the unseen world and other essays-第15部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


t　the　gospel　was　written　at　Ephesus；　which　a　century　before　had　been　John's　place　of　residence。　But　even　granting　most　of　Renan's　assumptions；　it　must　still　follow　that　the　authority　of　this　gospel　is　far　inferior　to　that　of　the　synoptics；　and　can　in　no　case　be　very　confidently　appealed　to。　The　question　is　one　of　the　first　importance　to　the　historian　of　early　Christianity。　In　inquiring　into　the　life　of　Jesus；　the　very　first　thing　to　do　is　to　establish　firmly　in　the　mind　the　true　relations　of　the　fourth　gospel　to　the　first　three。　Until　this　has　been　done；　no　one　is　competent　to　write　on　the　subject；　and　it　is　because　he　has　done　this　so　imperfectly；　that　Renan's　work　is；　from　a　critical　point　of　view；　so　imperfectly　successful。

The　anonymous　work　entitled　〃The　Jesus　of　History；〃　which　we　have　placed　at　the　head　of　this　article；　is　in　every　respect　noteworthy　as　the　first　systematic　attempt　made　in　England　to　follow　in　the　footsteps　of　German　criticism　in　writing　a　life　of　Jesus。　We　know　of　no　good　reason　why　the　book　should　be　published　anonymously；　for　as　a　historical　essay　it　possesses　extraordinary　merit；　and　does　great　credit　not　only　to　its　author；　but　to　English　scholarship　and　acumen。＇19＇　It　is　not；　indeed；　a　book　calculated　to　captivate　the　imagination　of　the　reading　public。　Though　written　in　a　clear；　forcible；　and　often　elegant　style；　it　possesses　no　such　wonderful　rhetorical　charm　as　the　work　of　Renan；　and　it　will　probably　never　find　half　a　dozen　readers　where　the　〃Vie　de　Jesus〃　has　found　a　hundred。　But　the　success　of　a　book　of　this　sort　is　not　to　be　measured　by　its　rhetorical　excellence；　or　by　its　adaptation　to　the　literary　tastes　of　an　uncritical　and　uninstructed　public；　but　rather　by　the　amount　of　critical　sagacity　which　it　brings　to　bear　upon　the　elucidation　of　the　many　difficult　and　disputed　points　in　the　subject　of　which　it　treats。　Measured　by　this　standard；　〃The　Jesus　of　History〃　must　rank　very　high　indeed。　To　say　that　it　throws　more　light　upon　the　career　of　Jesus　than　any　work　which　has　ever　before　been　written　in　English　would　be　very　inadequate　praise；　since　the　English　language　has　been　singularly　deficient　in　this　branch　of　historical　literature。　We　shall　convey　a　more　just　idea　of　its　merits　if　we　say　that　it　will　bear　comparison　with　anything　which　even　Germany　has　produced；　save　only　the　works　of　Strauss；　Baur；　and　Zeller。

＇19＇　〃The　Jesus　of　History〃　is　now　known　to　have　been　written　by　Sir　Richard　Hanson；　Chief　Justice　of　South　Australia。


