11-13;

12:54-56.

But

of course not available for those

Mall. 16:1-4;

12:38

f.;

Luke

11:16, 29;

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition greater advantage the disciples' belief

and

faltering as

it

is

—

in Jesus'

151

— tardy

messiahship/

notwithstanding the unmessianic character of his career

when judged by the standards of In Matthew and Luke, disbelief is similarly condemned as

popular expectation. Pharisaic

the trait of a generation which

is

and

"evil

adulterous."^

But how could

the

upbraided for disbelief a sign in support of faith

Pharisees

be

fairly

if

they were not given

?

Christian apologists

recognized this need, and offered, in place of the as yet impossible sign from heaven, other

data which were held by believers to justify identifying the earthly Jesus with the future

savior from heaven. in Jesus' career

Negatively, those features

which seemed to contradict

hope were explained away as divinely ordained;

while

more

positive

found

Jesus' uniqueness were of

his

career.

sanction of spiritual

main

evidences of

in other features

Not only was God's

him seen

lordship

special

and his community the

in his resurrection

over

the

pillars of the first Christians'

early interpretation

this

fore-

was able

'

Mark

^

Matt. 12:39; 16:4; Luke 11:29.

8: 14-21, 27-33.

— faith —but

to exhibit sanc-

The Historicity of Jesus

152 tions

from God during Jesus'

attestations of

ately

by Jesus

and also uniqueness given more immedilifetime,

himself.

This brought about a real demand for a "Life of Christ."

The

direction probably were

and

in a

earliest efforts in this

made on

Je^vish soil

Jewish atmosphere, and the items set

in the foreground of the narrative

were naturally

those best suited to show that the earthly Jesus

was worthy still

of messianic honors.

WTiile he

was

pre-eminently the savior to come, he had

also accomplished at least a preliminary sa\'ing

work while on earth. But as his coming was delayed, and interest in the realistic Jewish eschatology waned, still more did Christians the

realize

importance of finding the chief

manifestation of Jesus' saving mission in his earthly

but

life.

it is

This evolution was a gradual one,

clearly observable in the

New

Testa-

At the beginning stands Paul, with

ment.

his

vivid forward look warning converts that the

day

is

far spent

all shall

and the night

is

at

hand when

stand before the judgment-seat of God.^

At the other extreme is the author of the Fourth Gospel, whose faith takes a backward 'Rom. 5:10.

13:12;

14:10;

cf. I

Cor.

i: 7 f.;

3:13; 4:5; II Cor.

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

153

sweep to the time when Jesus first came forth from God to save the world by his work upon earth:

know Christ the

"This thee

is

only

the

whom

thou

Christians'

pletely diverted

Way,

hfe eternal, that they should

true

didst

gaze

God, and

Jesus

In

John,

send."'

has been almost

com-

from the Coming One to "the

the Truth, and the

which has

Life,"

already been revealed.

One

of

the

interpretation belief

that

first

was

necessities

primitive

of

to counteract the popular

certain

well-known

features

of

Jesus' career were contrary to messianic faith.

His death for instance must have occasioned

much

difficulty.

Paul made

this

an

essential

item in God's scheme of salvation, the cornerstone of the gospel of redemption.

He

recog-

nized that both Jews and gentiles took offense at this phase of the Messiah's career, but he

personally saw in

it

a demonstration of the

wisdom and power of God. His language implies that he was not the first to grasp this idea,^ yet it is doubtful whether any of his predecessors had expounded it so vigorously. At first the disciples seem to have offered no apology for this event, other than to express 'John 17:3.

^I Cor. 15:3.

The

154 their

Historicity of Jesus

conviction

that

had

it

happened

in

accordance with the divine will as revealed in

Thus

Old Testament prophecy.

scheme

integral element in the

was an

it

of

even though no one chose to phrase

salvation, it

as Paul

did, in the language of the Jewish sacrificial

system.

Perhaps a further intimation of its importance for early times

is

to be seen in the fact that

about one-third of the

devoted to the closing scenes of the of Jesus'

life.

And

playing

last

week

Jesus does not

even as a worker of miracles,

messianic

powers

is

to be a

this seems, too,

primitive phase of tradition. figure here

Mark

Gospel of

already

dis-

bestowed

upon him at baptism; he is rather a messianic claimant whose credentials are to be produced in the future. Paul said, in substance, that by death Jesus performed the to entering

upon the

final

last act

preliminary

part of his messianic

program; according to the passion narrative of

Mark, Jesus was put

to death because he

had

while on earth expressly asserted his right to

play this future part.

had saving

In either case the event

significance, in that it

in the divinely arranged

When

Jesus' death

program

was one act

of the Savior.

was thus disposed

of,

the

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

way was open

155

for a similar disposition of every

troublesome feature in his career.

But God's

interest in Jesus

simply to those features in his

was not confined life which at first

seemed incongruous with messianic faith. Di\'ine approvals of a positive sort were to be sight

found in the story of Jesus' life. Whether Paul knew nothing of these, or whether he merely felt

it

unnecessary to go back beyond the

resurrection dignity,

is

for

proof

difficult

of

messianic

Jesus'

to determine at this late

But there were theologians, and some of them probably were contemporary with Paul, who recognized the desirability, and found date.

themselves equal to the task, of presenting evidence from Jesus' lifetime in support of their messianic faith.

Instead of pointing merely to

the resurrection as the occasion explicitly authenticated

Jesus,

when God had they gave an

account of a "transfiguration" near the close of Jesus' career

when a foretaste

of his

approach-

ing resurrection glory was vouchsafed to a few

chosen disciples, and when the divine voice proclaimed him to be God's beloved Son

by other

interpreters

whom

was thought that God had given

the disciples were to "hear."

It

similar testimony at Jesus' baptism;

and,

by

The Historicity of Jesus

156

the time the tradition contained in the infancy narratives had taken form,

that

God had

it

was discovered

exphcitly indicated his approval

of Jesus' earthly mission

even before his birth.

Finally, the writer of the

Fourth Gospel con-

have been the incarnation of the from God. For Christians these were veritable signs from heaven, but they were not directly available for They had to be mediated by outsiders. ceives Jesus to

pre-existent, divine logos, sent

Jews were familiar with the Old Testament prophecies in which foreshadowings of Jesus' death were found, there was a wide difference between the current and the believers.

WTiile

Christian inteq^retations of these Scriptures.

Furthermore,

God's

transfiguration

and

approval

of

Jesus

at

at baptism had, at least in

the earliest tradition, to be taken purely on the

testimony of believers.

Only

in later

forms of

made

available

the narrative are such e\ddences for the public, as in the

Matthean version

of the

baptism, where the voice speaks about Jesus

him as in Mark. Also the Fourth Gospel, John the Baptist had been

rather than directly to in

divinely instructed regarding Jesus' messiah-

and the multitude were the auditors when God announced the glorification of the Son in

ship,

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

John in

12

28

:

157

But even had these items been

ff.

circulation earlier,

it

is

doubtful whether

they would have satisfied the actual demands of the situation.

Not only would opponents

ask for more objective proofs of messiahship

from Jesus' own personal life, but Christians themselves must have felt a similar desire when once

it

was believed that

Jesus' messiahship

had been divinely attested during his earthly life, and that certain features in his earthly career were an integral part of his saving work.

One

of the earliest passages expressing

approval

of

Jesus

"hear ye him."' of

contains

the

This carried with

God's

injunction it

the idea

a unique message delivered by the Son.

Nor could

interpretation be satisfied with any-

thing less than explicit statements from Jesus himself,

if

these could possibly be obtained,

asserting his uniqueness.

Furthermore, Jesus

Son who already at baptism is the object the Father's good pleasure must needs display

as the of

in his career a special type of conduct.

more detailed evidences

Hence

of Jesus' messiahship

'Mark 9:7; cf. Acts 3:22f. It must have been an early interpretation which first placed God's authentication so late in Jesus' career, rather than at his baptism.

It has indeed been suggested that the transfiguration story was originally a resurrection narrative (ct. Wellhausen, Das EvangeUum Marci, Berlin,

1903, P- 77)-

The Historicity of Jesus

158

are found in (i) his prophet-like teaching, (2)

and

his specific messianic claims,

These items are

works.

self-attestations

on the part

mighty

(3) his

of the nature of

all

com-

of Jesus, in

parison with those authentications given more

immediately by God." Evidently Jesus' teaching was brought

ward at a his

for-

relatively early date to demonstrate

supremacy.

In a synoptic passage usually

thought to come from the source material used in

earliest

the

common-

composition of

Matthew and Luke,^ when messengers from John the Baptist request Jesus

to testify con-

cerning himself, the climax of his reply

is,

"The

poor have the gospel preached to them, and blessed

is

he whosoever shall not find occasion

As these words now

me."

for stumbling in

stand in our gospels their original force apparently has been literally the

somewhat weakened by taking

previous statements about giving

sight to the blind, healing the lame, cleansing

the lepers, curing the deaf, and raising the dead. The Paul

(cf.

latter

apparently were the earlier interest,

e.g.,

God

in

Mark

in Acts 2:22 Jesus' miracles are

works

also Acts 2:32;

Jesus simply "rises";

which

"God

did

passage), but in

by him"

Mark

3:15)

(cf.

it is

raises Jesus,

Matt. 12 128 = Luke

Jesus'

own

the foreground.

'Matt. 11: 2-6 = Luke 7:18-23.

but

with

—a "Q"

11: 20

authority which stands in

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

In the

first

159

instance this language probably

was

intended to describe the beneficent qualities of Jesus' message, like that of the prophet Isaiah cited by Jesus in Luke 4:18: " The Spirit of the

Lord

is

upon me, because he anointed me

preach good

to

Emphasis rather than

mark

upon upon

tidings

Jesus'

to

the

poor,

prophetic

etc."

preaching

his miracles, as the distinctive

of his saving

work,

is

characteristic of the

non-Markan source material. It is here that the men of Nineveh who "repented at the preaching of Jonah," and the queen of the south who came to "hear the wisdom of

primitive

Solomon," are promised precedence over the

men

of Jesus'

judgment.^

own

generation in the day of

Similarly at the beginning of his

public career,

when it is suggested that he appeal

to miracles in order to test his divine sonship, he

emphatically refuses the challenge.^

Not only

are miracles of Jesus rarely mentioned in this section of gospel tradition, but his ability in '

Matt. 12:41

f.;

Luke 11:31

f.

Matt. 4:i-ii=Luke 4:1-13. It is noteworthy that Mark slurs over this phase of the tradition, evidently feeling it to be inconsistent with the prominence given to miracles in the Markan *

Even the temptation incident has been retouched by Mark, seemingly in favor of the miracle interest. At least the

narrative.

ministration of angels has been introduced, while in the earlier

source Jesus had positively refused to invoke their aid.

1

The

60

this respect

is

Historicity of Jesus

implied to be not essentially differ-

ent from that of other righteous

As proof

of his superiority,

men

in Israel.'

mighty works did

not appeal to the framers of this primitive type of tradition so

much as

did the spiritual and pro-

phetic cjuality of Jesus' teaching. fectly natural situation, for

the uniqueness of their great their ability to

work

This

is

a per-

Jews did not find

men

primarily in

miracles, but in the fidelity

with which they uttered the word of God.

A

method

showing that Jesus was to be identified with the Messiah to come is similar

seen in Acts, chap.

of

His earthly career had

3.

not been one of brilliant messianic display, and his

death had taken place in accordance with

prophecy

(vs.

18).

suffering servant of

through the

He had

figured

God, who was later

as

the

glorified

disciples' witness to his resurrection

and through miracles wrought in his name (vss. 13-15). In heaven he now awaited God's pleasure in bringing about the time for

appear in his

him

to

full messianic role (vs. 20). His had been "messianic" only in the sense that he was the prophet like unto Moses whose coming the great lawgiver had foretold. His mission, therefore, was to speak to Israel

earthly

'

Malt.

life

12: 27

= Luke

ii: 19.

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

i6i

the word which should prove a blessing

turning them from their iniquities.

It

by was

mistake not to have hearkened

Israel's fatal

unto "that prophet"

(vss.

23

and

26).

Here

again the very content of the tradition forbids that

we

credit the author of Acts with its first

composition.

The use

assumed

this

for

as

of a source has to

for

similar

be

primitive

elements in the Third Gospel.

The necessity of placing Jesus beside Moses and the prophets must have been early felt, particularly in Jewish circles.

This interest

is

by picturing Christianity's natal day as a time when the earth trembled and the Spirit, like fiery flames, came upon believers, with the served

result that all foreigners in Jerusalem at the

time heard the gospel preached in their several tongues.

The prototype

of this scene is

Mount

and aflame when the law is delivered to Israel, and when, according to Jewish Midrashim, the law had been proclaimed Sinai trembling

in

seventy

different

different nations, Israel.

languages

to

as

many

though accepted by none but

Thus God

acts as marvelously in the

founding of Christianity as in the establish-

ment

of

Judaism; and Moses figures

significantly

much

less

than does Jesus, whose heavenly

1

The Historicity oj Jesus

62

exaltation

the

the basis of

itself

is

Spirit's

Moses representing the "Law" and the

But even

activity.

in Jesus'

lifetime

— —

and Elijah "Prophets" appear in conversation with Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration. Here Peter, who has been spokesman for the disciples in their recognition of Jesus' messiahship,

make

to for

became conscious

proposes

for thee,

When

Moses, one for Elijah."'

religion

now

"one

three tabernacles,

the

one

new

of its owti existence,

founder of necessity took precedence over

its

Hebrew

the ancient

worthies.

This phase of Christian thinking ine\itably

grew

importance as Christianity remained

in

some time in close contact with Judaism. It was desirable to recall that Jesus' teaching had been superior to that of the rabbis, and that he had in fact excelled all scribes, sages, prophets, and lawgivers of old. It could be for

"He

said of the scribe:

wisdom

in prophecies.

the

men

of

He

renown, and

hidden meaning

'

Mark

9 4 :

f.

= Matt.

