Biblical and Miscellaneous Intelligence. 641

XI.-BIBLICAL AND MISCELLANEOUS
INTELLIGENCE.

Ir is very satisfactory to perceive that the recent boldness of infidelity, in attacking the life and character of our blessed Saviour, has so generally been felt and acknowledged to have conclusively revealed its own inherent weakness. As long as the enemies of revelation content themselves with vague insinuations against the authority of Scripture, or with carping at some subordinate details which are almost necessarily involved in much obscurity, not a little plausibility may easily be imparted to the views which they present. The strength of Bishop Colenso's argument, for example, against the Pentateuch, lies in our ignorance of many minute points that, if known, would at once have explained difficulties, or reconciled apparent discrepancies which, as matters stand, he is enabled to press with such an air of triumph. Advancing knowledge in every department of human investigation is the true solvent for the difficulties of yet obscure portions of the Bible. Let both natural and philological science prosecute with unceasing zeal those inquiries which belong to their respective departments, and new tributes of homage, we doubt not, will, from time to time, be paid to the statements of the Bible. Far from having any jealousy of the progress of knowledge in any one of its branches, we are convinced that the stronghold of the infidel and the rationalist is found in our remaining ignorance; and that, as the sciences of geology, ethnology, and others, become more perfect, the more clearly will their conclusions be found to harmonize with the true and natural interpretation of the word of God. More light is all that is needed. to drive the opponents of Scripture from the field. As long as they carry on the conflict on portions of the Bible which are, from their extreme antiquity, or the plainly fragmentary character, "hard to be understood," success may seem for a time to attend their efforts; but, when an attack is ventured on the true centre and citadel of our faith,—the life of our adorable Redeemer,-the instant and inevitable result is an entire and hopeless_discomfiture of the assailants.

It is therefore matter for gratification to the friends of truth, that rationalistic writers have recently turned from the servants to the Master, and have thus provoked such certain defeat as must ever await them when they impugn either the gospel-records themselves, or the incomparable life which these enshrine and exhibit. We are persuaded that such works as M. Renan's Vie de Jésus, however distressing and disturbing they may be felt for a time, are really the most effective demonstrations of the helplessness of infidelity which could be presented. They speedily serve to swell the triumphs of our faith. They are so manifestly insufficient as an explanation of the undoubted facts of Christianity, that every candid mind perceives the falsity of the theory which they embody,

and is thrown back, by their felt unsoundness, on a sincere and simple acceptance of the scriptural accounts. It may be noticed accordingly, that not a few even of the rationalistic or semi-infidel publications of the day have pointed out the fallacies and feebleness of the brilliant romance of M. Renan, and have felt it necessary, for their own credit, to disown some of the most important of his principles and conclusions. We rejoice to observe that such an influential journal as the Edinburgh Review has dealt with Renan's work in the most decisive and satisfactory manner; and we gladly set before our readers the following extract from its last number, on

M. Renan's treatment of the Resurrection of Christ.

"We have one far more serious charge to bring against M. Renan than anything that has yet been advanced; and it is a charge that is concerned with the very essence and most vital point of the whole Christian religion. It is pardonable that he should feel difficulties about miracles, when the church to which he once belonged receives almost all alleged miracles in an indistinguishable heap. It is conceivable that he should make a cento of texts in support of his theological opinions, for many great Christian divines have done the same. But it is not conceivable how, as a man of ability and candour, he can allow a mere à priori dogma about the supernatural, to blind his reason to the enormous evidence that exists to the fact of our Lord's resurrection; and it is not pardonable, it is not reconcilable with that delicacy of moral perception to which he lays such frequent claim, that he should -rather than give up his favourite dogma-hazard the fearful charge of connivance at imposture upon One whom he himself places, at the very least, 'at the very highest pinnacle of human greatness.'

"With regard to the former of these points, let us remind the reader of the exact state of the case, even on M. Renan's own shewing. There are four epistles in the New Testament, of whose genuineness not even the most extravagant Tendenz-critic of the most keenly suspicious school of German theology has ever been able to frame a doubt; and these are Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. Now, from these, it is quite incontestable that St Paul-a man of such training, of sense, and of wide knowledge of the world-firmly believed in Christ's resurrection, and staked his life upon it. In Galatians i. and ii., he, with his own pen, describes to us two journeys to Jerusalem, where he saw and consulted with Peter, John, and James the Lessnot about this momentous question, but about a mere practical matter, senseless, and utterly vain in his estimation unless Christ's resurrection were presupposed. Now, St Peter (even in M. Renan's opinion) is the virtual author of St Mark's gospel (p. xxii), and St John is the actual author of the gospel which bears his name. In both of these, the resurrection is narrated with great distinctness and particularity. With these certain and incontrovertible facts before us, is it conceivable, on any rational estimate of human nature and human conduct, that so gross and senseless a delusion lay at the bottom and formed the nursing spring of all these proceedings as that described in the words of M. Renan? (p. 433)