The　fitness　of　our　author　for　the　task　which　he　has　undertaken　is　shown　at　the　outset　by　his　choice　of　materials。　In　basing　his　conclusions　almost　exclusively　upon　the　statements　contained　in　the　first　gospel；　he　is　upheld　by　every　sound　principle　of　criticism。　The　times　and　places　at　which　our　three　synoptic　gospels　were　written　have　been；　through　the　labours　of　the　Tubingen　critics；　determined　almost　to　a　certainty。　Of　the　three；　〃Mark〃　is　unquestionably　the　latest；　with　the　exception　of　about　twenty　verses；　it　is　entirely　made　up　from　〃Matthew〃　and　〃Luke；〃　the　diverse　Petrine　and　Pauline　tendencies　of　which　it　strives　to　neutralize　in　conformity　to　the　conciliatory　disposition　of　the　Church　at　Rome；　at　the　epoch　at　which　this　gospel　was　written；　about　A。　D。　130。　The　third　gospel　was　also　written　at　Rome；　some　fifteen　years　earlier。　In　the　preface；　its　author　describes　it　as　a　compilation　from　previously　existing　written　materials。　Among　these　materials　was　certainly　the　first　gospel；　several　passages　of　which　are　adopted　word　for　word　by　the　author　of　〃Luke。〃　Yet　the　narrative　varies　materially　from　that　of　the　first　gospel　in　many　essential　points。　The　arrangement　of　events　is　less　natural；　and；　as　in　the　〃Acts　of　the　Apostles；〃　by　the　same　author；　there　is　apparent　throughout　the　design　of　suppressing　the　old　discord　between　Paul　and　the　Judaizing　disciples；　and　of　representing　Christianity　as　essentially　Pauline　from　the　outset。　How　far　Paul　was　correct　in　his　interpretation　of　the　teachings　of　Jesus；　it　is　difficult　to　decide。　It　is；　no　doubt；　possible　that　the　first　gospel　may　have　lent　to　the　words　of　Jesus　an　Ebionite　colouring　in　some　instances；　and　that　now　and　then　the　third　gospel　may　present　us　with　a　truer　account。　To　this　supremely　important　point　we　shall　by　and　by　return。　For　the　present　it　must　suffice　to　observe　that　the　evidences　of　an　overruling　dogmatic　purpose　are　generally　much　more　conspicuous　in　the　third　synoptist　than　in　the　first；　and　that　the　very　loose　manner　in　which　this　writer　has　handled　his　materials　in　the　〃Acts〃　is　not　calculated　to　inspire　us　with　confidence　in　the　historical　accuracy　of　his　gospel。　The　writer　who；　in　spite　of　the　direct　testimony　of　Paul　himself　could　represent　the　apostle　to　the　Gentiles　as　acting　under　the　direction　of　the　disciples　at　Jerusalem；　and　who　puts　Pauline　sentiments　into　the　mouth　of　Peter；　would　certainly　have　been　capable　of　unwarrantably　giving　a　Pauline　turn　to　the　teachings　of　Jesus　himself。　We　are　therefore；　as　a　last　resort；　brought　back　to　the　first　gospel；　which　we　find　to　possess；　as　a　historical　narrative；　far　stronger　claims　upon　our　attention　than　the　second　and　third。　In　all　probability　it　had　assumed　nearly　its　present　shape　before　A。　D。　100；　its　origin　is　unmistakably　Palestinian；　it　betrays　comparatively　few　indications　of　dogmatic　purpose；　and　there　are　strong　reasons　for　believing　that　the　speeches　of　Jesus　recorded　in　it　are　in　substance　taken　from　the　genuine　〃Logia〃　of　Matthew　mentioned　by　Papias；　which　must　have　been　written　as　early　as　A。　D。　60…70；　before　the　destruction　of　Jerusalem。　Indeed；　we　are　inclined　to　agree　with　our　author　that　the　gospel；　even　in　its　present　shape　（save　only　a　few　interpolated　passages）；　may　have　existed　as　early　as　A。　D。　80；　since　it　places　the　time　of　Jesus'　second　coming　immediately　after　the　destruction　of　Jerusalem；　whereas　the　third　evangelist；　who　wrote　forty…five　years　after　that　event；　is　careful　to　tell　us；　〃The　end　is　NOT　immediately。〃　Moreover；　it　must　have　been　written　while　the　Paulo…Petrine　controversy　was　still　raging；　as　is　shown　by　the　parable　of　the　〃enemy　who　sowed　the　tares；〃　which　manifestly　refers　to　Paul；　and　also　by　the　allusions　to　〃false　prophets〃　（vii。　15）；　to　those　who　say　〃Lord；　Lord；〃　and　who　〃cast　out　demons　in　the　name　of　the　Lord〃　（vii。　21…23）；　teaching　men　to　break　the　commandments　（v。　17…20）。　There　is；　therefore；　good　reason　for　believing　that　we　have　here　a　narrative　written　not　much　more　than　fifty　years　after　the　death　of　Jesus；　based　partly　upon　the　written　memorials　of　an　apostle；　and　in　the　main　trustworthy；　save　where　it　relates　occurrences　of　a　marvellous　and　legendary　character。　Such　is　our　author's　conclusion；　and　in　describing　the　career　of　the　Jesus　of　history；　he　relies　almost　exclusively　upon　the　statements　contained　in　the　first　gospel。　Let　us　now　after　this　long　but　inadequate　introduction；　give　a　brief　sketch　of　the　life　of　Jesus；　as　it　is　to　be　found　in　our　author。


