« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
name comprehending the succession of facts occurring in the subsequent history of mankind that go to constitute what is called Revealed Religion. The hypothesis of a special primeval revelation cannot, however, be said to have been generally accepted by theologians. It would be difficult for Professor Max Müller to give proof of his statement that “ there are theologians who maintain that during all the centuries that have elapsed, and in all the countries of the world, God has left Himself without a witness, and has revealed Himself to one race only, the Jews of Palestine.” In what theological treatise is such teaching laid down? On the contrary, all theologians of note, Catholic or Protestant, recognize the original universal witness which God has given of Himself in the general revelation of nature, history, and conscience, and do not teach, as the Lecturer asserts they do, that miracles are needed to convey to men's minds the concepts included under Natural Thcology. With the great majority of theologians, special revelation is regarded, not merely or mainly as deepening or strengthening man's previous knowledge, but as adding to it what was not known or guessed before ; as revealing a new relation of God towards human sin ; as providing, not a mere republication of the law of nature, but a divinely devised remedy for the foreseen evils of man's abuse of freedom; as laying fresh foundations for the kingdom of God in hearts estranged from Him by proclaiming the love of the Father, the grace of the Son, and the communion of the Holy Spirit, and calling men on the basis of that Gospel to repentance and faith and newness of life. It is in relation to the disclosure and authentication of this “good news that miracles have their place and value in theology. The subject of Jewish and Christian miracles is, one would think, quite foreign to a course of lectures on Natural Theology. The confused and contradictory manner in which it is discussed comes under the critic's censure; and also the almost disingenuous use made by the Lecturer of passages from the works of Cardinal Newman and Bishop Temple in order to strengthen his position. It was morally impossible for vague and chaotic teaching in theology to be given in Scotland without some expression of dissent, and we are glad that it has taken the form of this able piece of criticism.
THE MEANING AND VALUE OF THE “ NEW THEOLOGY."-In a sermon with the above title, the Rev. Frank Ballard utters the warning which it seems necessary to give to generation after generation of the Christian Church, that there is no occasion for panic in the new conceptions of religious truth that may be growing up in our midst, or in the results reached by scientific investigation. It is, he says, our duty to listen to "what the Spirit saith unto the Churches," for to us in our day the Divine Voice speaks as truly as to the Churches of Asia in the time of St. John. And we may allay the fears which new departures in thought excite in our minds, by the consideration that truth can bear the strictest examination, and will survive every change. He points out that a Christian teacher of the present day has to contend with two difficulties : he has to convince a large number of people, generally friendly to religion, that theology itself is a permanent necessity, and he has often to insist with equal earnestness that a newer theology may contain as much truth as the older, if not sometimes even more. Little time need be spent in confuting those who speak against theology, which is after all but the definiteness of knowledge which is essential as a basis for the religious emotions. For surely it is self-evident that no faith can be firm and strong which has not a sure foundation on which to rest. Those, however, who value theology need to keep in mind that in so far as it is a science there is a human element in its construction, and that it cannot therefore be free from imperfection; and also that, like all other sciences, it must undergo modification and change as new stores of knowledge bearing upon it come to light. Correction of previous but now manifest mistakes, modification of rigidity of definition in general, clearer and more true re-statement in face of the needs and facts of to-day's human life-these are in the main the present results of the “ New Theology.” The writer concludes with indicating some satisfactory results in the way of greater reverence, humility, liberty, and charity, which can be traced to the more worthy conceptions of God and His kingdom, which he believes belong to the school whose teaching he defends. The whole sermon is characterized by a fearlessness of thought and utterance which is not rashness, and is happily free from that narrowness which is almost as often to be found in those of liberal opinions as in those of rigid orthodoxy.