"The existence of the spiritual world is the Christian's firm conviction, and its predominance over everything below it is one of the very elementary principles of his faith. Death is, practically to us all, the great standing mystery of mysteries, and appeals with irresistible fascination to the interests of humanity, down to its very lowest dregs. If the resurrection of Jesus Christ from death were what M. Renan supposes it to be,-a hallucination of credulity, or an invention of enthusiasm,-not only is there an end of all faith in those narratives which culminate in this great event, but there is an end likewise of the supreme doctrine of immortality, and of revelation itself. The

Biblical and Miscellaneous Intelligence.

643

attempt to deify a human being by the loftiest attributes of our own imperfect nature can never fill up the infinite chasm between the creature and the Creator. A revelation from above must be supernatural, if it be anything at all. But if the fact of the resurrection of Christ rest on evidence as direct and conclusive as that which demonstrates any occurrence in history,—if for that purpose the ordinary laws of life and death were suspended, then what matters it to contest to the Almighty the manner in which he may think fit to exercise his own omnipotence? We recommend those who may be perplexed or distressed by the perusal of this volume to fix their minds on one simple point-the resurrection of Jesus; as long as they rest upon that signal event with entire faith and certain knowledge, they retain the key to the whole system of Christianity; for to apply the words of Bishop Butler, in a precisely analogous occasion:-'If it be incredible, on the anti-miraculous hypothesis, that Jesus Christ should have risen from the dead, then the antimiraculous hypothesis is not true; since the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a well-authenticated historical fact."—Edinburgh Review, April 1864.

As our readers may have learned, the redoubtable Dr D. F. Strauss has again entered the field of theological controversy with a new life of Jesus. We have just formed some acquaintance with this fresh attempt on his part to write a "Leben Jesu," and in doing so, we have been not a little amused by his statement on the title-page, that it is "für das deutsche Volk bearbeitet." Writing formerly for scholars and professed theologians, he has now endeavoured to bring himself down to the comprehension of his countrymen at large. His wish in this work is to be popular, while his great ambition in his earlier productions was to be scientific. Referring with slightly-qualified commendation to the work of M. Reuan, he declares that "to have written for Germans, in the full sense of the word, as he has written for Frenchmen, is all that he desires." But no greater contrast could be imagined than exists between the two works. With a thoroughness and consistency to which M. Renan's book can lay no claim, this work of Strauss is totally deficient in those lighter graces of style which have given such a charm to its French rival. We shall be greatly surprised indeed, if the people of Germany are found paying it much attention. It is an extremely laborious process to get through it; and after doing so, we just reach the same conclusion as that so long ago promulgated in its notorious predecessor. Dr Strauss is still as much in love with the mythical hypothesis as ever, and devotes the larger portion of this volume to its exposition and development. The only very new feature in the work is the further advance towards downright Atheism which it indicates as having been made by its author. As M. Renan dedicated his book to his dead sister, so does Strauss dedicate this book to a dead brother. This brother is spoken of in terms of the highest admiration, and the eulogy culminates in the following outspoken commendation of his disbelief in a future state "Thou hast retained courage and composure in the midst of circumstances which might have shaken the faith of the most believing; thou hast even, in moments when every hope of life was gone, never yielded to the temptation of deceiving thyself by any trust in a hereafter." Let us hope that such a man is not to be regarded, as Dr Strauss thinks he may be, as a representative of the

German people, and that the book which begins with such an ominous declaration may lead all that read it to shrink from reasonings which have guided its author to such a sad and desperate conclusion.

In connection with the above remarks on the vital questions now agitated respecting the foundations of our faith, we quote the following remarks from one of our contemporaries, on the dangers which seem impending over the faith of the people of our own land, and the best way in which these may be met and neutralized :—

"The four Gospels have now fairly become the great battle-field of theological controversy. Those skirmishes at the outposts of revelation, which have been carried on for some time with so much vehemence, have led, as sagacious minds perceived they necessarily would, to a determined assault on the very heart and citadel of our religion. The spirit of scepticism could not rest satisfied with discrediting the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, or scattering doubts as to the historical accuracy of the books of Kings and Chronicles. It was folly to suppose that because no direct attack was made by recent impugners of the books of Moses upon the Gospels, these latter could possibly escape the fate which a destructive criticism threatened to the former. The whole Bible must, in fact, stand or fall together. It presents a living organic unity to the attacks of its assailants, and to wound or ventilate in any one part is seriously to affect and endanger the whole. Any blow inflicted upon the Pentateuch is felt at once by the Gospels. Renan is just the logical consequence of Colenso; and it is an utterly vain and mistaken policy on the part of the friends of Scripture to attempt, by surrendering what is thought trivial or unimportant, to preserve unattacked and unimpaired that which is on all hands admitted to be vital and essential in regard to the claims of Christianity as a revelation from heaven.

