Jesus the Nazarene: Myth or History

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

* * MYTH OR HISTORY? *

THE * MYTH & HISTORY?;*

JESUS *

MAURICE GOGUEL DOCTOR OF THEOLOCr AND LITERATURE, PROFESSOR OF EXEGESIS AND TESTAMENT CRITICISM IN FACULTY OF FREE PROTESTANT

NEW

THEOLOGY (PARIS)

TRANSLATED BY

FREDERICK STEPHENS

APPLETON AND COMPANY MCMXXVI NEW YORK * * D.

COPYRIGHT, 1926, BY

D.

APPLETON AND COMPANY

PREFACE THE

is one question of the historical character of Jesus of present-day interest. It has once again been ably raised by Monsieur P. L. Couchoud in a small volume

of considerable literary value and high spiritual in1 Is it true that the theory of the origins of spiration. as anChristianity sketched out in the above work is, nounced in the programme of the collection in which has appeared, "the synthesis of recent works on in Christianity," and "the focussing that all agree For he who knows, considering as indispensable"?

it

of research conbe permitted to doubt cerning Christian origins may Has not one of M. Couchoud's collaborators this.

even

superficially, the present state

written on the

first

volume of the

collection

:

"Without

seem as inexJesus, the history of Christianity would or of plicable as that of Islam without Mahomet, intellecPythagorianism without Pythagoras"? The 2 and the M. of tual loyalty vigour Couchoud, sincerity of his thought, the loyal effort which he has made to

are penetrate into the spirit of primitive Christianity, it is a which this but full of homage respect, worthy

our seeing in his pleasure to pay him does not prevent book the dream of a poet rather than the work of an historian. 'P. L.

Couchoud, Le Myttlre dt U*u*> Paris, 1924-

Albert Houtin, Courte kutoire du Christianisme, Parit, 1924.

v

PREFACE

vi

winter

During the discussions which took place last at the Union pour la Verite certain criticisms were advanced and facts were cited in contradiction to his It is no matter for surprise that these obtheses. but it is surjections should have left him unmoved, he has prising that in the volume he has just published not attempted to answer them. The problem of the historical character of Jesus is one of fact. It is entirely in the region of fact and by

method that we shall attempt its solution decide whether modern criticism since the eighteenth

the historical to

should admit its century has entered a blind alley, and and in error, cease to see in Jesus a real personage, followed enter upon a road other than that so

doing by Strauss, Baur, Renan, Albert and Jean Reville, and Auguste Sabatier, Harnack, Lagrange, Loisy Guignebert,*

historical exis'Being only here concerned with the question of the tence of Jesus, we pass over the problem of the influence (according to certain authors) of the religions of India upon him and the Gospel

tradition.

Cp. R. Seydl, Das Evangehum von Jesus in semen Verhaltntssen nur Buddha-Sage und Buddha Lehre, Leipsig, 1882; Buddha und Chnstus, Breslau, 1884; Die Buddha-Leg ende und das Leben Jesu nach den Evangehen, Weimar, 1897.

CONTENTS PAGB

PREFACE

*

*

*

v

*

CHAPTER

I

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES CZUPT1B

OF NONHISTORICITY UP TO THE CLOSE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY NONHISTORICAL THEORIES IN THE TWENTIETH

THE THEORIES

I

.

.

II.

CENTURY III.

...

.

.

I

15

THE PROBLEM

25

CHAPTER

II

THE NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY I II.

III.

FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS THE LATIN AUTHORS

....

.

.

.

"ACTA PILATI" (THE ACTS OF PILATE)

CHAPTER

...

29 38 45

III

HYPOTHESIS OF A PRE-CHRISTIANITY I II.

JESUS THE NAZARENE THE HYPOTHESIS OF A SECT OF PRE-CHRISTIAN NAZARENES, WORSHIPPERS OF JESUS CHRISTIANITY AND THE DISCIPLES OF JOHN THE .

.

.

III.

BAPTIST

.

.

.

51

57 73

CHAPTER IV TWO PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS I.

THE POLEMICS ITY

II.

DOCETISM

OF THE OPPONENTS OF CHRISTIAN78 S2

CONTENTS

vffl

CHAPTER V THE APOSTLE PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION I.

THE

........ ..........

PAUL

EPISTLES OF

II.

PAUL, BEFORE His CONVERSION, A WITNESS TO

III.

PAUL AND THE UNITY OF PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN-

IV.

THE BROTHERS

THE CROSS ITY

...........

VI.

95

99

AND THE JERUSALEM

OF JESUS

..........

APOSTLES V.

93

EXAMINATION OF TEXTS SUPPOSED TO CONTAIN ALLUSIONS TO A CHRIST MYTH THE GOSPEL TRADITION IN PAUL

....

.....

IO 103 121

CHAPTER VI THE THEOLOGY OF THE APOSTLE PAUL I.

THE CHARACTER

THOUGHT

OF PAULINE

...

III.

IV. V. VI.

THE REDEMPTION THE CHRIST AND His WORK THE JUSTIFICATION AND REDEMPTION

II.

THE GENESIS

III.

IV.

V.

.

.

.....

.

EPISTLES OF

THEIR CHARACTER

THE THE THE

.

-

.

.

.

*59 168

VII

THE NEW TESTAMENT

........ ........ ......

FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER, EPISTLE OF JUDE, THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER AND THE EPISTLE OF JAMES

........ ........... CHAPTER

139 144

THE

PASTORAL EPISTLES EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

CONCLUSION

135

.149

.

OF

.

OF THE PAULINE THEOLOGY

THE NONPAULINE I.

.

.

CHAPTER

II.

.

.......... ........

SINNER VII.

.

.136

GOD AND DEMONS SIN AND EVIL

173 175 182

184 186

VIII

THE CHRIST OF THE APOCALYPSE I,

II.