1 7

:

3

f.

out

all

the

be occupied

will enter in

He

wdll seek

amidst out the

and be conversant parables."^ Yet more

of proverbs,

dark sayings of

'Sir. 39:1-3.

will

keep the discourse of

will

the subtilties of parables.

in the

will seek

and

of the ancients,

= Luke

9 30-33. :

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

could be said of Jesus.

not merely an

men's proverbs and para-

interiDreter of other bles,

He was

163

but was himself the author of teachings so

subtle that even his 'own disciples understood

him with

and outsiders were com-

difficulty

pletely mystified.^

pound the wisdom

Other teachers might exof the older sages,

but Jesus

most

highly

esteemed of the Hebrew wise men.^

Jesus'

even

excelled

Solomon,

the

understanding of the prophets was not only superior to that of contemporary teachers, but

he was himself the fulfilment of prophecy and the author of a

the more lowly last

new dispensation in which even members were greater than the

and greatest

of the prophets of Israel.^

He was also an authoritative expounder of the law, even to the extent of criticizing

its

enact-

ments regarding, for example, sabbath observance and divorce/ Yet many early Christians did not feel that the new faith meant the abrogation of the law, and they regarded as least in the kingdom all who, like Paul, taught men to discard Mosaic injunctions. On the other hand, Jesus was the new messianic lawgiver '

Mark

*

Matt. i2:42

3

Matt.

11

Mark

2:27; 10:5

4

4:9-12.

:

= Lukc 11:31. = Luke 7 26-28.

9-1 1

:

f.

164

The

who, by way

of fulfilling rather

11 istor icily of Jesus

than abrogating

the Mosaic dispensation, placed his word above that which they of old time had spoken.' Hence Jesus was naturally described as exemplifying

many

surpassing

superior

even

traits

Moses.

personality,

of

probably

Josephus

current Jewish opinion when he Moses as a prophet whose like had never been known, so that when he spoke you would think you heard the voice of God himself while his life was so near to perfection that he had full command of his passions, and knew them only by name as perceiving them in others.^ Ultimately Christian tradition was represents describes

able to say of Jesus that "never this

man" and no

man

spake as

one was able to convict him

Christian interpreters were, from an

of sin.3

early date, under pressure to give Jesus first

place

in

the

gallery

of

greatest

Israel's

worthies.

As a

foreteller of

quite uniquely.

It

coming events Jesus figures was very desirable that he

should be thus presented to

men

The same Deuteronomic passage

of that age.

in

which the

primitive Christians found Moses' prediction of '

Malt. 5:21-48.

^

AnI., IV',

viii,

49.

3john7:46; 8:46.

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

165

Jesus also provided a test for determining the

any

validity of

individual's claim to be the

"When

promised prophet:

name

in the

of Jehovah,

if

nor come to pass, that

a prophet speaketh

the thing follow not, is

the

thing which

Jehovah hath not spoken; that prophet hath it presumptuously, thou shalt not be

spoken

had to be shown that Jesus would have been vain for present him to the Jews as the

afraid of him.'"

met

It

this test, else it

Christians to fulfilment

of

Accordingly

Moses' prophecy.

gospel tradition notes that he predicted his

death, his resurrection, the destruction of the

temple, disaster for the Jewish nation, and his

own

return in glory

—

all

items closely con-

nected with his messianic program.

The

desirability

presenting evidence of

of

may have been and fall of Jerusalem. As Josephus looks back upon that disaster he notes many premonitory signs, and blames the Jesus'

Jews

powers

predictive

enhanced by the

siege

for not giving

heed to these. ^

Among

other things he affirms that soldiers had been seen running about

among

the clouds, which,

he naively remarks, might seem doubtful were it

not that those •

Deut. 18:22.

who

actually ^

War, VI,

saw the thing

v, 3.

1

The Historicity of Jesus

66

bore testimony to

There was

occurrence.

its

also at Pentecost one year a

quaking

of the

by a

super-

earth and a great noise followed

But clearest and most was the utterance of one Jesus, son of Ananus, who, four years before the war began, proclaimed woe upon Jerusalem, and upon the people, and upon the holy house. This he continued to cry for seven years and five months "without becoming hoarse or growing tired," until finally he was killed in

natural, warning voice. terrible of all

Then Josephus

the siege.

any man

will consider

he

concludes:

"Now

will find that

if

God

by all ways possible what is for their doubtless was current

takes care of mankind, and

foreshadows

preservation." belief

in

our

to

This

Josephus' day,

might not accept principle

leaders

race

to

whom

many Jews

though

his specific application of the

reflect

discreditably

he describes as

"men

upon

their

infatuated,

without either eyes to see or minds to consider" the denunciations

We may and made

made

to

them by God.

say that Josephus found his signs his interpretation to suit his needs,

but Christians also passed through the trying experiences of those days and were none the less

under the compulsion of adjusting their

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

thinking to the historical events rible that

ter-

they seemed to presage the end of the

Since Jesus was believed to have stood

world. in

— events so

167

unique favor with God, and was the one to

bring in the

new

age,

Christians, during the

ing the siege

and

it

was very desirable that

momentous events attend-

fall of

Jerusalem, should recall

such words of Jesus' as seemed to point to this event and to indicate the manner in which history would issue.

It

was fortunate

for believers

that they were able to recall Jesus' predictions of disasters,

and

to assure themselves that he

believed these disasters to be merely prelimi-

nary to the consummation of his own kingdom.

We have

already observed that Jesus' mighty

works are not greatly emphasized

non-Markan

tradition.

They

in the early

do,

however,

occupy a prominent place in the Gospel of

Mark,

particularly

in

the

account

of

the

While the specific need prompted a rehearsal of Jesus' miracles is somewhat uncertain, the pragmatic interest which they serve in the Markan narrative is quite evident. After baptism Jesus shows himself to be the Spirit-filled Son of God, who first resists Satan's attack and then goes Galilean

which

ministry.

first

forth to display his triumph over the forces of

i68

The Historicity of Jesus

this evil age

by casting out demons, healing the

and transcending the limitations

sick,

In this he

generally.

of nature

not merely exhibiting

is

suggested by comparison with Old Testament worthies like Moses and Elijah. These individuals were on occasion granted the traits

exercise of miraculous powers, but in Jesus'

case this ability

is

more

power was

of the tradition Jesus' ate.

own

distinctly his

There are intimations that

rogative.

less

in

pre-

some

immedi-

Peter at Pentecost describes Jesus as "a

man approved

of God unto you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by

him

in the

midst of you,"' and again in the

Beelzebul incident Jesus affirms that he casts

out demons ''by the finger of God."^

Mark's

representation

Jesus'

But

in

self-sufficiency

stands in the foreground, the only conditioning factor being that of "faith."

Nor

are Jesus'

miracles here put forward primarily as "signs" to stimulate belief.

are precursors

of

In the Fourth Gospel they faith;

in

Mark

regularly the consequent of faith.

they are

Thus

for

the Second Evangelist Jesus' miracles are not

merely messianic credentials, but are a beneficent outflowing from the person of the Messiah '

Acts 2:22.

'

Luke

11: 20; cf.

Matt. 12:27.

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

169

whose presence already brings the blessings of the new age within the reach of believers and near-believers. The disciples do not always understand the significance of Jesus' activity,

but the demons do, for they perceive with

alarm that God's deliverer

is

"temptation" he conquered

at hand.

In the

their leader, Satan,

and now he proceeds by exorcism,

healings,

and

various triumphs over nature's limitations, to despoil Satan's domains.

This conception answers in a general

way

to

the Jewish notion of the blessings to attend the

Messiah's appearing, but

it

is

phrased more

immediately in terms of Christian experience within the primitive community. that this present evil world

is

Paul believes

coming to naught

through the victory of the Spirit in the Christians,

place

when

and that

its final

lives of

collapse will take

the Messiah comes in glory. Accord-

ing to

Mark

began

his sa\dng ministry after his baptismal

the fatal shock

endowment by the

Spirit.'

was

felt

when Jesus

At a time when

' Cf. the Lukan tradition, which represents Jesus as seeing the earnest of this victory in the miracle-working career of his dis-

When

they return and report their success in exorcism enough tradition merely generalizes on their activity in this respect prior to Jesus' death he replies: "I was beholding [idecbpow] Satan falling as lightning from heaven" (Luke 10:17-20). ciples.

— though

significantly

—

The Historicity of Jesus

170

men thought

themselves victims of

meant much

evil

powers,

it

new

religion

gave the

of

to feel that the

Spirit-filled believer vic-

And

tory over these foes.

all sorts

the

Markan

repre-

sentation of Jesus' activity will have served a

most

beneficial purpose in

reminding the later

generation that the spiritually endowed Messiah

had exemplified

ideally this conception of \dc-

tory over the powers of the evil one.

While Jesus' significance

for

salvation

is

clearly the central interest of early interpreta-

there

tion,

doubtless were

interests at

work even

individual

bias

of

many

subsidiary

in the early period.

various

writers,

The

current

Jewish as well as heathen religious notions, Christian use of the Old Testament, the political events of the age, the

by the

problems raised

gentile mission, the developing organiza-

tion of the church, the appearance of heretical

and similar forces will have left stamp upon the growing evangelic tradiFor an accurate historical estimate of

teachers, these their tion.

details in

the gospel narratives,

these items

would need to be scrutinized more closely. But for the more general question of Jesus' existence they need not detain us, since they

were clearly secondary and contributory to the

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

main

interest of

171

showing Jesus to be the well-

authenticated mediator of the divine salvation.

Whether primitive interpretation does or does not allow a place for the historical Jesus

may be

determined from a consideration of this central In comparison with

feature of early thinking. this,

other items are of minor importance.

Summarizing the it

results of the

above survey,

appears that interest in recording fully the

events of Jesus' career did not manifest at

the very beginning of the

movement.

At

thought

first,

new

itself

religious

was directed

mainly toward the future when Jesus would

come

introduce

to

new

the

age.

Christian

preachers announced the approach of the end, the transitoriness of present relationships, the

near advent of the heavenly Messiah. since they identified this

making

belief in his

But

coming one with Jesus,

messiahship the test of

admission to the new community, they could not

altogether

dispense

background even

was

this

true

in their

with

the

dogma.

historical

Especially

when they entered upon an

propaganda. For those whose upon a personal vision of the risen Lord, historical proofs were more a luxury than a necessity. But these individuals were relaevangelizing belief rested

The Historicity of Jesus

172

number and belonged at the very beginning of the new religion. The spiritual gifts in the life of the community were more widely observable, and seem to have been put tively few in

forward at an early date as attestations of the

new

faith.

needed

to

outsiders.

But

all

be

supplemented,

these experiential evidences especially

for

Accordingly reflection upon Jesus'

earthly career enabled interpreters to claim for

him evidences

of the divine approval,

own which had

set forth traits of his

and

high

to

self-

At the same time his genubecame more and more associated with his career upon earth.

attesting worth.

inely saving acti\dty closely

Thus ultimately the historical horizon of pretation was broadened to take in Jesus' life from the manger to the tomb. It

inter-

entire

has seemed desirable to dwell at some

length upon these pragmatic phases of early Christian

thinking,

assumed that a

full

since

ests necessarily carries bility

Jesus'

against,

if

historicity.

sometimes

it

is

recognition of these inter-

with

it

a strong proba-

not an outright denial

But

the

results

of

inquiry point in a very different direction.

of,

our In

"4he first place they serve as a warning against

the error of supposing

that

the

framers of

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition

173

Christian tradition in the early days always

recorded

all

they

knew about

We may

Jesus.

sometimes be tempted to read our desire for full historical

New

the

of

information back into the minds

Testament

unjustly to affirm that they

writers,

and

knew only

so

thus

much

of a historical Jesus as they recorded.

argument from

silence

is

This

a most precarious one.

Moreover, variations or inconsistencies in different interpretations of Jesus

do not neces-

sarily

imply non-historicity for his personality.

Even

if

one could justly claim that the gospel

picture of

him

is

so truncated

to be impossible in reality,

it

and distorted as would not follow

that he never actually lived but only that primitive pragmatism was using its

own interests. we can find a

that

It is too full

him

much

to serve

to expect

and perfectly uniform

portrait of the earthly Jesus in our present sources;

on the other hand, do these compel us to pronounce the entire

nor,

deficiencies

tradition historically worthless.

The

primitive

theologians selected and preserved those features

of

the history which best served

interests of their day,

the

even though the result

was an incomplete picture

of Jesus,

standpoint of historical perfection.

from the

The Historicity of Jesus

174

Indeed

it is

very probable that interpreters

in the early period

would be compelled to adhere

rather closely to history, in so far as they dealt

with items which had come under the observation

of

contemporaries.

their

removed

the

shadows

actual

the past

of

Only as time

occurrences

into

the

could freely idealizing

tendencies be brought into play.

But

it

does

not follow that Christians themselves would be deterred

by

this fact

from taking a reverential They were not

attitude toward the risen Lord.

making the earthly Jesus the object worship;

this

they

were

rendering

of their

to

the

heavenly Christ, who had become what he was through the direct agency of God.

Further-

more, the early believers found the ground for their

own

faith in personal experience rather

than in historical data. logically necessary

It

may

be psycho-

to presuppose for

them a

high estimate of the earthly Jesus as a basis for the resurrection faith, but essential

for

this

it is

not absolutely

estimate that they should

previously have been conscious of Jesus' deity,

nor does primitive tradition suggest that they were.

The

failure of the disciples to perceive

in Jesus' personality while he

was with them on

earth the significance which they later attached

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Tradition to

it is

175

quite generally recognized in the earliest

parts of the gospels.

In the

stage of the

first

post-resurrection faith reverence

was

justified

mainly by God's attestations of Jesus, and not until later reflection had done its work did believers

come

to appreciate that Jesus during

had really displayed qualities which made him worthy of the later faith. Then the disciples understood that they had been slow to comprehend his significance fact which they candidly admitted. his earthly career

—

had a distinct an earthly individual with whom

It follows therefore that they

recollection of

they had associated, yet without placing upon

him

at that time the particular form of inter-

pretation which was later evolved under the inspiration of belief in his resurrection.

We are

not to infer that this individual had not strongly impressed himself upon the disciples,

memory

and that he was not held

esteem by his associates, though

this

of

the

in high

esteem

may

not have been fundamentally doctrinaire in type.

Of course the earthly Jesus' personality may well have prompted some "doctrinal" reflections

among

his

followers

in those

days of vivid

messianic expectations, and the subject

may

have been discussed by Jesus himself, but any

The Historicity of Jesus

1 7'^

conclusions to which such reflections led

seem

by

Jesus' death.

to

may have

have been pretty generally shattered

That which remained with the disciples was the recollection of his words and the memory of his indi\dduality, and these ultimately proved

sufficiently substantial to sup-

port the superstructure of the resurrection faith

and the doctrine

heavenly Messiah.

of the

Wliile gospel tradition, arising under these

circumstances, might seem to be primarily a history of early Christian doctrine, there were forces

working both within and mthout the

community compelling

interpreters to adjust

their thinking to the actual Jesus of history.

