صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

selves to be moved from their opinions; while for others, the only effect of polemical digressions is to increase the difficulty of gaining a general impression of the view which the writer desires to set forth. Consequently, the power of the argument to produce conviction is weakened; since that depends in no small measure on the consonance of its several parts. I have therefore to ask the reader to be kind enough not to conclude from my not mentioning opinions which diverge from mine, that I am unacquainted with them; I ventured to hope that the most convincing method of refuting them would be to set forth plainly the grounds on which my own opinions were based. Next to the labours of my fellow-workers in theology, that which has proved of most service to me in working over the material again, has been my own continued study of the history of religion. I have become more and more strongly convinced in the course of these studies how much that is helpful for the understanding of primitive Christianity is to be learned from the comparison with extra-Biblical Jewish, and heathen, religious history; how indispensable, indeed, such comparison is for the elucidation of some of the most important questions. I am well aware that, to many, my practice of drawing parallels from the sphere of heathen religion will appear superfluous, while to some it will even be a ground of offence. In Germany, even more than elsewhere, it is still customary to take up a shy and suspicious attitude towards the application of the Science of Comparative Religion within the domain of Biblical Theology. The few who venture to make use of it draw on themselves, as I know from my own experi

ence, the reproach of "paganising." That, however, has never made me waver in my conviction, which has remained unshaken ever since I studied under my revered teacher, Ferdinand Christian Baur, that Christianity as a historical phenomenon is to be investigated by the same methods as all other history, and that, in particular, its origin is to be understood by being studied as the normal outcome of the manifold factors in the religious and ethical life of the time. Even though the way in which Baur conceived this development was not, as we all know now, quite accurate in detail, yet the principle of development, which he introduced into the historical study of theology, retains its position by an incontestable right-a position which the temporary reactionary tendency of traditionalism and dogmatic positivism will not ultimately affect in the slightest degree. I believe, moreover, that this tendency is already on the wane, and that the time is not far distant when the application to Biblical Theology of the historical and comparative methods of the Science of Religion will be generally welcomed.

When that takes place, people will be able to convince themselves that this scientific investigation of its history in no way endangers the stability of the Christian religion. Quite the contrary. So long as Christianity is conceived of as a miracle, whether unique or repeated, its truth is, for the men of our critical age, always more or less problematical. But when it is recognised as the necessary outcome of the development of the religious spirit of our race, towards the production of which the whole history of the ancient world was moving onward, in the

furnishing forth of which the mental and spiritual acquisitions of the East and West have found their application, their enhancement, and their higher unity -when this is recognised, it becomes, in my opinion, the most solid and imposing Apology for Christianity which it is possible to conceive. Of course, the historical investigator ought not to allow himself to be guided in the treatment of particulars by an apologetic purpose, but should seek to discover, with the utmost possible precision, exactly how things were. The more loyally he strives after the attainment of objective truth in his exposition of the manifold concurrent causes, the more certainly will the general result shape itself into a defence of essential Christianity. The whole wealth of religious ideas and ethical motives which the Christian principle includes within itself cannot be rightly grasped by any method of studying its history which is fettered by dogmatic prejudices, or is held in leading-strings by subjective or Confessional prepossessions. Only a science which is free from the fetters of dogma, and which seeks to understand the origin and growth of Christianity with reference to conditions of period and environment, will succeed in obtaining full recognition for the surpassing greatness of its principle, which unites within itself the most various aspects and the most opposite tendencies. Free historical inquiry is therefore no enemy to the most pious reverence for Christianity; it opposes only the dogmatic narrowness and exclusiveness which can allow value only to one form of Truth, while it has no comprehension for the revelation of Truth in other forms. Holding this opinion, I desire that this book, while designed in

the first place to serve the interests of scientific knowledge, may at the same time contribute to the furtherance of the great practical task of our time— the task of reconciling the just claims of modern scientific thought, and the critical testing of all tradition, with the reverent recognition of the abiding truth and of the unique value of Christianity as the basis of our common ethical education.

« السابقةمتابعة »