RECENT ACQUISITIONS IN BIBLICAL KNOWLEDGE.-In an article in The North American Review, Sir J. Wm. Dawson points out some fresh information on Biblical subjects brought to light by the discovery of the clay tablets at Tel-el-Amarna, of which a brief account was given in our June number. We have here, he says, also a note on an obscure passage in the life of Moses, namely, his apparent want of acquaintance with the name Jehovah until revealed to him at Horeb. Now, as reported in Exodus, Moses in that interview addressed God as “ Adon," which is supposed to be the Hebrew equivalent of “Aten,” the meaning being Lord. This is a curious incidental agreement with the prevalence of the Aten worship in Egypt, and shows that this name may have been currently used by the Israelites, whose God Moses himself calls Adon, till commanded to use the name Jehovah. This passage has been often misunderstood, but it certainly shows that the name Jehovah had become nearly obsolete among the Hebrews in Egypt, and that the name usually given to God was Adon or Aten. Another unexpected acquisition is a solution of the mystery which has enshrouded that mysterious people known as Hyksos, or Shepherd kings, who invaded Egypt about the time of the Hebrew patriarchs, and, after keeping the Egyptians in subjection for centuries, were finally expelled. They constitute a great feature in early Egyptian history, but disappear mysteriously, leaving no trace but a few sculptured heads, Turanian in
aspect, and markedly contrasting with those of the native Egyptians. It now appears that a people of northern Syria and Mesopotamia, known to the Egyptians at a later time as Mitanni, and who were neighbours of and associated with the northern Hittites, have the features of the Hyksos. It also appears from a letter in the Tel el-Amarna tablets that they spoke a non-Semitic or Turanian language akin to that of the Hittites. Thus we have traced the Shepherd kings to their origin, and, curiously enough, Cushan-rish-athaim, who oppressed the Israelites in the days of Othniel, seems to represent a later inroad of the same people.
THE CITY OF JUDAH.—The suggestion of M. Le Camus in the Revue Biblique as to the identification of the “ city of Judah," to which the Virgin Mary went on a visit to her cousin Elizabeth (Luke i. 39), deserves notice. As it was supposed that there was no place of that name in Palestine, some have conjectured that it was one of the Levitical cities in the territory of Judæa, perhaps Hebron; others that it was Juttah, a city mentioned in Josh. xxi. 16, as among those assigned to the priests. But beyond the mere coincidence of names there is no positive evidence in favour of this latter view. Juttah was a city in the mountainous part of Judæa, in the neighbourhood of Maon and Carmel, on the southern boundary of Palestine. M. Le Camus thinks that so long and painful a journey as that from Nazareth to it or to Hebron—from one end of the land to the other-can scarcely be implied in the simple statement that “ Mary arose and went into the hillcountry, into a city of Judah.” The bill-country from Nazareth is to the north, towards Safed, Sephoris, Gischala, and the ramifications of Lebanon; and we only think of the journey of Mary as having been southwards, because of the identification of ’Ioúda with Judæa. But the phrase eis trów 'Iouda seems to indicate the name of the town rather than that of the country to which Mary went. The solution of the difficulty might, therefore, be found if we could discover a town of that name to the north of Nazareth. There was such a town. It is mentioned in Joshua xix. 34, in the description given of the boundaries of the territory of Naphtali. M. Miklasiewicz, the Austrian Vice-Consul at Safed, who is an authority on the topography of Upper Galilee, was the first to draw attention to the identity between it and the modern village of Jehudiyeh. The site has recently been visited by a German traveller. It is an hour's journey north of Tibnin, not far from Wady Ilmah. He observed on the site a great many fragments of sculptured marble, the remains probably of an ancient synagogue. This small town of Judah was scarcely two days' journey from Nazareth, while Hebron was five, and Juttah six days' journey. The only difficulty connected with the identification of this place with that in the narrative of St. Luke, is that Judah of Naphtali is not mentioned in any of the lists of Levitical towns, in some one of which Zacharias probably lived. But may there not have been, after the conquest of Palestine, other such towns than those appointed by Joshua ? Were all he appointed retained ever afterwards as priestly cities? Even Juttah is not
given in the later list in 1 Chron. vi. 57-59. The Assyrian, Egyptian, Greek, and Roman invasions of Palestine must have resulted in many changes. For aught we know, Judah in Naphtali may have been a priestly residence. Its position in the hill-country of Galilee harmonizes better with the narrative of St. Luke than Hebron or Juttah in the hill-county of the south of Palestine.