Opponents

them

of

Christianity would not permit

to ignore the data of history, especially

such items as could be made to ably upon the

new

faith.

community, where there was

reflect

And less

unfavor-

within the

need to prove

doctrinal tenets, believers, in their daily fellow-

ship

mth

one another, naturally found them-

selves recalling scenes from the life of Jesus and words spoken by him while he had lived in personal association with those disciples who were

now

the inspiration of the

new community-life.

It is therefore not intrinsically

that

we

shall

improbable

be able to find important historical

Pragmatic Phases of Primitive Pradition

lyj

information about Jesus in our present gospels,

no matter how generally we admit the possibility of pragmatic influences at work in the

when the gospel tradition was taking When, in our modern use of the New Testament writings, we are merely concerned to discover historical data regarding Jesus, we period shape.

must attach most importance to those features of tradition which seem to have occasioned early interpreters difficulty, or which are not linked

closely

with

the

peculiar

doctrinal

interests of the primitive apologetic.

aim were

item in Jesus' career

make

If

our

to ascertain every available historical it

would be necessary

to

detailed application of this test to the

whole gospel history, but since our immediate purpose

is

merely to obtain historical evidence

for belief in Jesus' actual existence, only the

— —

more primitive phases of the tradition Paul's letters and the earliest gospel materials need be examined minutely.

CHAPTER

VI

THE PAULINE EVIDENCE FOR

JESUS'

EXISTENCE The genuineness of the principal Pauline epistles is among the most generally accepted conclusions of what may be called modern The evidence for this acceptcritical opinion.^ ance

is

usually regarded as exceptionally good.

For instance, Clement Corinthians

the

in

century a.d., not only pattern of

Rome, writing

of

first

Paul a "notable

calls

patient endurance" but exhorts his

"the

readers to peruse again 'The status

of present opinion

detailed statement here. of the

to the

decade of the

last

Dutch school

is

of

epistle

too well

The extreme views

known

of B.

are quite generally discarded.

to

the need

Bauer and Steck {Der

Galakrbrief, Berlin, 1888), though he admits the possibility of

a few Pauline fragments in Romans, has not won adherents for The partition hypotheses of, e.g., Volter his skeptical opinions. {Die Komposilion der paiiUnischen Briefe, Tubingen, 1890) and

R. Scott {The Pauline Epistles,

New

field.

The

results of the

Tubingen

York, 1909),

are

not

among

specialists in this

criticism,

reworked to meet

looked upon with even partial favor

the requirements of later investigation, leave not only Galatians, I

and

II Corinthians,

and Romans as unquestionably Pauline,

but also Philippians and I Thessalonians. Colossians, Ephesians, are II Thessalonians are nowadays less widely rejected than formerly, and even the Pastorals are thought to contain

Pauline elements. 178

some

The Pauline Evidence

179

them

blessed Paul" which he wrote

in ''the

beginning of the gospel," and in which he

charged them to avoid

all

party

Here

spirit.'

clearly a reference to our canonical First

is

Clement's

Furthermore,

Corinthians.

letter

shows in thought and language very

often

strong resemblances to Paul's writings.^

evidence of Ignatius, from the the second

a few years

He

first

century, is less specific later, is

make them

and the

scriptural authority;

church, while

it

but Marcion,

;

value to the principal

Pauline letters that he would

main

quarter of

a most significant witness.

much

attached so

The

his

rest of the

regarded Marcion as a heretic,

did not dispute his high estimate of these writings,

although

it

Marcion

exclusively as

them quite

did not hold to

By

did.

so

the end of the

century several available sources of information 'Clem. 5:5 *

ff.;

47:1

flf.

As an example compare Paul 's thought and phraseology

I Cor., chap. 13, TTOiTjcrdrw

ToO OeoO

rd rod XptcrroO Trapayy^XfxaTa.

tU SivaraL

rii dpKerbi i^€nr€7v io'Tiv.

dydir-q

dydirrj

irdvTa

KoWq.

;

i^yjyrjcraa'dai

t6 v\pos r]fj.S.s

;

et's

t

cannot be denied that

it

he might not have used the former, which occurs several times in the writings usually

The

credited to Tacitus.

further contention,

that "the procurator Pontius Pilate" needs closer definition,

more

is

0\'er what But the answer is

in point.

country was he governor?

near at hand, for we are informed at once that

Judea

is

the

source whence

this

"malady"

sprang.

Accepting the genuineness of Tacitus, still

a question whether his testimony

on

anything

tradition.

other

than

current

He may have had

records in which

the

facts

is

it

is

based

Christian

access to official

he records were

mentioned, yet in the present state of our information this

On

is

purely a matter of conjecture.

the other hand,

gospel tradition

we have

already seen that

by the year 115

had taken present known, and a.d.

the form in which it is at had been carried broadcast over the Roman Empire by word of mouth if not in written

Extra-Biblical Evidence

And

documents.

the

249

death of Jesus under

most persistent by admitting that he may have had his information from current Christian tradition; this Pontius Pilate was one of

its

Tacitus' rehability does not suffer

items.

possibility

merely robs us of the convenience

an independent witness.

of citing Tacitus as

More

satisfactory results

from an examination

might be expected

of Jewish writings of the

Of these however only the works of

period.

Philo and Josephus have been preserved at fully.

The

latter frequently speaks

certain contemporary

named

Justus'

all

about a

who

also

wrote a history of the Jewish war, a work which Josephus latter

criticizes

part

of

In the

very unfavorably.

ninth century Photius,^

the

patriarch of Constantinople, refers to Justus'

"chronicle of the Jewish kings" from Moses to

Agrippa

11.

This

to be very brief

and

is

pronounced by Photius

to pass over

tant and necessary things,

many

impor-

among them

the

appearing of Christ, the fulfilment of prophecy

and the miracles he wrought. Hence Justus' work was still extant there is slight probability that it would yield anything for in him,

if

'Josephus, Life,

g, 12, 17, 35, 37, 54, 65, 70,

'Cod., 2i (Migne cd., CIII, col. 65).

and

74.

The Uisloricily oj Jesus

250

use in this connection. offer, since, as

Philo also has nothing to

already noted, his treatise on the

Therapeutes has no reference to Christianity.

Twice

Josephus only remains.

he mentions Jesus.

ties

in his Antiqui-

In the midst of an

account of calamities suffered by the Jews in the time of Pilate, we read At

this

time lived Jesus, a wise man,

l)roper to call

him a man.

works, a teacher of

ful

gladly,

and he won

many

Greeks.

if

indeed

it is

For he was a doer of wonder-

men who

receive the truth

many Jews and And when Pilate, on the indictment of the chief men among us, sentenced him to crucifixion, those who loved him at to himself both

This

was the

did not cease lo\dng him

Christ.

for he appeared to them day as indeed the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonders concerning him. And even to this day the race of Christians named from him is not extinct.' first

;

alive again the third

On

another occasion, in speaking of the high

priest

Ananus, Josephus says: "So he [Ananus]

'The

original of ihis very important passage

is,

according

TlviTon 5i /card tovtov rbv xp^^'O" 'I^/coOs vo centuries before Jesus, "the son (as was supposed) of Joseph," began his work, Jesus the son of Sirach had said: older prophets

writings of the earlier

Ye that fear the Lord, put your And your reward shall not fail.

trust in him,

eyes of the Lord are upon them that love him. mighty protection, and a strong stay.

The

A

The Most High hath no

pleasure in the offerings of the

ungodly.

Neither

is

he pacified for sins by the multitude of

sacrifices.

To

depart from wickedness

is

a thing pleasing to the

Lord;

And

to depart

from unrighteousness

is

a propitiation.

Have mercy upon us, O Lord the God of all, and behold;

And

send forth thy fear upon

all

the nations;

Lift up thy hand against the strange nations;

And

let

them

see thy

About a century

God

will

later a similar assurance that

ultimately vindicate

appears in the 'Sir. 2:8;

mighty power.'

Wisdom

of

the

Solomon

34:16, 19; 35:3; 36:1-3-

righteous

TJie

294

The

His tor icily of Jesus

souls of the righteous are in the

And no torment For even

if

Their hope

shall

the sight of

in

is full

hand

of

God,

touch them.

men they be

punished,

of immortality.'

Again, the wicked, speaking of the righteous

man,

says,

He professeth to have knowledge of God, And nameth himself servant of the Lord. The

latter

And

he vaunteth that

Let us see

And For

let if

end of the righteous he calleth happy; if

his

God

words be

is

his Father.

true,

us try what shall befall in the ending of his

the righteous

man

is

God's son, he

will

life.

uphold

him,

And

he

deliver

will

him out

of

the

hand

of

his

adversaries.^

To some extent Jesus shared these views. He demanded a Hfe of righteousness for the individual, he did not identify trial

and

suffer-

ing with defeat, he taught that

God

freely

forgave the sins of the repentant, that he sustained

men

in affliction, that he cared for the

lowly, that he gave assurance of immortality,

that he revealed himself to the righteous, that the righteous 'Wisdom

Sol.

man had God

3:1,4.

MVisdom

for a father Sol. 2: 13, ibh-iS.

and

Jesus

Founder of Christianity

the Historical

was God's

But

son.

Jesus deviates from

does not

make

one important respect

in

these teachings:

all

he

the hope of favoritism from the

divine the principal

The

295

aim

of righteous living.

highest privileges of sonship are not to be

identified

with temporal blessings, but

the opportunity to live the Godlike love, mercy,

and

life

lie

in

self-giving service are

in

which domi-

nant to the end.

When

Jesus determined that the preaching

of this truth was to be his chief mission, he went quite beyond the religious outlook of his contemporaries. Possibly we may have here the key to his interpretation of the current messianic hope. As that doctrine was popularly held, it rested mainly upon the idea of favoritism. This was read into the early history, as seen in Moses' words to Pharaoh: "Thus

saith Jehovah, Israel

and

behold

Here

is

my

son,

my first-born; my son go:

have said unto thee, Let

I

I

will

slay thy son,

thy first-born."

God's favoritism for his chosen people expressing itself in vengeance on their enemies.

Even

is

in Jesus'

day

this

was the

essential con-

tent of Jewish messianic thought, but

it

was

so

at variance with Jesus' fundamental thought

that he can hardly have avoided criticizing

The Historicity

296 it

of Jesus

along with other ideas that were lacking in

Moreover, the prophets had and John had partially condemned it when he warned the Jews not to trust in Abrahamic descent for future safety. Jesus went still farther in his criticism. Like ethical efficiency. criticized

it

John, he did appeal to life,

men

to live a righteous

not however with the ultimate motive of

winning God's favor in the day of judgment but in order to attain genuine sonship in the present. This was the way of true salvation, the present realization of the messianic hope,

and as the minister of this truth Jesus may have thought his work to be "messianic." On one occasion John

is

reported to have sent

messengers asking Jesus minister of salvation.

if

he

is

this

In substance he replies

affirmatively, but the proof of his claim

to be looked for in

final

was not

the establishment of a

miraculous judgment of sifting and purging as

Rather John had preached. for mankind was Of course he does not deny the favor, and in fact he makes

of service

his godlike life his

testimonial.

reality of divine it

displace the

narrower conception of the divine favoritism:

God's blessings abound toward wealth of his love

is

all

men, the

unlimited, he desires

all

Jesus the Historical Founder of Christianity

297

by making absolute

to share in his goodness

choice of him.

doctrine of salvation

Jesus'

by

this

He

is

rule

thought of God's activity among men.

The nature

regnant here and now.

of his

narrow favorit-

fatherly, he discards all

is

determined

is

ism, he gives himself unreservedly to the interests of

humanity, and the ideal

the realization, on

is

gram

God

in

childlike,

and under the inspiration the

life

God

that

It

is

men should this new life,

encouraging them to do

this

of this fellowship live

all

full realization of

man

trustful fellowship,

of unselfish service.

desire of

all

become

for the attainment of salvation:

sons of

is

part, of the godlike

its

Jesus prescribes no other doctrinal pro-

life.

the

humanity

for

so,

the urgent^ enter into

he

ever

is

and Jesus' work^ But it is for

directed toward this end. to say

new

whether or not he

relation.

There

is

will enter into

no barrier between

him and God save that which

his

own

will

has

and

its

undoing.

It

erected.

This

is

simplicity

the soteriology of Jesus,

has almost been

lacks the Pauline dialectic,

its

it is

free

theological intricacies of later times,

no

vital

it

from the attaches

importance to any form of organiza-

The Historicity of Jesus

2g8 tion,

and

it

presupposes no theory of

infallible

mediators whether in the form of books or persons.

It centers attention

on two things:

on the one hand is God, immediate, loving, inviting; on the other is man with a free spirit

own hand.

holding his destiny in his

Will he

commit his way unto God, and walking in harmony with the divine spirit realize the highest ends of life ? Or will he refuse, living for self

and the world, and

so suffer the unspeak-

able calamity of shutting

But how

shall

men

God out

of his life

?

get rid of the debt which

past sins have laid upon

them?

not by some means placate an angry

Must they God whose

mandates have been disobeyed and whose dignity has been insulted by rebellious humanity? Jesus knew no such angry deity. His father would gladly receive ever}' penitent who came; forgiveness for the past was procured by the very desire to forsake it and to live the new life. The real problem was not how to escape the anger of God, but how to break the power of sin which hindered the attainment of the higher life; and Jesus has a remedy for

this

evil.

His contemporaries talked of

judgment from which only those would escape who had succeeded in getting rid of sin before

Jesus the Historical Founder of Christianity

299

God came, while Jesus preached that God is now present delivering men from their bondage. Personal alliance with the Father escape

of

Getting rid of site to

is

the secret

from the present power sin,

of

evil.

instead of being a prerequi-

the divine coming

in its realization.

is

Man's

an integral factor

receptivity for the

divine, rather than his perfect attainment of holiness, conditions

the coming of God, and

without his presence in

the hope of any

life

worthy attainment is meager. Here is one of the most distinctive features of Jesus' religious God's presence means

thinking:

and

career,

In

salvation,)

Jesus, proclaiming this truth in his is

its

own

the minister of salvation.

more external

features, the theological

thinking of Jesus corresponded in general to

The modern

the intellectual ideas of that age.

outlook upon the world and

then unknown, consequently for this in his teaching.