Concerning　the　time　and　place　of　the　birth　of　Jesus；　we　know　next　to　nothing。　According　to　uniform　tradition；　based　upon　a　statement　of　the　third　gospel；　he　was　about　thirty　years　of　age　at　the　time　when　he　began　teaching。　The　same　gospel　states；　with　elaborate　precision；　that　the　public　career　of　John　the　Baptist　began　in　the　fifteenth　year　of　Tiberius；　or　A。　D。　28。　In　the　winter　of　A。　D。　35…36；　Pontius　Pilate　was　recalled　from　Judaea；　so　that　the　crucifixion　could　not　have　taken　place　later　than　in　the　spring　of　35。　Thus　we　have　a　period　of　about　six　years　during　which　the　ministry　of　Jesus　must　have　begun　and　ended；　and　if　the　tradition　with　respect　to　his　age　be　trustworthy；　we　shall　not　be　far　out　of　the　way　in　supposing　him　to　have　been　born　somewhere　between　B。　C。　5　and　A。　D。　5。　He　is　everywhere　alluded　to　in　the　gospels　as　Jesus　of　Nazareth　in　Galilee；　where　lived　also　his　father；　mother　brothers　and　sisters；　and　where　very　likely　he　was　born。　His　parents'　names　are　said　to　have　been　Joseph　and　Mary。　His　own　name　is　a　Hellenized　form　of　Joshua；　a　name　very　common　among　the　Jews。　According　to　the　first　gospel　（xiii。　55）；　he　had　four　brothers；Joseph　and　Simon；　James；　who　was　afterwards　one　of　the　heads　of　the　church　at　Jerusalem；　and　the　most　formidable　enemy　of　Paul；　and　Judas　or　Jude；　who　is　perhaps　the　author　of　the　anti…Pauline　epistle　commonly　ascribed　to　him。

Of　the　early　youth　of　Jesus；　and　of　the　circumstances　which　guided　his　intellectual　development；　we　know　absolutely　nothing；　nor　have　we　the　data　requisite　for　forming　any　plausible　hypothesis。　He　first　appears　in　history　about　A。　D。　29　or　30；　in　connection　with　a　very　remarkable　person　whom　the　third　evangelist　describes　as　his　cousin；　and　who　seems；　from　his　mode　of　life；　to　have　been　in　some　way　connected　with　or　influenced　by　the　Hellenizing　sect　of　Essenes。　Here　we　obtain　our　first　clew　to　guide　us　in　forming　a　consecutive　theory　of　the　development　of　Jesus'　opinions。　The　sect　of　Essenes　took　its　rise　in　the　time　of　the　Maccabees；　about　B。　C。　170。　Upon　the　fundamental　doctrines　of　Judaism　it　had　engrafted　many　Pythagorean　notions；　and　was　doubtless　in　the　time　of　Jesus　instrumental　in　spreading　Greek　ideas　among　the　people　of　Galilee；　where　Judaism　was　far　from　being　so　narrow　and　rigid　as　at　Jerusalem。　The　Essenes　attached　but　little　importance　to　the　Messianic　expectations　of　the　Pharisees；　and　mingled　scarcely　at　all　in　national　politics。　They　lived　for　the　most　part　a　strictly　ascetic　life；　being　indeed　the　legitimate　predecessors　of　the　early　Christian　hermits　and　monks。　But　while　pre…eminent　for　sanctity　of　life；　they　heaped　ridicule　upon　the　entire　sacrificial　service　of　the　Temple；　despised　the　Pharisees　as　hypocrites；　and　insisted　upon　charity　toward　all　men　instead　of　the　old　Jewish　exclusiveness。

It　was　once　a　favourite　theory　that　both　John　the　Baptist　and　Jesus　were　members　of　the　Essenian　brotherhood；　but　that　theory　is　now　generally　abandoned。　Whatever　may　have　been　the　case　with　John；　who　is　said　to　have　lived　like　an　anchorite　in　the　desert；　there　seems　to　have　been　but　little　practical　Essenism　in　Jesus；　who　is　almost　uniformly　represented　as　cheerful　and　social　in　demeanour；　and　against　whom　it　was　expressly　urged　that　he　came　eating　a