BAPTISM IN THE NAME OF Jesus.-In an address by Edwin H. Spring the extraordinary statement is made that the baptismal formula in Matt. xxviii. 19 is most probably an unauthorized interpolation, and that it is in contradiction to the practice of the Apostles, who baptized converts " in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Not a scrap of evidence is given in support of the assertion. The passage in question is found in all the ancient manuscripts and versions of the Gospel, and to cast any doubt upon it, because it contradicts a preconceived opinion, is mere trifling with the Word of God. To treat passages of Scripture that agree with our views as authoritative, and to reject those that do not, as interpolations, is undoubtedly a short and easy method of solving difficulties, but is on the face of it utterly irrational. There is no reason whatever for believing that the Apostles departed from the form so solemnly prescribed by their Divine Master. It is true that in the Acts (ii. 38, viii. 16, x. 48, &c.) we read of their baptizing “ in the name of the Lord Jesus,” but we are not to suppose that this implies any change from the first ordinance. It was belief in Christ as the Son of God that constituted the ground of admission to the Church; and therefore it was appropriate that, in mentioning the sacrament administered to those entering that Church, His name should be specially made prominent.
THE VARIORUM BIBLE APOCRYPHA.—The growing interest of Biblical students in all ancient literature which illustrates however slightly the life and thought of the Jews during the centuries immediately preceding and following the commencement of the Christian era, will ensure a hearty welcome for the edition of the Apocrypha which has just been issued as a supplementary volume to the Variorum Bible. The name of the editor, the Rev. J. C. Ball, an accomplished Hebraist and an Assyriologist of repute, is a guarantee of sound scholarship, especially in relation to Semitic philology and religion. From that point of view, indeed, the volume is extremely valuable. It is, we believe, the first attempt at a detailed examination of these much debated writings in the full light of modern research. The freedom with which the results of the latter have been utilized is evident from two entries in the list of authorities at the beginning: the India House Inscription of Nebuchadnezzar, and the first volume of the Inscriptions of Western Asia. In this respect this work represents an advance on the larger work to which it is supplementary. Especially interesting are the notes on "Bel and the Dragon," which show that this strange legend is far more in accordance with the facts of history than used to be supposed. The Astyages said to have been succeeded by Cyrus is identified with the Istuvegu mentioned by Nabonidus, the last of the Babylonian kings. The statement long considered utterly improbable that Cyrus worshipped Bel is supported by a reference to a recently discovered cuneiform inscription, and the curious details about Bel's daily allowance are glossed with the remark that we have Nebuchadnezzar's own account in one of his inscriptions. As to the existence of dragon (or serpent) worship in Babylon, Mr. Ball gives the following instructive note. “The Babylonians had a deity called simply the Serpent God, and serpents of stone and bronze were set up before their temples and palaces." Perhaps these curious stories (for, as Schürer has shown, the fragment really consists of two independent narratives) will henceforth receive more respectful treatment from Biblical students. The notes on the so-called First Book of Esdras, most of which coincides with portions of the canonical Ezra, will be very helpful to students of the latter. In reference to the origin of the Apocrypha, Mr. Ball goes further than some critics in finding traces of translation from Semitic texts. Not only the books of Judith, Tobit, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, and the first book of Maccabees, but also the so-called Second (or Fourth) Book of Esdras (which, after Fritszche, is regarded as the work of two hands), the Epistle of Jeremiah and the Song of the Three Children are considered to be based on Hebrew or Aramaic originals. The assertion of a Hebrew origin for the lastmentioned in face of the express statement to the contrary in the heading of the Greek text will no doubt be warmly contested, but the suggestion is at least deserving of careful consideration. The exclusive use of the Hebrew names of the three confessors instead of their Babylonian names is certainly a curious circumstance. The editor's thorough acquaintance with his subject is amply attested by the references in the notes, but perhaps we may be permitted to express surprise that so little use seems to have been made of Neubauer's Tobit. Some may also take exception to details of execution, but few or none who are competent to judge will refuse to admit that this new setting of the Apocrypha is an addition of unusual value to the solid contents of our theological libraries.
NEW FORMS OF CHRISTIAN EDUCATION.-In an article in The New World Mrs. Humphrey Ward speaks of the methods to be followed by the parent or teacher who desires to present religious truth to the minds of the young, so that Christianity, as understood in the light of modern criticism, may become a new and living force. The object of such a teacher is, she supposes, twofold—first, to form an ideal in the child's mind, a vivid and perpetual image of the good, dressed in the living detail of a human story, which may become an ever-present influence on conduct and feeling. In the second place, the parent or teacher desires to form a link between the child and that world about it which remains so largely Christian, and in which so much of the noblest work is still Christian, and Christian of the old type. In order to accomplish this, the teacher should throw his lesson into two parts. The first will be concerned with the better understanding of the Christian Founder, and of the work begun by Him in human life. The