He

its

it is

history

was

vain to look

did subject vari-

ous ideas of the time to criticism and correction, yet not on

scientific, but on religious grounds. For example, men then talked of angels and

demons

in a realistic

way and

so did Jesus,

but in contrast with Jewish transcendentalism,

and the attendant development

of angelology,

The Historicity

300

oj Jesus

he brought God back from remote regions and

made him walk again with men ual

in true spirit-

This was no denial of angels

communion.

existence, but they could

no longer be thought

any important religious function. Also was not denied, but their power was practically abolished by faith in the nearness and supremacy of God. Similarly other phases of Jesus' teaching employed curto serve

belief in evil spirits

rent thought and terminology, but their essential

content was determined by the

of his personal religion.

method was

controlled

new

vitality

His whole theological

by

his

own deep

reli-

gious experience. Jesus'

religion

had

also

important ethical

and social aspects. The conditions of society and the point of view of that age differed so much from those of modern times that the real import of his teaching has not always been grasped. nitely in

We

cannot assume that he had

mind

society, nor

is

all it

defi-

the problems of modern

fair

to give his

words and

deeds the interpretation which modern conPerhaps he ditions might place upon them. had he otherwise would have taught and acted

been placed in

So

these

far as his specific

modern surroundings.

words are concerned, they

Jesus the Historical Founder of Christianity

301

should always be interpreted in the

first-

not in a twentieth-century setting;

while for

modern application one must

the purposes of

seek

the

specific

and

general

underlying

principles

These

teaching.

always

are

his

fairly

evident.

Jesus lays for

down two

controlling principles

God

the guidance of conduct;

loved with

mind, and one's neighbor oneself.

Each

is

to

be

devotion of heart, soul, and

full

is

to be loved as

principle carries with

it

many

The first means nothing than a determination to make God's

practical implications. less

conduct an absolute standard for of the divine

is

the ideal of

life,

human

the rule

action, sons

are to live as the Father lives and to be perfect as he of

is

perfect.

Therefore genuine sincerity

motive must characterize

all life;

so

men

are

exhorted to maintain secrecy in almsgiving in order to guard against pride and hypocrisy, to preserve the genuineness of their devotions

by

God and not of men, and, fast, to make it a season of

praying to be heard of if

they choose to

secret personal discipline.

true son no place selfishness

is

to

In the

life

of the

be allowed that type of

which seeks such credit from men

as a disfigured countenance, a

wordy prayer,

The

302

Historicity of Jesus

or a public demonstration of generosity might

prompt. of

Jesus seeks to inspire

with

life

the motives

all

fundamentally

these

unselfish

qualities.

The by the and

character of

action

all

ideal relationship

determined

is

between the Father

They will put his cause first, kingdom and his righteousness at

his sons.

seeking his the cost of

all

lower ideals; they will be opti-

mistic yet trustfully submissive to the divine will,

and they

giving

will live the

as does he.

life

must they;

if

If

same

sort of self-

he loves

all

men

so

he abhors favoritism they must

if his interest is to seek and save must also be theirs; if self-seeking is eliminated from his attitude they must strive to abandon all selfish thoughts; if it is characteristic of him to forgive and forbear they must practice forgiveness and forbearance,

do likewise;

the lost this

in

short

their

entire

conduct

toward their

modeled after the perfect standby the Father. These were the con-

fellows will be

ard set

trolling principles in Jesus'

in his lot

own

life.

He

cast

with the poor and lowly, he despised

not the needs of publicans and sinners, he freely

gave himself for the sake of others, and when he was smitten he smote not in return but

Jesus the Historical Founder of Christianity

303

and forgave because he believed

this

forbore

also to be the Father

Such, in outline, Jesus.

's

is

will.

the personal religion of

His serene faith withstood the storms

that beat against it because it was founded upon the consciousness of vital communion with God. His whole theological thinking was dominated by this personal experience of a divine father whose presence in the world meant a full salvation and whose contact with men inspired them to live the life of selfgiving service. This was the Jesus whose personality, whose teaching, whose activity,

made

Christianity possible.

'

CHAPTER X FOR MODERN RELIGION

JESUS' SIGNIFICANCE

Jesus' career

upon earth closed nearly nine-

hundred years ago. Subsequently the who had personally associated with him carried on, for a few years, a propaganda in his name. Then another generation took teen

disciples

up the movement, which had already begun to spread beyond the narrow confines of its original

home

in

Palestine,

and ultimately

"Christianity" became the recognized religion of the western world.

In this course of develop-

ment many strong leaders championed its cause, new forces from time to time entered into the making of the new faith, and the ordinary transformations incident to a healthful and normal

growth

were

duly

manifest.

After

nearly nineteen centuries of this history \/

we

turn back to the shadijw'y form of Christianity's traditional founder

and ask what

he has for religion today.

significance

Remembering the

long lapse of time, the comparative incompleteness of our knowledge of Jesus' earthly career,

and the changed conditions 304

of the

modern

age,

JcsHS^ Significance for it

Religion

305

not surprising that some persons should

is

feel

Modern

our question to be an idle one.

Furthermore,

the

in

course

Christian

of

thinking as a whole, reflection about Jesus has usually taken

its

departure from some prevailing

type of speculation rather than from historical

To

data.

begin with, the peculiar world-view

who thought in terms Jewish messianism and who looked for the

of the primitive believers, of

end of the world in the near future, was employed for this purpose. But for Greek Christians

neither

supremely

valuable.

of

these

The

ideas

seemed

was

latter

soon

denied by history, and the former was too particularistic

form. in

to

be retained in

Jesus' chief significance

the

realm

of

its

original

was now sought

metaphysical

speculation,

which, though varying somewhat in form at different times, has

been the usual method of

indicating his superior worth. historical

Not

Jesus was

In

all this

the

almost wholly ignored.

that there was any conscious deviation

from the traditional records

of his career,

interpreters easily discovered ticular type of person

there

but

the par-

needed as the counterpart

of their christological speculations.

Hence the

picture of Jesus which has been chiefly before

The Historicity of Jesus

3o6

the minds of believers from time to time has

been a product of interpretation rather than a plain portrait of the individual

who

lived in

Syria centuries ago.

This result was quite unavoidable.

was

to

have supreme value

for

If

Jesus

successive

generations of Christians he had to be reinter-

preted in terms of the ideas which came to hold first

place in each

new

age.

It

was impossible

for believers of the

second century to maintain,

with those of the

first

generation, that Jesus'

worth could be adequately measured by the expectation of his return upon the clouds during

who had been personally him while on earth. Each new

the lifetime of some associated with

phase in the history of Christian thinking has

been confronted by a similar problem with respect to the Christology of the past.

Should

Jesus be newly evaluated in terms of the newer

thought? theologians tively,

At the outset perhaps only a few answered

this

question

affirma-

but ultimately their opinions prevailed

just in proportion as the

look gained currency.

new

intellectual out-

If interpreters

had

left

Jesus inextricably bound up with past modes of thinking then they

him

must have abandoned

outright, or have allowed the needs of their

Jestis

*

Modern

Significance for

age to pass unheeded.

If

307

he was to be saved

developing Christianity

for

Religion

was necessary

it

that he be reinterpreted. It is perfectly natural, therefore, that

how they

should ask

An

significance.

are to estimate Jesus'

evaluation of

modern thought would seem

Many

persons

may

be

feel

him

in

terms of

to be inevitable.

satisfied

with some form

but there are others

of traditional Christology,

who

moderns

compelled to adopt, in their treatment

of religious problems, the

methods

of critical

inquiry which they recognize to be valid in

other fields of study and a world-view which

harmonizes with the data of modern knowledge. If

Jesus

is

to

have any

vital significance for

their religion, interpretation of

him must be

phrased in the language of present-day thinking.

The motive of this effort to understand Jesus anew should not be misunderstood. An expresdoubt regarding the validity of former views is sometimes looked upon as an attempt

sion of

to disparage Jesus.

aim

is

On

the contrary,

its real

more adequate means of worth. One may question

to obtain a

appreciating

whether

the

his

first

interpreters'

speculations

about him can lay any stronger claim to finality than can their cosmology, but the

The Historicity of Jesus

J 08

world has not

lost its

meaning because

been newly interpreted

on a much

—

in fact

larger meaning.

that Jesus' chief significance tive

garments in which

draped him, then there prestige; essential

but

if

he

is

lies in

has

has taken

it

assumed

If it is

his

it

the speculafollowers

earlier

danger that he lose

is

discovered

have

to

worth quite apart from their theology,

the attempt to estimate his significance from

the standpoint of to

modern thinking

is

scarcely

be feared.

Yet the modern situation

raises

more

a

fundamental issue than that formerly presented at critical periods in the history of christological

development.

Heretofore

quite uniformly centered attention so-called

Christ

of

faith.

have

interpreters

It

upon the

has been

the

Christ-idea, the idea of a Savior- God perhaps

we may

say, that has held first place in Chris-

How

tian thinking.

slight,

for example,

was

Paul's interest in the earthly Jesus apart from the saving significance which Paul attached to Jesus'

death!

preters

made

Similarly, it

subsequent

their chief task

to

inter-

expound

worth as the mediator of a God-assured salvation for mankind, the form of the dogma

Jesus'

varying to suit current ideas about the world

Jesus Significance for Modern Religion '

and man it is

In

in relation to the deity.

all this

the divine, heavenly Christ rather than the

human, historical Jesus which stands ground

of interpretation.

there

now

cal

309

is

a strong

On

demand

in the fore-

the other

hand

that christologi-

speculation definitely relate

itself

to the

actual Jesus of history, and the serious question is

whether

this

can be done without detriment

to our estimate of Jesus'

Three ways

of

been proposed, that the

worth for religion. this problem have

meeting (i)

main content

Some

interpreters assert

of traditional Christology

finds historical substantiation in Jesus' earthly career.

(2)

Others do not think the history

supports the traditional views, and accordingly

they would construct a

new

Christology from

by their critical and teaching. (3) Yet others find the connection between his historical personality and the religion of men today so unimportant that they eschew all christological speculation and treat him as merely one of the phenomena more or less significant in the history of our religion. These three main types of opinion need to be examined more closely in the material brought to light

study of Jesus'

—

life

—

order to bring out the distinctive issues of our

present problem.

The Historicity of Jesus

3IO

Those who hold the first would make the worship Christ

the

of

these opinions

the

of

mark

distinguishing

heavenly-

modern Hence

of

as well as of primitive Christianity.

the Jesus tiated

of

history

from the Christ

is

not to be differen-

of faith, since

it

was

in

the latter capacity that Jesus actually presented himself to men, even during his earthly career.

That

is,

deity,

he claimed to be an anthropomorphized

and was

followers.'

To

so recognized this

by

his believing

fundamental tenet of

ditional Christology "liberals" raise

objections.

They maintain

inquiry upon the

life

that

tra-

two general (i)

and teaching

critical

of Jesus

does not allow this reading of the history, and (2)

modern world-\dew cannot adopt

a

this

type of metaphysical speculation. 'Cf., the

among

the more recent discussions, Garvie, Studies in

Inner Life of Jesus (New York, 1907); Griitzmacher, 1st das

liberale

J esushild modern?

(Gr. Lichterfelde, 1907); Nolloth, r/re

Person of Our Lord and Recent Thought (London, 1908); Denney, Jesus and the Gospel (New York, 1909) Jordan, Jesus im Kampfe ;

and Jesus und die modcrnen Jcsusbildcr (Gr. Lichterfelde, 1909); Forsyth, The Person and Place of Jesus Christ (Boston, 1909); Dunkmann, Der historische Jesus, dcr mythologische Christus und Jesus der Christ (Leipzig, 1910); Warfield, The Lord of Glory (New York, 1907), and "The Two 'Natures' and Recent Christological Specula-

der Partcien dcr Gcgcnwart (Stuttgart, 1907),

XV

tion" in the American Journal of Theology, (1911), 337-61, 546-68; also several contributors to the Hibbert Journal Supplement, "Jesus or Christ?" (London, 1909).

Jesus Significance for Modern Religion '

311

It is unnecessary here to re-examine in detail

the content of primitive interpretation.'

The

now

well

results

known, and it is

are

criticism

historical

of

for those

who

accept these results

evident that the Christ of faith was thought

an individual soon to come in glory. may have inspired messianic hopes in some of his immediate associates, but these hopes were not identical with those which of at first as

Jesus upon earth

followed

the

resurrection

faith,

and which

resulted in giving the risen Christ a position in

the

reverence and worship

of

his

nearly identical with that of God. degrees did interpreters in the earthly Jesus

portray his

life

come

followers

Only by

to find qualities

which enabled them to

in terms of their thinking

the heavenly Christ.

about

This was accomplished

by explaining away such seemingly contradictory features as his death, and by making the blindness of the disciples responsible for their generally

admitted failure to perceive in

him, while with them on earth, the characteristics

which they

'Sec above, chap. v.

later ascribed to the

1909);

Granbery, Outline of New Testament Bacon, Jesus the Son of Cod (New

Christology (Chicago, 1909);

Haven, 191 1).

im Glauben des and Chrislus: Die Anfdnge des

Cf. also J. Weiss, Jesus

Urcltristatliims (Tubingen, 1909)

Dogmas (Tubingen,

heavenly

The

312

Historicity of Jesus

Thus thought passed from the Messiah to come, and centered itself upon the Messiah who had come. Then arose the question how he had become Christ.

such.

While the future was looked to

manifestation

—or

for the chief manifestation

of his messiahship, the question of

answered

in the

for the

"how" was

language of apocal\q:)ticism, but

upon the messianic quality of his earthly career grew stronger new answers had to be found. These needs are met by recalling his spiritual endowment at baptism, his virgin birth, and the incarnation of the logos in him. At first faith was directed toward an angelic figure whose uniqueness was yet to be revealed; then thought was fixed more firmly upon an earthly individual especially endowed with divine favor, and from this it went on to regard Jesus as as emphasis

actual deity anthropomorphically manifest.

we

consider historical criticism alone,

it

If

does not

follow that this last stage of interpretation

may

not be the most accurate and valuable explanation of the significance of Jesus' personality;

but to carry this back into Jesus' own teaching

and

to

make

it

the most primitive and the only

type of early Christian thinking

is

what causes

offense in the eyes of "liberal" historical critics.