"Thus, then, the life of our Lord himself has become the subject to which both the friends and foes of Scripture in this country are now directing their most serious attention. It seems as if we were destined in this matter to pursue much the same cycle as that which has already been completed in Germany. After multitudes of critical assaults on particular parts, both of the Old and New Testaments, German rationalism reached its climax in the attacks of the Tübingen school upon the evangelic narratives, and in the notorious Life of Jesus,' published by Dr Strauss. Baur and his school laboured to overthrow at once the authenticity and credibility of the Gospels, while Strauss, leaving in them but the smallest nucleus of historic fact, sought to explain their origin and contents by his well-known mythical hypothesis. The result in both cases is, that the Saviour of sinners disappears; we are left nothing more than a dim and uncertain glimpse of a remarkable man, who arose in Judea about the commencement of our era; and whether we contemplate the ruthless destructiveness of Baur and Strauss, or the sentimental and shallow constructiveness of Renan, the feeling which rises up in the heart of the Christian may naturally find utterance in these words of the weeping Mary, 'They have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.'

"But now, as ever, powerful defenders of God's truth will not be wanting. The Tübingen and Straussian criticism called forth numerous works from German divines which will now be found highly useful in the warfare which has been begun in our own country. But it is, we believe, in another way altogether that we must be furnished with an effective defence of the truth of the gospel history. Nothing but creative scholarship, we are persuaded, can adequately provide what is necessary. It must be one who is himself an Englishman, and who thinks and writes in English, that can alone adequately meet the wants of our countrymen. And, therefore, we would rather have German writers used as auxiliaries than trusted to as our main defence

Biblical and Miscellaneous Intelligence.

645

against the enemy. Let these abounding scholarships be thankfully taken advantage of in the preparation by English scholars of works bearing on the controversies of the day, but let them not be cast, as they have been, in tome after tome, upon us with the effect only of begetting a feeling of despair in the hearts of ordinary readers."- Weekly Review, May 28. 1864.

The recent important judgment of the Privy Council continues, as a matter of course, to be earnestly canvassed by the different parties in the Church of England. It has led, as our readers are aware, to a remarkable coalition among some who seemed wide as the poles asunder, and may probably complicate still further the relations sustained by evangelicals, tractarians, and broad churchmen to one another. This is well brought out in an interesting letter addressed to the editor of The Christian Observer, from which we give the following extract :

"No one, we think, would have ventured, thirty years ago, to predict that the time was so near at hand in which Dr Pusey and Dr M'Neile, Archdeacon Denison and Canon Stowell, together with the different classes of Churchmen whose opinions they individually represent, would be found standing shoulder to shoulder in the ranks of an army rallied round the standard of orthodoxy. No one would have supposed it possible that a third party in the Church of England could so soon gather strength enough to make such a formidable attack on what tractarians and evangelicals alike esteem a fundamental principle of the faith, as to unite the two older parties in an organization for repelling the assault.

"Yet, at this very time, all this is happening, and although the co-operation we have spoken of has at present only extended to the joint signature of 'The Oxford Declaration,' it is impossible to say what further influence this movement may exert on the relative positions of church parties. . . . The two old parties (so we may now call them) for a time divided between them nearly all the life and earnestness in the Church of England; here and there a hard-working zealous man was to be found who held aloof from both, but the opinion recently expressed in the pages of a contemporary obtained then even more than it does now, that it is in truth a lack of earnestness, a feeble sense of the magnitude of the interests at stake, which enables any man to take up an eclectic position amidst the strife of contending parties, however much it may be matter of regret that there should be parties at all.' Hence almost all earnest-minded men were more or less pledged to one side or the other.

But, by and by, a third party began to make its presence and its working felt in the Church of England. Small in its beginnings, but aided from the first by men possessing talents of the very highest intellectual order, the Broad Church party speedily raised upon a German foundation an English superstructure of threatening proportions. Perhaps, in tracing the history of this party, one is most struck with the immense influence exercised by a very few individuals. True, in its way, the influence of Simeon may have been as great as is that of Stanley; that of Pusey and Newman may have equalled that which Jowett and Maurice are now exerting; but the founders of the older schools of theology soon collected around them, as helpers in their work, men who have left almost as indelible a mark upon their day and generation. This has not been the case, as yet, with the great Neologian teachers. The brunt of the battle, the burden and heat of the day' has been sustained by a very few, and yet we are now witnessing the most astonishing results as flowing from these efforts, and indeed, so pressing and immediate seems the danger to the Church of England from this source, that the old antagonisms of which we have been speeking have been forced into an united action.

"And while this new body has been growing up in our midst, we must not