Jesus' Significance for

The second main

313

objection urged against the

is the extent and upon the supernatural. emphasis

Christology

traditional

character of

its

Many now feel relation

Modern Religion

to

mechanical

that this

human to

give

estimate of Jesus.

way

of picturing

and history

life

a

God's

is

too

adequate

religiously

According to the newer

world- view, unprecedented and seemingly extra-

ordinary events in history need not be assigned to other-world causes in order to give significance.

This world

is

now

them

far richer in

than it was for the ancients. Then it was barren and narrow and could be enriched only from without, while for moderns the enrichment has come increasingly from within. In proportion as the conquest of the normal has enlarged, confidence in it has increased, and the need for the abnormal has gradually grown less. This is no impoverishment of the spiritual reality

possibilities of the universe,

the

elimination

of

and arbitrary intervention order.

So

it

but

externalism, in the

and

an inadequate way

this is

does

mean

freakishness,

normal world-

follows that in interpreting Jesus

the category of supernaturalism to be

it

is felt

by many

of picturing his worth,

not because he has lost significance

but because the category has done

so.

This

The Historicity oj Jesus

314 situation

is

seen more definitely, for example,

in the use which has been made

of certain

terms

to indicate the idea of his deity, terms which no

longer

fitly

answer to the conception of deity

even when they are used of God himself. be

sure,

upon

it

should

this subject

physical

relations,

but today

move

in the

realm of

employing such ideas as

the course of Nature, unlimited

defiance of

exercise of the

hensive

To

was inevitable that primitive thought

it

and

powers of sense, and the is

like;

believed that more compre-

spiritual

express the idea of

terms

God and

are

needed to

his relation to

men.

Accordingly a more liberal type of interpretation proposes a different Jesus' significance for

way

modern

of ascertaining

In con-

times.

trast with the foregoing procedure,

it

would use

minimum of metaphysical theory and a maximum of history in its evaluation of Jesus. To some extent this is a concession to the a

reaction against supernaturalism begun rationalists

rationalists are not

The

by

the

a century or more ago, but the

always followed

all

the way.

crasser forms of belief in the supernatural

are eliminated, but in treating Jesus he

monly

felt to

is

com-

be historically so unusual, and to

answer so ideally the

spiritual cravings of the

Jesus' Significance for soul, as to

Modern Religion

be a unique agency for bringing

315

God

and man together.

The antecedents tion

may

of this

mode

of interpreta-

be traced back even to Herder, whose

him

reason would have led

to ally himself with

the rationalists but whose poetic sensitiveness of spirit enabled

him

to find religious

worth in

miracle narratives.

Schleiermacher's contribu-

tion in this direction

was more

significant.

He

too did not give

(^

first place to miracles, but he emphasized the immediacy of religious feeling

and of

so

found God revealed

Jesus,

particularly

Fourth Gospel.

y

as

in the personal life

described

Similarly Ritsch l

in

the

saw a revela-

tion of the cosmic purpose in the historical

who, being the unique embodiment of the religious ideal which faith craves, has the

Jesus,

God for us. Thus he revelation of God in history. The more recent exponents value of

method

still

supernaturalism stress is placed

of Jesus, while '

We

days of

reduce

further

allowed.

upon

is

the supreme

of this general

the

amount

Relatively

specific

of

minor

deeds and words

emphasis rests mainly upon his

should remember that Schleiermacher came before the

and he found more abundant miracle display of

scientific literary criticism of the gospels,

the absence from John of the

the Synoptics rather gratifying.

3i6

The Historicity oj Jesus

His consciousness of a peculiar relation to God, the unique vitality of historical personality.

own

his

and the

ideals,

the height of his religious

religion,

an estimate

are

like,

made

the chief basis for

Accordingly^

of his significance.

the essence of Christianity does not consist in

holding any given set of beliefs about Jesus,

but in the reproduction of his type of

But the

The

"liberals"

premises

in that he

He

is

he

is

is

exactly

uniqueness?

modern

which

very simple and

—very satisfactory

:

how

thinking,

his

explanation,

traditional

liberalism rejects, its

modern

define

life.

more

measure

to

significance for

Jesus'

do

order

in

—

Jesus

granting

is

comes into the world from

unique

^^^thout.

not a product of the present world-order; rather a

new

contribution to

Liberal interpretation of the prefers

a

but

does not always

it

less

strongly

its

life.

more usual type

dualistic

world-view,

content

itself

with

defining Jesus' uniqueness in a strictly naturalistic

He

manner.

is

held

to

be a normal

product of evolutionary laws and

human, yet indefinable light

out

schauer,^

in

way he of

who

is

purely

some vague and undefined or the

stands apart eternal

—a

world.

gleam of So

War-

in general does not appeal to the

'Jesus: Seven Questions (London, 1908).

«

Jesus Significance for Modern Religion '

supernatural

evidence

for

of

317

worth,

Jesus'

speaks of Jesus as the one "sent in the fulness

"crowning instance"

of time," the

Harnac k puts

immanence. idea that

God

is

in his

own of

both

his uniqueness

unparalleled God-consciousness and

in his ability to

ance

upon the

truly manifest only in personal

and that Jesus reveals

life,

of the divine

stress

awaken

divine

an assurSimilarly Wernle

in believers

sonship/

recognizes a supernatural self-consciousness in

Jesus which differentiates

him from

the rest of

humanity;* and Schmiedel notes that Jesus "had something to offer which appeals to every

human

heart in the universe and

is

to that

'Cf. Christianity and History (London, 1896, pp. 36 f.), Das Wesen des Christentums (Leipzig, 1900, pp. 81 f.; English tr., What Is Christianity? New York, 1 901, pp. 127 ff.). The Twofold

Gospel in the

New

Testament (Berlin-Schoneberg, 191

1,

pp. 10

f.;

translated from the report of the Fiinfter WeUkongress fUr freies

Chrislentum und religiosen Fortschritt, Berlin, 1910, pp. 151

ff.).

^Die Anjdnge unserer Religion (Tiibingen, 1904', p. 28) "Das Wunderbare bei Jesus ist das Zusammensein des iibermenschlichen Selbstbewusstseins mit der tief sten Demut vor Gott. Der:

selbe

Mensch, der

ruft:

Alles ist

dem

Reichen:

Was

vom

mir

worden, und niemand kennt den Vater

nennst du mich gut?

Ohne das Erste

Vater iibergeben

als der

Sohn, antwortet

Niemand

Mensch, wie

ist

gut, als

ohne das Zweite ein Schwarmer. Jesus selbst hat sich als IMittler empfunden. Der Mittler ist durchaus Mensch, ohne Abzug, aber er hat von Gott einen besonderen Beruf und Auftrag an die Menschen bekommen, und dadurch iiberragt er sie. " Cf. Engder Eine Gott.

lish tr.,

Beginnings of Christianity

ein

(New York,

wir,

1904,

I, 40).

The Historicity of Jesus

3i8

Above

extent eternally true.

all

he possessed

a religious nature of such strength and purity as have never to our knowledge been

combined

any other person."^ Bousset hints at a between "transient" and "eternal" in the personality of Jesus, who is the symbol of the divine idea and the supreme example of a God-directed human life.^ Thus Jesus, in

distinction

according to this school of interpretation, has significance in

two

spicuously

he a model

is

directions:

(i)

Most con-

human

being,

a

uniquely successful seeker after God, and so an abiding example and inspiration to his fellow'

*

Jesus in Modern Criticism (London, 1907, pp. 88

Schoneberg,

191 1;

f.).

Person of Jesus for Belief (Berlintranslated from the report of the FUnfter

The Significance of

the

Weltkongress fiir freics Christentmn und religiosen Fortschritt, pp.

291-305). fiir

Cf. Troeltsch, Die Bedenlung der Geschichllichkeit Jesu

den Glaubcn (Tubingen, 191 1,

kann

fiir

uns nur heissen,

dass

p. 50):

wir

in

'"Gott Jesus

in Christo'

die

hochste

uns zugangliche Gottesoffenbarung verehren und dass wir das Bild Jesu zum Sammelpunkt aller in unserem Lebenskreise sich findenden

Selbstbezeugungen

Gottes

machen. "

Weinel

"Aber wer in ihm das Ideal auch seines Lebens erfasst, der erlebt an ihm auch Gott" {1st das "liberale" Jesusbild widerWhether Bousset is to be reckoned among the legt?, p. 84). says:

representatives of this second type of interpretation seems to

some

of

his readers doubtful.

third group.

Thus Wobbermin

They would (Geschichle

assign

him

und Historic

Religionswissenschaft, Tubingen, 191

to

the

in der

1, pp. 47-72) thinks Bousset's treatment of Jesus as the "symbol" of the divine no longer

allows

him any

significance as a source of our religion.

Jesus Significance for Modern Religion ^

men who He is yet

are engaged in a similar search.

Though not

more.

319 (2)

himself God, yet

as an illustration of God's self-revelation in a

human

personality he transcends

all

others

who

have gone before or who have come after him. Thus he virtually becomes a bearer of something

from God to man in the mystical realm of spiritHis chief significance lies in helping ual life. humanity God-ward, but in some less distinct yet real manner he brings

God man- ward.

Advocates of the third main attitude mentioned above take exception to the foregoing

They

interpretation.

object to the retention

remnant of philosophical dualism one's thought about Jesus, however skilfully

of the smallest in

such dualism for

may

be veneered by admiration

Jesus on grounds alleged to be strictly

They

historical.

view which

is

refuse to entertain

any world-

not absolutely monistic.

God

and the world are one in the most rigid sense, and his activity is not to be differentiated at any point from the totality of the cosmic flux. There are, to be sure, variations in matters of detail

among exponents

Some put

stress

of this monistic faith.

upon mysticism, and

so find

the fundamental unity by absorption into an emotionless Nirvana a view which Schopen-

—

The Historicity of Jesus

320

and Richard employed in thinking

hauer

Wagner, of Jesus.

example,

for

A kindred

thought emphasizes the identification

of

of

line

God

with the universe, as illustrated more recently in the pantheistic inteipretation of Christianity

by E. von Hartmann^ and A. Drews.^

Perhaps might be termed a

their metaphysical theory

monism

of divine will, the

^\dll

identified with the world-process.

ordinate the thought of

God

God

of

being

Others sub-

to that of matter,

thus producing a distinctly materialistic mon-

ism

Haeckel, according to which and Jesus are purely naturalistic cultural products and have no further significance. Others advocate an idealistic monism in which mind is the unifying concept-—^an inheritance from Kant and Hegel with the last vestiges of dualism eliminated. Here the final test of all religious values is determined by the like that of

Christianity

dictates of reason. It follows that

emphasis upon the supreme

Die Krisis dcs Christcntums (Leipzig, 1888), Das Christeutum et al. Cf. also von Schnehen, Der modcrne Jcsuskultiis (Frankfurt, 1906); Anderson, "The ^

des neuen Testaments (Sachsa, 1905),

Collapse of Liberal Christianity" in the Hibhert Journal, \TII (1910), 301-20,

and "Whitherward?

Criticism," ibid., ^

el al.

Die Religion

IX

(191

1),

—a Question

for the

Higher

345-64.

als Selbst-Beu'iisstscin Gottcs,

Die Chrislusmythe,

Jesiis^ Significance for

Modern Religion

321

value of history for religious thinking does not

appeal to the monist. Christianity

For him the essential

supernatural revelation of

nor

God

in Jesus Christ,

a reproduction of the religion of Jesus.

is it

It is rather the

resulting

embodiment

of ideas

and

available for him.

—past and present

The personal

religion of

Jesus, the religion of his disciples, religious ages,

ideals

from the modern man's reaction upon

the whole realm of reality

all

in

not belief in a sensuous yet

is

life

in

even among adherents of non-Christian

faiths, are

valuable for modern reflection, but,

according to this view, Christianity at heart

is

a

matter of spiritual immediacy in each new age

and

is

fundamentally neither a historically nor a

miraculously mediated product.

It

is

primarily

an attainment, not an inheritance. The present indeed has a rich inheritance from the past, particularly in Christian history,

Christianity,

on

this

but present-day

understanding of

its

charac-

embodiment of the actual religious attainments of modern men in a modern ter, is

the total

environment.' '

This point has recently received new emphasis

Harnack controversy.

in the

Jatho-

For example, Wernle asks whether Protestantism is essentially a definite historical quantity, or whether it is something which every man may formulate to his own liking. Wernle adheres to the former notion and finds his historical Grosse

The Historicity of Jesus

322

This idea, that religion to be vital must be cut

loose

from

moorings,

historical

altogether ''modern."

is

not

It arose with the con-

ception that ideas rather than events are the

most

and reason

significant items in religion,

rather than history

is

the proper tribunal for

The modern

judging the validity of religious truth.' application

these

of

principles

liberalism results in its

ground

condemnation on the

of its "sickly" metaphysics.

that a historical

an

to

phenomenon can be

Its claim

set

up as

worth is held to be a conterms. For if the ideal has once

ideal of absolute

tradiction in

been actually realized then

becomes something static, may be transcended, and so is no longer the highest ideal. Hence, from this standpoint, to set up the historical Jesus as in in Jesus,

ual

life

who, though

strictly

"dass wir uns

wissen."

in

so unique a spirit-

Jesus von Gott beriihrt

Jatho, on the other hand, admits the desirability of all

possible help in the cultivation of

but declines to regard Jesus so authoritatively. inspirational but in no sense normative: "Was je von

spiritual is

human, exhibited

dem Menschen

drawing upon the past for

He

it

life,

Wert und Bcdeutung iiber Gott gesagt worden ist, tragt sein Mass in sich selbst, d.h. in der Personlichkeit, welche es sagte. Nur fiir diese ist es massgebend, fiir keine andere. " See Die Christliche Welt, '

XXV

(1911), 878

Cf. Lessing's dictum:

f.,

916-19, 946-51.

"Zufallige Geschichtswahrheiten kon-

nen der Beweis von notwendigen Vemunftwahrheiten nie werden."

Modern

Jesus' Significance for

any

Religioti

323

real sense a culminating revelation of

God,

him and

or to treat

his teaching as

for later generations,

And

normative

condemned on principle.

is

to overlook speculative considerations

felt to

is

be a neglect of the only criterion available

adequate estimation of religious values.

for the

Nothing can be

permanent

of

religious

worth

except ideas which have eternal and cosmic

Even Strauss

significance.

demands the

"Our age

said:

to be led in Christology to the idea in

fact,

to

the

race

theology which, in stops short at

its

him

in

the individual;

a

doctrines on the Christ,

as an individual,

is

not

properly a theology, but a homily." It is also

urged that not only

is

anything in

the nature of a historical absolute intrinsically impossible, but Jesus

is

not so ideal as liberal

As a matter of historical the modern picture of him

theology supposes. fact,

it

is

said,

cannot be established with certainty.

Well-

hausen remarks that we cannot go back to him even

if

'And

zum

we would, further:

religiosen

^

while others think

we know

"Dadurch, dass man den historischen Jesus

Dogma

macht, wird

man

schliesslich

gezwungen,

wie die alten Rationalisten 'die historische Bedingheit' von ihm abzustreifen (Einleilung in die drei crslen Evangelien, Berlin, 1905, p. 115).

Cf. Strauss:

"Der Jesus der

Geschichte, der Wissen-

Problem aber kann nicht Gegenstand des Glaubens, nicht Vorbild des Lebens sein." schaft, ist lediglich ein Problem, ein

The

324

him too of

Historicity of Jesus

man

well as a

own age

of his

"It

nothing

is

than a misfortune

less

modern theology that

for

it

admit

So Schweitzer

the "liberal" idealization.

afhrms:

to

mixes history with

everything and ends by being proud of the

with which its

finds its

it

own thoughts

skill

—even to

beggarly pseudo-metaphysic with which

it

has banished genuine speculative metaphysic

from the sphere

him

represents

religion

of

expressing

as

representation of

—in

him

is

and

Jesus,

them."

This

thought to be a pure

"a figure designed by rationalism, endowed with life by liberalism, and clothed by modern theology in a historical garb."' Thus exception is taken, on grounds alleged to fiction,

be purely

historical,

to the general claim of

ideality

which the "liberals" usually make

Jesus.

His ethical principles are declared to

be antiquated,

pronounced

if

more

indeed they are not to be seriously

judged by modern standards. of indifference life,

defective

And

when

his attitude

toward the ordinary relations

his other-worldliness,

and teaching, so it for modern needs.

for

is

makes

his

of

example

said, relatively worthless

The

liberals are

charged

' The Quest for the Historical Jesus (London, 1910, pp. 396 ff.; German, Von Reimarus zu Wrcdc, Tubingen, 1906). Cf. Pfleid-

erer,

Early Christian Conception of Christ (London, 1905,

p. 12).

Jesus' Significance for

•

Modern Religion

325

with absurdity in surrendering Jesus' world-

—

view phrased as it is in terms of the Ptolemaic astronomy and Jewish apocalypticism while they yet hold to the validity of Jesus' view of

—

It is

life.

urged that this too should be set

aside, for his is the ideal of

an age "which knew

nothing of the demands of modern further

and further development

here upon this planet." ing problems of our

Upon

life,

of

or of a

humanity

the most burn-

day he had nothing

to say

"the state and the family, the laborer and the employer, these fundamentals of our existence

have

for

How this

him no worth.'"

shall

maze

moderns find their way through about Jesus ? Shall they

of opinion

apply the metaphysical test for determining his

worth

?

they have a long road to travel,

If so

and must spend much time and energy

dis-

cussing the relative merits of different types of speculation.

For many today the category

supernaturalism, at least in

its

of

traditional form,

seems to be discredited, while others

still

think

Looking at Jesus from the speculative point of view, those whose worldfully

it

view

is

valid.

such that special value attaches to

alleged happenings lying outside the course of '

F. Lipsius in Berliner Religionsgesprdch, p. 80.

The Historicity of Jesus

326

natural law will be able to retain the termi-

nology of the ancient faith; others the

to

notions

speculative

of

may

later

resort

times,

perhaps adopting the Hegelian postulate of the divine idea, thus removing the miracle from

the physical sphere into the realm of ideas; others will wish to level the thought of

still

Jesus

down

experience; of

to the ordinary plane of

and

in

no instance

one set of interpreters seem at

to those

After

point.

but

who view him from

it is

human

will the results all

adequate

a different stand-

not Jesus and his worth,

all it is

a world- view which

is

at stake here.

Can a more satisfactory outcome be attained by applying the historical test ? The answer to the question would seem to depend largely upon what one is seeking in the history. Sometimes historical criticism has been asked to state

what

it

about Jesus.

has fixed upon as the pure facts

Can

it

tell

us whether he was

miraculously born, whether he was really God,

whether

his physical

body was

raised

from the

tomb, and give other information of a similar character? To answer candidly, the historian cannot give a

He

final reply to inquiries of this sort.

can observe the place of these items in the

early faith, the probable date of their appear-

Jesus^ Significance for

Modern Religion

327

ance in the literature, and the special theological

which they originally served, but he cannot produce a mathematical demonstration There are either for or against their validity. interests

two main reasons why he cannot do

In

this.

the first place his earliest sources of information

were not given literary form until a generation

more

and so the narratives are liable to be colored by the pious fancy of the primitive interpreter; and in the second or

after the events,

place these problems are primarily speculative

The question of the phenomena is involved, and it

rather than historical. quality of the

cannot be answered apart from some metaphysical theory.

study which

is

Nor

is

a type of historical

content with determining the

content of primitive belief wholly adequate for

modern

many

needs.

Much

of the phraseology

and

of the thought-forms of primitive Chris-

tianity

ideas of

do not correspond to modern men's

what constitutes the highest values

their world of thought.

This

when we remember that modern

is

in

not strange

scientific ideas,

the evolutionary interpretation of the world, the comparative study of religions, and the

present complex conditions of society must of necessity enter into the

making

of

any

vital

The Historicity of Jesus

328

type of modern religious thinking.

One who

goes to history to discover an infallible christological

men

in

dogma

to

be made normative for

modern times must expect

all

to be dis-

appointed in his search. Is

it

desirable

therefore

to

surrender the

notion that Jesus has any essential worth for

one who accepts the results of recent historical

and whose world- view is of the socalled modern scientific type ? Since Jesus cannot be "proved" to be an anthropomorphized deity, and history cannot be thought to contain infallible dicta for modern religion, why not break the "entangling alliance " between religion and history and permit the present, in its thinkresearch,

ing about the significance of Jesus, to be absolutely a law unto itself

?

This need not

mean

that he is to be wholly ignored, but his worth would be merely incidental and would be discovered in the contribution which thought of him

has

made

to the history of religion rather than

in his actual historical career.^

'On the relation of history to modern religion one may note Harnack, Chlslianity and History; Troeltsch, Die Absolutheit dgs Christentums und die Rdigionsgcschichtc (Tubingen and Leipzig, 1902), and "Glaube und Geschichte" in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, II (Tubingen, iQio, cols. 1447-56); Lovejo)'^, "The Entangling Alliance of Religion and History" in the Hibbert Journal, V (1906-7), 258-76; Eck, Religion und Geschichte (Tubingen, 1907); Wobbermin, op. cil.

Jesus' Significance for

The

Modern

method

rigid application of this

In the

unsatisfactory.

first

Religion

place

329 also

is

lends itself

it

Merely from

too readily to subjectivism.

the"^

standpoint of scientific method, must

it not be moderns are already exercising too the liberty of making what they please,

said that freely

out of Jesus

?

One has only to

recall the present

situation to realize the danger in this direction.'

Some

are saying that he

person, or,

ing about

he

is

if

he lived at

was not a

all,

historical

comparatively noth-

him can now be known.

For others

a historical character, but one of a very

different sort

from that portrayed

in the gospels.

Sometimes his Semitic ancestry is doubted, and is even made the exponent of Buddhistic

he

doctrine,

teaching

a

self-redemption

be

to

by a complete suppression of all desire. Others see in him an ideal teacher of pantheism.

attained

For others he appears

Testament prophets speaking

God

of Israel;

contemporary rabbi, or one

ment

sages.

Many

who

is

more

of the

represent

a neurotic visionary im

for the righteous

again, he

or,

Old

in the likeness of the

him

like

a

Old Testa-

to

have been

faced death in the

'Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus; Weinel, Jesus neunzehnten Jahrhundert (Tubingen, 1907); Pfannmiiller,

Jesus im Urteil der Jahrhunderte

may

(Leipzig

und

Berlin,

1908),

be consulted for a survey of types of interpretation.

The Historicity oj Jesus

330

confidence that he would soon return upon the

clouds Still

to

vindicate

others find in

his

him an

and even the exponent Again, he

is

supernatural claims. ideal social reformer,

of anarchistic principles.

sometimes thought not to have

been a religious enthusiast but a typical ethical theorist. For others he stands forth as an ideal

modern theologian who took

special pains

in his teaching to furnish future generations

Nor has

with doctrinal proof-texts.

the history

failed to yield for still others specific proof of

Jesus' supernatural personality.

This situation makes imperative the exercise of a discriminating historical research, even if one has no further end in view than the interests

of scientific scholarship.

But

mental for interpretation

of

it is

also funda-

Jesus.

If

one

think of him at all, intelligent must proceed from the most objective which can possibly be obtained. And to

chooses

to

reflection

facts

estimate the significance of historical personalities,

one always desires to look upon the

individuals, in so far as this

actually appear in daily

a

life.

new

is

possible, as they

the ordinary relations of

Their deeds and words then take on

vitality.

Modern

evaluation of Jesus

cannot break with history, but

it

must,

if

any-

Jesus' Significance for

Modern Religion

33

be more strictly historical than past

thing,

interpretations have been.

Yet

not to be imagined that an accurate

it is

acquaintance with history

is

of itself a

guaranty

of piety, or that the discovery of the actual

any ready-made, dogma. Piety is pri-

historical Jesus will supply

normative christological

marily a personal attainment, with respect to

which the

historical Jesus

can have significance

only as a stimulus and an inspiration. Christology

is,

And

an estimate

in its last analysis,

of Jesus'

worth

Nor can

history claim to supply the ultimate

realities

of

for the individual interpreter.

personal

The

religion.

item of religion for the individual

is,

essential

admittedly,

a spiritually enlightened religious consciousness,

and

to

lived,

know what

may

be

less

Jesus said or did, or

valuable than

is

heritage of historical Christianity

how he

the religious

handed down

from age to age in his name. It is sometimes said, and not without a degree of truth, that life's

religious values

affected even

if

it

would not be

essentially

should be discovered that

Jesus was no such ideal personage as history represents

—

if

indeed belief in his existence should

—

have to be surrendered since it the ideal and not the person that

is is

primarily significant

The Uistor icily oj Jesus

332

moderns.

for

Whether Jesus made this ideal, was its author is,

or whether someone else

therefore, thought to be of

On

other

the

hand

it

minor importance.' be

will

generally

admitted that meditation upon the

work

of Jesus

stimulating religious living all ages.

life

and

has been eminently valuable in

among

believers in

Various ideas about him were some-

to meet new thoughtdemands, but to have given up entirely the notion of his existence, and so to lose the inspiration of his pious personality, would have

surrendered

times

been disastrous for Christian faith throughout the greater part of Christendom.

templation of the objective,

will

it

is

always

has usually been, and not improbably

continue to be, an important means of

cultivating religious

may

con-

notwithstanding

the serious perversion to which liable,

The

life.

Some masterful spirits

be able to reach the heights of religious

attainment otherwise, but the majority seem destined to climb '

by the more laborious path

In the Hal Jesus

gelebl ? controversy it is granted by some though they stoutly defend Jesus' existence on hisgrounds, that Christianity would not collapse if belief

'"liberals," torical

in Jesus' historicity

had

to be surrendered.

Cf. also

D. C. Mac-

intosh, "Is Belief in the Historicity of Jesus Indispensable to

Christian Faith?" in the American Journal of Theology, XV^ (1911), 362-72.

Modern

Jesus^ Significance for

Religion

333

where they lean hard upon the past for support and encouragement. And not infrequently, too, they, with their

narrower vision

may

it

be,

who have come up some other way as thieves and robbers. Moreover, there are many Christians with whom the intellectual will regard those

aspects of

life

hold an important place, and they

are particularly desirous that their ideas about

Jesus shall be compatible with historic fact.

Under these circumstances

it is

of dispensing with history

but of enlightening

pages and making

furnish the utmost

its

it

not a question

possible aid for the practical religious needs of

modern

times.

Historical study,

it

more valuable service

would seem, can render a in the present situation by

disclosing the grounds of the primitive Christians' faith,

than by attempting to supply a definite

christological

The

dogma.

first

believers cer-

tainly had their doctrines, yet they had something else

more fundamental.

that the Jesus

who founded

with

whom

have already seen

Christianity

was not

He was

a religious individual

the disciples

had intimate personal

a mere dogma. association,

We

and from

whom emanated

an

influ-

ence sufficiently powerful to support their strong, bold type of interpretation and to inspire the

L^

The Historicity of Jesus

334

loyal quality of

The

life

which they exemplified.

force of Jesus' personality, expressed

perpetuated in the work of the

amply attested

and

disciples,

is

new move-

in the success of the

ment. Judas of Gamala, Barcochba, and even John the Baptist, seem to have had quite as

many

adherents to preserve their

memory

as

did Jesus, and the circumstances which attended

them were hardly more failed while his

succeeded

than those

ad\'erse

Yet

through which he passed.

—a

their

cause

significant testi-

l^mony to the vital impress his personality left upon his disciples. The exceptional manner in which he aw^akened the deeper elements of religious faith

by which

it

gave the new religion a stimulus

conquered even so stubborn a foe

as Saul of Tarsus.

Unquestionably there were

many

contribut-

ing factors in the genesis of the primitive faith.

The

resurrection appearances, antecedent mes-

sianic notions, possible personal claims of Jesus

to messiahship, all exerted their influence; it is

perfectly clear, as

we have

earlier

yet

remarked,

that these things were not uppermost in the disciples' life

of

minds when they

association

gospel tradition

is

with

first

Jesus.

recalled their

The

earliest

explicit in stating that the

Jesus" Significance for

Modern Religion

predictions of his resurrection

sponsive

fell

335

upon unre-

while belief in his messiahship

soil;

did not take shape until near the close of his ministry, and even then

was a

it

faltering

hope

which quickly vanished under the shadow

We

the cross.

are not to imagine that

of the historical Jesus

at

first

That

was

in

any

large

of

memory

"^

measure

linked with these interpretative ideas.

can be seen in the present form

this fact

of the tradition

is

all

the

more

significant in

view of the special needs for the framers of the

show that the later faith in the risen and exalted Messiah was consonant with the tradition to

disciples' actual recollection of Jesus.

believe that the features in his

life

We may

which made

the most abiding impression at the time were

not any claims of his to high

official dignity,

either for the present or for the future, (but the

strength of his it

may

own forceful personality'^

Indeed"*

be that we shall not go far astray

we think

of this as a

if

very essential factor in the

genesis of the resurrection faith, as well as in

stimulating the It

is

first

Christians' messianic belief.

not strange that Jesus' early followers

made him the object of their worship, or that men today should be similarly moved; but we must not lose sight of should ultimately have

>

The

336

Historicity of Jesus

the fact that his personal religion rather than

him was

the religion about

He

importance.

lived

of

fundamental

and

religiously

thus

inspired believers to live similarly. 1/

From

this standpoint his

worth

for

primarily in the content of his

lies

moderns as

life,

history discloses his superior personal efficiency

He

in the spiritual sphere.

has for

men today

the same essential value that he had for the primitive disciples, in so far as history per-

mits acquaintance with him, and he answers

modern needs.

may

venture

He to

has usually been, and one

think

he

always

will

be,

esteemed according to the degree in which he aids

men

since for

in their struggle for salvation.

many persons

possible to in

make

today

his

have to be

is

some forms

worth was formerly phrased

in

may

Nevertheless the power

set aside.

and

But

no longer

the external element central

the thought of salvation,

which

it

message continues to be a mighty inspiration prompting modern men to of his person

his

the worthiest spiritual attainments and encour-

aging them to realize in their

genuine experience of God. is

own

lives

a

In this respect he

now, as he always has been, the great Savior.

The maintenance

of

harmonious relations with

Jesus' Significance for

Modern

Religion

337

the divine, and the emulation of the Godlike life

own

in one's

ideal.

secular

life,

is

still

a great religious

Moderns may wish to phrase it in more language and call it the establishment

of right relations

with the universe, or

may

it

be stated in the warmer, richer phraseology of Jesus and called the

demand

of spiritual sonship to

we may with

God.

for the realization

But

struggle as

terms, the ideal remains, and not

the least important feature in Jesus' significance for

many moderns

religious life

will

be the fact that his

reveals the secret of transforming

the ideal into the real.

The

general spirit of his

life

has been

felt

memory of high standards The has been preserved. righteousness maintained by Christians today, continually and broadly wherever the

their

emphasis upon brotherly love, the control

of noble ideals in their lives, are a heritage

him.

The

from

theoretical question of whether these

things would have been realized without him,

however answered, does not alter the fact that thousands have found the inspiration which comes from him their mainstay in the struggles of

life.

Many

persons today are repeating the

experiences of the past in this respect, and even the twentieth century, with

all

its

inventive

The Historicity oj Jesus

338

can scarcely hope to furnish a better

skill,

agency for the propagation of righteousness

and personal

True, Jesus was not the

piety.

to admire virtue nor the first to preach

first

Before

righteousness.

statue of goodness

day

his

graceful proportions admired as other artists

marble

the

had been unveiled and

had not

;

its

but he succeeded

in putting a throbbing

heart within that marble breast, thus infusing it

with the warmth of real

He

life.

gave a

personal demonstration of the possibilities of

noble

by showing that

attainment

trustful

fellowship with the Father enabled one to live

the

to maintain the

of personal purity,

life

optimistic

spirit,

to

cherish

the

attitude

brotherly kindness and social service.

If

could peer into the secrets of Christian

life

past ages

we might have

interpreters

find that

taken

much

presenting Jesus effectively to

we in

of the credit

themselves

to

of

men

for

has been

quite secondary in comparison with the winning force of his in its

to

life,

life.

The power

of Christianity is

the lives of believers lived in likeness

and under the inspiration

of the life of Jesus.

By thus seeking the basal element

for present

thought in a study of the real content of Jesus' life,

one

may

escape the perplexities of ecclesi-

Jesus' Significance for astical

dogma without

Modern Religion

339

sacrificing the essential

thing which inspired the creeds and yet some-

times eluded them.

Failure to recognize that

the personal religious basis of all

been

a

weakness

beginning.

life

of Jesus lay at the

genuine interpretation seems to have

Even

theologians

of

the first disciples,

deeply impressed by their

life

from

the

who were

of association

with Jesus, preferred to set in the foreground their

own

his career.

inferences

And

about the meaning of

eventually the efforts of later

believers to account for the original force of his

personality

became entangled

logical difficulties regarding

in

grave

such problems as

how he could be both truly God and truly man, or how he could be God by the side of God himself,

and yet Christians hold to

only one God. fix

The

belief in

creed makers' efforts to

the content of belief

by much

definition of

phrases answered the needs of their day, but^

modern interpretation must go behind the dogmas which have gathered about Jesus and

make his historical personality its corner-stone.y And it would not be surprising if this should ultimately mean a more significant appreciation of Jesus'

worth

for religious

would be possible on the basis

of

thought than

any amount

of

The Historicity of Jesus

340

metaphysical dualism which the oriental imagination

or

the

ancient Greek

philosophy was

capable of inventing.

Yet we may at first be disposed to exclaim "They have taken away my Lord and I know not where they have laid him." As the women at the tomb were vainly yet anxiously

among

seeking the living

quently

happens

that

the dead, so seekers

it fre-

after

truth

when they find their former ideas transformed into new shapes at first hardly recognizable. But if the new conserve

experience a shock

the values of the old the transformation

may

ultimately prove a blessing, notwithstanding

the inconvenience of a temporary disturbance of thought.

The

first disciples

passed through

dark hours of agonizing experience before their

new

Lord emerged, but it proved to be a new power in their lives enabling them to retain the estimate of Jesus which their personal contact with him had inspired. Indeed, when the limitations imposed by the earthly relationship were removed the disciples were able to paint their picture of his worth with far bolder strokes than had formerly been faith in the living

The changes in christological doctrine which have come about from time to time in

possible.

Jesus^ Significance for

Modern

Religion

341

the history of Christianity have sometimes cost

beHevers pain, yet changes were necessary Christian thought of Jesus was to maintain

if

its

vitahty.

Newer types

of interpretation

seem to have

proved adequate just in so far as they preserved the vital content of the older views, and at the

same time answered the thought-demands

own

their

Today

day.

of

the older metaphysics,

terms of which Jesus has usually been

in

is unsatisfactory to many persons. To meet this situation efforts are now being made to go behind all former christological

interpreted,

theories to

knowledge

the historical Jesus, and with a

a basis to estimate his

of his life as

significance in the light of spiritual rather than

external relations.

It will doubtless

be gen-

method is in harmony with certain phases of modern thought, but still it may be asked. Does it conserve those erally

conceded that

elements which

this

made

valuable and effective

lie

At the basis two ideas

attached: for

the

human

the older

of all past interpretation of Jesus

to

which

chief

men have found life,

concrete

Christology

?

in

worth has been

him

their ideal

and they have regarded him as embodiment of their highest

The

342

thought

of

Historicity of Jesus

God.

These values have been

formally expressed in the doctrine of his perfect

humanity on the one hand and his absolute deity on the other. All christological speculation may be said to have described its orbit about these two foci. No one is likely to doubt that the former of these underlying values is preserved by the modem historical method of interpretation. Surely nothing could bring out more emphatically Jesus' worth as an ideal for life than the effort to fix renewed attention upon his earthly In fact modern demands are not career. satisfied

with a merely objective contemplation

of his career, or a parrot-like imitation of his

action; the present calls for

men who

not only

have seen Jesus standing in a niche of the past, but who see him today beckoning them on to the realization of the noblest attainments in

the modern world of action. is

more than a pattern

For them Jesus

to be copied, he

demonstration of spiritual power to be

is

a

felt

today by those who have received the unction of his spirit. Is

the

conserved

second of these main ?

values also

As already indicated, the

form by which

it

doctrinal

has usually been expressed

Jesus* Significance for

Modem

Religion

presupposes a metaphysical theory for

many modern minds According

able.

to

obsolete

its

343

now become and unwork-

God

presentation

impinged upon the universe from without,

human history, he men by a semi-legal

he projected himself into expressed his love for transaction

the

making salvation

more external

possible

features

of

;

in short,

Jesus'

career

were coupled with current notions about the deity

to

notions.

form a concrete setting for these Without question, this phase of

Jesus' value for the religious experience of that

age had to be estimated in this currency estimated at

all;

and

just in so far as

if

men

today find greatest satisfaction in thinking of

God

in

terms of externalism will they

to picture Jesus in this

way

if

he

is

still

to

need have

important religious significance.

But the converse feel

is

also true.

Those who

that the most vital experience of the unseen

can be adequately pictured only in spiritual terms

will

satisfaction

probably derive greater religious

from meditating upon the

spiritual

life. Under these circumseem more important to seek in worthy living and enlightenment

content of Jesus' stances

it

will

Jesus help for for one's

thought of

God than

to try to frame

The Historicity of Jesus

344

an interpretation

of Jesus in the language of

any predetermined metaphysical theory. The is not to decide upon the kind of Jesus which is demanded by one's ideas of God, but to attain the vision of God which a knowledge of Jesus makes possible. Ancients and moderns alike feel that God who is "unknown" is less immediate than Jesus who has visibly appeared upon the stage of human history, hence Jesus becomes immediately helpful in clarifying and enriching human experience In his loyal service for humanity of the divine. problem, then,

is

found the manifestation of divine love

religious life the reality

communion with pressed;

and power

the unseen

his teaching

and

his

in his

of spiritual

are vividly ex-

conduct inspire

loyalty to the divine will in brief, ;

life is

;

when human

brought into close touch with Jesus'

life,

he so clarifies one's sense of moral obligations

and one's consciousness of spiritual he becomes a most valuable aid vision of

the Father.

He who

realities

that

to a better

pictures

the

unseen Father in spiritual likeness to Jesus of

new meaning

words

Nazareth

will find

"No man

hath seen God at any time; the only

begotten Son,

who

a

is

in the

he hath declared him."

bosom

in the

of the Father,

INDICES SUBJECTS AND AUTHORS Aaron, 124.

Berliner Religionsgesprach, 40, 54, 60, 325.

Acts, spuriousness of, 86.

Adonis, 46, 68, 92

f.,

122, 125.

Agrippa II, 249. Akiba, 266.

Bischoff, 267. Bithynia, 242.

Albinus, 255. Alexander the Great, 50, 135.

Alexander Jannaeus, 48, 98

Beth, 65. Bethlehem, 98, 116

Bolland, 39, 44, 51

ff.,

Bomemann, Bosc,

III.

f.

65.

2,Z-

Alexandria, 38, 49, 52, 107.

Bossi, 39.

Aim

Bousset, 27 f., 40, 102, 318. Bracciolini, Poggio, 247. Brephol, 65.

(Ghillany), 34.

Ananus, 250, 255 f. Anderson, 320. Anthropomorphizing of

deities,

135, i9i> 197, 230. Antioch, 103, 109, 186. Antiochus Epiphanes, 120. I,

Apocryphal Gospels, 238, 259

Broecker, 65. Bruckner, 63. Burkitt, 212. Burton, 213.

f.

Apollos, 114 f. Apostolic Age, 15, 20. Apostolic Fathers, 86, 120, 239. Aquila, 115.

Aramaic, 211, 219. Arimathea, 46. Arnold, C. F., 247. Asia Minor, 118. Attis, 46, 92 f. Augustus, 99 f., 141.

Carpenter, 65. Celsus, 254.

Charismata, 144 ff., 169, 172. Cheyne, 116. Christianity, modern, 40, 58; nature of, 272 f.; origin of, IS, 38, 42, 45 f., 49 ff., 89 ff., 136 f. origin in gnosis, 46 ff ., 53; primitive form of, 43 f., 57; relation to history, 328 ff.; ;

other religions, 271 f.; a social movement, 41; early use of name, 244 f., 250. Christ-idea, 57 f., 236, 308. Christology, development of, 306 ff.; in Jesus' teaching, 232; primitive form, 19, 28, relation

Babylonia, 33, 44 f., 141. Bacon, 66, 216, 265, 311. Bahrdt, 32, 35. Baptism, 55, 114 f. Barcochba, 334. Barnabas, 74, 187, 197. Bauer, B., 2, 35-9, 42, 62, 66, 90 f., 130, 178. Bauer, W., 238.

42,

67

to

f.,

226, 228, type, 310

Beelzebul, 168. Berendts, 256 ff.

309 ff. Chwolson, 65.

345

235; traditional variations of,

f.,

The Historicity of Jesus

346 Claudius, 244

Eusebius, 74, 105, 107, 209

f.

Clemen, 42, 65, 237. Clement of Alexandria, 210. Clement of Rome, 178 f., 206,

Fumeaux,

f.,

102,

109,

:i6,

Deification of men, 135 Deissmann, 112. Deists, 6. Delbriick, 65. De Loosten, 14 f. Denney, 310. De Regia, ss.

f.

Diaspora, 49. Dibelius, 66. Dietze, 65. Dio Cassius, 245. Domitian, 38, 244.

Drews, 39, 44, 54-60, 62, 64, 74!., 88, 96, 113, 116, 122, 124, 126, 128, 193, 320. Dunkmann, 63, 310. 72,

Dupuis, 32, 45.

Easter, 17. Eck, 328. Ecstasy, 17

Geneval, 32. Gfrorer, 34.

148, 229.

Eabani, 78

247.

Galilee, 46, 96. Garv'ie, 310.

Daniel, 69.

98

Exorcism, in. Fiebig, 33, 65. Forsyth, 310. Frey, 260.

239, 241.

Coe, 15. Conybeare, 106. Cyprus, 49, 125. CjTene, 46, 125.

David,

f.,

254.

ff.

Gilgamesh, 44, 71, 78 Gilgamesh epic, 77 ff.

ff.

Gnosis, 113. Gnosticism, 47, 50 ff.; in the gospels, 51 f.; in Judaism, 53; in Paul's writings, 49. Gnostics of Justin, 53. "God of the Hebrews," inf. Goethals, 252, 260.

Goguel, 244. Gospels, date of, 48, 137 ff., of, 205 ff.; historicity 55, literary relationships 74 ff of, 212 ff.; modern criticism of, mythical char203 ff ;

.

;

.

acter of, 43; origin of, 51 f., 77 ff.; purpose of, 139 ff. Gospel of the Egyptians, 52. Gospel according to the He-

brews, 286.

Granbery, 311. Greece, 33.

f.

Egypt, 33, 48, 102 141, 260 f.

f.,

105, 108,

Elijah, 55, 69, 162, 168. Elisha, 55.

Gressmann, 118. Griitzmacher, 65, 310.

Haeckel, 320.

Enoch, 69. Ephesus, 184.

Hamack,

Epiphanius, 47, 97-110, 124. Erbt, 45. Essees, 106 ff. Essenes, 33, 47, 53, 106 ff.,

Hartmann, von, Hauck, 65.

120, 123, 232. Esser, 66.

20,

213,

317. 328. 320.

Hegel, 35, 51, 320. Hegesippus, 255. Heitmiiller, 117.

Hemerobaptists, 103.

215,

289,

Indices

12 f., 281 ff.; 19 f., 23 f., pre-Christian, 44, 47 f., 49 f., pre-existence of, 54, 93 ff II, 126, 239; psychology of, 12 f.; relation to Moses, 161 ff.; religious significance of,

Hennell, 33. Herder, 315.

Hermeticism, 47.

. ;

Herod Antipas, 46, 80. Herod the Great, 46, 99

f.

Herodians, 120. Herodias, 46, 80. Hilgenfeld, 106. Hippolytus, 112

f.

Hochart, 87, 247.

Holy

Spirit,

46,

114

f.,

169,

228.

Holtzmann, H., 211, Ignatius, 179, 206 Irenaeus, 205, 216.

347

f.,

213.

240

f.

27 ff., 56 f., 60 f., 336 ff.; resurrection of, 15 ff., 55, 144 f-, 17s, 234, 26s, 276 ff.; return of, 183; sanity of, 14 f.; son of Joseph, 293; sonship to God, 19, 290 ff.;

a sun-god, 46; his teaching about forgiveness, 298 f.; his teaching about God, his teaching about 299 f himself, 275; his teaching about his mission, 292 ff.; his teaching about salvation, 297 ff.; temptation of, .

Isaiah, 69.

James, 113, 251, 2545. Jason, 75, 96. Jatho, 322. Jensen, 39, 44, 62, 64, 71, 7784.^ Jeremias, 63.

Jerome, 255. Jerusalem, 96, 99, 161, 186, 196 f., 218; fall of, 254, 260 f.

;

83; transfiguration 155, 162, 225.

of,

83,

Jesus ben Pandera, 44. Jesus son of Ananus, 166. Jesus son of Sirach, 293.

Jeshu, loi.

Jewish testimony to Jesus, 2645. Jews' expulsion from Rome,

Jeshu ben Pandera, 48. Jeshu ben Stada, 48.

John the Baptist,

24549, 78 ff., 104, 156, 228, 230, 232, 238, 256, 260, 262, 286 ff., 296,

Jesse, no, 124. Jessees, 108 ff.

Jesus,

227 of,

baptism of, 83, 155, 238, 2855.; betrayal

f.,

73; crucifixion

death

of,

55;

of, 18, 25, 76, 153 f., of name, 176; derivation 123 f.; an Essene, 33; God's attestation of, 151 f., 155 ff.; gospel picture of, 128 ff.; influence of his life, 278 ff., 337 ff.; messianic self-consciousness of, i3ff.,42,288ff.; messiahship of, 25 f., 144 ff.; of, miracles 4ff., 159 f., 167 ff.; newness of teaching, 231 ff.; personal religion of,

334-

John Mark,

107, 109, 197, 209.

Jordan, H., 310. Josephus, 38, 86 f., 95, 105 ff., 119, 121, 164 ff., 211, 245, 249 ff., 267 f. Joshua, 43, 54, 93. Joshua = Jesus, 48, 51, 95 ff., 123.

Joshua ben Pandera, 112. Judaism, polytheism in, 122

f.;

sects within, 47 f., 119 ff. Judas of Gamala, 143, 260 ff.,

334-

Judea, 41, 46, 98, 248.

The Historicity of Jesus

348

Julicher, 44, 64, 199, 220, 262. Justin Martyr, 206, 241, 245, 266.

Meyer, A., 28, 199. Milky Way, 46, 96. Miriam, 43, 96.

Justus, 249.

Mithra, 93.

"Modem Kalthofif,

41

39,

f.,

90

62,

f.,

Monotheism, 50. Moore, G. F., 121.

129.

Kapp,

positivists, " 28.

Moffatt, 211.

40.

Kant, 320. Kautsky, 41

Moses, 55, 69,

161

164

f.,

f.,

168, 229, 249, 295. Muirhead, 66. MuUer, 216.

f.

Klein, 63.

Kneib, 14.

Koch, H., 215. Koch, P., 45.

Muratorian Canon, 205

Kohler, 121. Krauss, 267. Kiihn, 65.

Naassenes, 53, 112. Nasarees, 102, 105. Nazarees, 102-5, 108, 124. Nazareth, i, 89, 115 f., 222,

Lactantius, 245.

284.

Nazareth = Galilee, 116. Nazarite, inf., 114 78,

Lake, 16. Langsdorf, von, 33. Lessing, 6, 8, 20, 322. Lipsius, F., 325. Lipsius, R. A., 106. Logos, II, 156. Lois)', 65 f., 212, 216. Lord's Supper, 55, 274.

Lublinski, 39, 53

Nazirees, 104

f., 108. Nazirite, 103, 105. Nazorees, 102-5.

Nazorite, 103. Nero, 38, 86, 244 Nestle, 102.

116

in,

ff.

Nolloth, 310. of

Jesus'

Notowitsch, S2-

f.

Marcion, 179, 206, 208 Mareotis, Lake, 107.

Mary (mother

of

f.

Jesus),

44,

Orient, 42, 53, 93. Origen, 253 ff., 258 266. Orosius, 245. Osiris, 46, 93.

96, 109.

Massebieau, 106.

Matthew

ff.

Niemojewski, 39, 44 Nieuwenhuis, 40. Noack, 34.

f.

Macintosh, 332. Magic, loi; use

f.,

124.

Losinsky, 41. Lovejoy, 328.

name

f.

(apostle), 210

Maurenbrecher,

42.

Mead,

46

44,

39,

ff.,

f.,

56,

214. 62,

116. 66.

Messiah, advent ing of, 117

ff.

Palestine, i, no. Papias, 206, 208 ff., 214, 216.

Paschal lamb, 96. Passover, 96, 230.

Meffert, 63.

Mehlhom,

Ossees, 108 ff. Ossenes, 108 ff.

of,

171; suffer-

Paul,

Christianity of,

Christology

of,

125

18,

ff.;

119,

Indices 126

ff.,

181

of,

48

f.;

144

ff.;

eschatology

of, historicity knowledge of Jesus, ff.;

126, 192 ff.; 73, 43, 54, relation to early Christians,

191, 195

ff.,

198

f.

Pauline epistles, 37, 49, 69 72 ff., 178 ff. Paulus, 6. Pentecost, 166, 168, 184.

ff.,

Persia, 53, 141. Peter, 69, 74, 79, 81, 107, 162, 168, 187, 196 f., 206, 209 f., 279. Pfannmiiller, 329. Pfleiderer, 324. Pharisees, 120, 232. Philo, 38, 47, 102, 119, 121, 123, 249 f. Photius, 107, 249. Phny, 86, 242 ff., 256. Polycarp, 206.

Reimarus,

ff.

99.

J.

M.,

39,

43

f.,

56, 62.

Rome,

38, 41, 102, 210, 216, 244 ff.

Smith, G. B., 28. Smith, W. B., 39, 44, 49

f.,

56,

Socialism, 41 f. Soden, von, 40, 64. Soltau, 252. Son of God, 54, 128, 157, 167. Son of man, 42. Stanton, 205. Steck, 71, 178. Steudel, 73.

107,

184,

Strauss, 6 f., 34 ff., 323. Suetonius, 86, 244 ff., 256. Supematuralism, 7, 12, 15 28 ff., 32, 313 ff.

Ross, 247. Rossington, 65.

Tacitus, 86

Sadducees, 232. Salome, 46. Salvation, Christian idea of, 143 ff. Jewish idea of, 142 in non-Christian religions, 141.

Tammuz,

f.,

Talmud,

44, 120, 266.

;

;

f.

Stoics, 38, 41. Strack, loi, 266.

f.

6.

Ritschl, 315.

Robertson,

260.

62, 73, 88, 113, 116, 124.

14.

314

f.,

Scott, R., 178.

Shamash, 84

213, 215, 289.

6,

Schmidt, F. J., 65. Schmidt, N., 166. Schmidtke, 102. Schmiedel, 71, 317. Schnehen, von, 320. Schopenhauer, 319 f. Schiirer, 106, 252, 254

Silas, 197.

204.

Rationalism,

Satan, 167, 169. Schaefer, 15. Schechter, 121, 124. Schleiermacher, 315.

Seneca, 38.

Pseudepigraphic writings, 69,

Rasmussen,

Samson, 104. Sanday, 15.

Schwen, 102. 105-10,

Priscilla, 115.

"Q,"iS8

7,^,.

Samaritans, 108, 120.

Schweitzer, 324, 329.

Pontius Pilate, 87, 240, 246 Preaching of Peter, 210. Preuschen, 238.

Ptolemy Philadelphus,

Salvator,

349

ff.,

245 ff., 256, 267. 47 f., 98, loi,

46, 93.

Tarsus, 125. Tatian, 206.

Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, 117.

The Historicity oj Jesus

350 Tertullian, 245.

Therapeutes,

53,

47, 120, 123, 250.

Theudas, 260

107

ff.

Thikotter, 40. Tiberius, 245 f.

Weidel, 14. Weinel, 64, 95, 262, 308, 329. Weiss, B., 213. Weiss, J., 64, 132, 189 f., 196, 199, 216, 252, 311.

Weisse, 213. Weizsacker, 213.

Titius, 40. Titus, 186.

Toland,

ff.

Wellhausen,

6.

157,

199

f.,

289, 323.

Tol^doth Jeshu, 47, 264, 266. Trajan, 38, 242, 244.

Wendland,

106.

Troeltsch, 318, 328.

Wendling, 216. Werner, 14.

Tschim, 40.

Wemle,

27, 317, 321 Wessely, iii. Whittaker, 39, 52. Wilke, 213. Winckler, 45. Windisch, 42, 66.

Valensin, 65.

Van Manen,

52, 71.

Vatke, 51. Venturini, 32, 35. Vergil, 141.

Vespasian, 251, 261.

f.

Wobbermin, 318, 328. Wrede, 128, 191,

Virolleaud, 39.

Volney, 32. Volter, 178.

Xisuthros, 79

ff.

Wagner, 320.

Zealots, 232, 245, 292. Zimmern, 63.

Warfield, 310.

Zodiac, 97.

Warschauer, 316.

SCRIPTURE REFERENCES Genesis

Sirach

49:10

98

18:22

.165

98

f

II Esdras

14:46

Wisdom

1-3.

•293

162

39:1-3

Matthew

Psalms 132:11

293

35:3 36:

Deuteronomy

.

47, 120

ff

of

1:18-25. 3:17.... 4: i-ii 5:21-48 5:44 f 6:9 ff 11:2-6 11:9-11 11:25 12:27 12:28

Solomon

2:13, i6t-i8. .294

3:1,4

294

Sirach 2:8 34:16, 19

293 293

147 147

159 164 290 290 158 163 289 160, 168

158

215,

Indices Matthew 12:38 f 12:39 12:41 f 12:42 13:58 16: 1-4 16:4 16:18 17:3 f 17:5 19:16 f 21:32 23:37 24:29 26:26-28 28:19

Luke 150 151

159 163 222 150 151 274 162 147 222 287 28s 183 274 274

Mark i:ii 2: 27

3:17 4:9-12 5:41 6:5

147 163 210 163 210 222

7:22

210 210 7:34 8: 11-13 150 8:14-21,27-33151 9:1 183,217 162 9:4 f 9:7 147,157 10:5 f 163 10: 17

f

10:46 12:42 13:3 13:10 13:24-27 13:30 i3:3of 14: 2, 32 14:22-24 15:42

222

210 210 210 183 183 183 217 210 274 210

Luke 1:2

f

1:26-38

351

213 147

3:21 f 3:22 4:1-13 4:18 6:28 7:18-23 7:26-28

289 147 159 159 290 158 163 162 147 169 289 290 150 160

9:3^33 9:35 10: 17-20 10: 21

2-4 11:16, 29 11: 19 11

:

11:20 11:29 11:31 11:31 f 12:54-56 18: 18

f

21:24 22:19

f

158, 168

151 163 159

150 222 183 274

John 5:2 7:46 8:46 12:28 17:3

211

164 164 157 153 211 204

£f

19:13, 17

21:24

Acts 1:1

215

2:22 2:32 2:32

158, 168

158 146 146

flf

3:13-15 3:13-15, 20, 23,

3:15 3:22 6:1 13:33 15:1,39 18:25 i8:2sff

18,

26.

.

160 f. 158 157 273 146 273

49,114 115

The Historicity of Jesus

3S2 Romans

I Corinthians

1:3 1:4

126, 194 126, 146

S:i2ff 5:18 f 10:9 13:12 14:10 15:3 15:18 f 15:19-23 15:25

15:6 16:5-9

194 126 145,265 152,181

II Corinthians

5:10 5:16.... 5:21.... 8:9 io:i 12:12

152, 181

126 145 218 184

i:7ff... 10 22 f. 2:2. 1

:

.

1:12, 16

1:15—2:1

182

1:17 f 1:19 2:11 3:2,54:4-

273 ... 149 ,194 152 152, 182

126 7:10, 12, 25.. .194 7:29 ff 181 9:1 196

9:5 9:14 11:

1:14

,152

4:5 5:5-8

74, 126

194 201

1

":23

73, 126, 194

11:23-26

274 12:1 ff 145 12:13 114 iS:3-.-.... ...153 15:4-8, 14 f.. .145 15:5 126 15:5 ff, 73,194

152,

196 ,126

126 126 145

Galatians

I Corinthians

i:7f....

.194 .184

•

Philippians 1:6, 10 2:sff 2:9 f

4:5 I

126 265 184 126 74, 126

273 145 126

182 126 117, 126, 146

182

Thessalonians I

:

10. ...

3:13 4:15- ••• 4:15-18. 5:2, 23.

.182 .182 .194 .182 ,182

.

/>

^^

II Peter

3:8-10

183