CHARACTER OF THE APOCALYPSE ("Revelations") VISION OF THE WOMAN AND THE DRAGON

THE

188 192

CONTENTS

fc

CHAPTER IX THE THEORY OF THE PROPHETIC ORIGIN OF THE GOSPEL TRADITION *AOE

CHAPTIft I.

II.

OF THE PROPHETIC ARGUMENT IN PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANITY RELATIONS OF PROPHECY AND THE GOSPEL HISTORY

203

CREATIONS DUE TO PROPHETIC EXEGESIS MODIFICATIONS DUE TO PROPHETIC EXEGESIS

203 205

INFLUENCE OF PROPHECY ON THE FACTS FULFILLMENT OF PROPHECIES DISCOVERED AFTER

212

THE FUNCTION

THE 1.

2.

III.

IV.

.

.

THE EVENT V. VI.

THE

.

.

198

215 219 226

.

CRUCIFIXION

CHRIST THE PASCHAL LAMB

CHAPTER X THE GOSPEL TRADITION I,

IL III.

IV.

V.

COMPOSITION OF THE GOSPELS

THE GOSPEL IDEA THE ABSENCE OF CHRONOLOGICAL THE PLAN OF THE GOSPELS

CONSIDERATIONS

CONCERNING CERTAIN FACTORS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GOSPEL TRADITION

....

1.

2. 3.

4.

FOLKLORE

.

.

INSPIRATION AND VISIONS THE TRANSFERENCE OF MATERIAL BORROWED FROM THE APOSTOLIC HISTORY

....

THE LITURGY

229 234 239 244 264 265 267

270 275

CHAPTER XI THE ORIGIN OF THE FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION AND

ITS

FUNCTION IN PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANITY I.

II.

THE RESURRECTION PROBLEM THE PAULINE CONCEPTION OF

279 CHRIST'S RESURREC-

283

TION III.

OF THE RETURN OF CHRIST TO TERIAL LIFE

THE CONCEPT

MA289

CONTENTS

x CHAPTER

IV. V. VI. VII.

PRIMITIVE FORM OF THE RESURRECTION BELIEF How THE BELIEF IN THE RESURRECTION AROSE THE BELIEF IN THE RESURRECTION AND THE MESSIANIC BELIEF

290 294

CONCLUSION

3 11

.

.

3<>7

GENERAL CONCLUSION

3*4

INDEX

3*7

JESUS THE NAZARENE * * MYTH OR HISTORY?*

THE NAZARENE MYTH OR HISTORY?

JESUS

CHAPTER

I

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES THE THEORIES

I.

OF NONHISTORICITY UP TO THE

CLOSE OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY one of the greatest scholars of the Renaissance, Laurcntius Valla, during a banquet, said one day to Antoinc Panormita, who was as much scandalized as shocked by the remark, that he had in 1 his quiver weapons against the Messiah Himself. Did

BAYLE

relates that

he mean by this to throw doubt upon the manner in Or which tradition presented the Gospel history? historical the to as far so did he go reality of question the person of Jesus?

The manner in which the conversation does not permit us to decide the point.

is

related

to the eighteenth century the authority of the Gospels was unquestioned. Each one contented him-

Up

by paraphrasing with more or less freedom the So long as Protestants, equally data of the accounts. with Catholics, continued to be dominated by the

self

of Scripture principle of the literal inspiration

it

could

not be otherwise. *

article "Vtllt.* Btyle, Diction**ir* historigue *t critigui,

JESUS

2

THE NAZARENE

problem which existed was that concernand disposition of the parallel ing the arrangement From the sixteenth up to the eighteenth records. marvelous incentury, from Osiander to Griesbach,

The

sole

to coordinate these in such genuity had been displayed a manner that, according to the very words of Osiander,* no word of any record should be omitted, that nothing foreign should be added, and that the 3 order of no evangelist should be modified.

If this "reconciling" was not yet a true critical study of the life of Jesus, it at all events, owing to the

complexity and improbability of the hypotheses

compelled to construct, helped to

show

it

was

that the prob-

lem as then presented remained insoluble, and that in consequence it was necessary to transfer it to another field.

It

was during the eighteenth century that

this trans-

This revolution, the consequences of which were only gradually revealed, took place almost simultaneously in England under the influence of the Deists, in France under that of Voltaire and the ference took place.

Encyclopaedists, in

Germany under

that of the School

of Enlightenment (Aufklarung), which received the 4 adhesion of Reimarus and Lessing.

The

first scientific

essay on the

life

of Jesus

*See hit Harmonic, published in Basle in 1537. Concerning L'Harmonistique, see M. Goguel,

Introd.,

is

i.

that

pp. 49

et seg. *

Concerning the beginnings of the critical history of the life of Ltben Jesu-Forschung, Jesus, see Albeit Schweitzer, Geschichte der de Tubingen, 1913, pp. 13-26; also Chas. Guignebert, Le Probteme Deists and Jtsus, Paris, 1914, pp. 7-21. The part played by English

French writers, completely ignored by Schweitzer, has been well emphasized by Guignebert.

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

3

and 1778. It published by Lessing between 1774 from a voluobtained of seven consists fragments by Hermann Samuel Reimarus ob(1694-1768). The author of this had for his showin natural religion ject the justification of base of supfeeble a but had that Christianity ing

minous manuscript

left

port.

In the opinion of Reimarus, Jesus had never thought of founding a new religion. His preaching, exclusively eschatological and terrestrial, had solely in view manifestation as Messiah, the son of David.

His

that He Jesus perished at Jerusalem at the time Himself to proclaimed King. After get attempted His death His disciples imagined the idea of a second

coming of the Messiah and of a through His death. Reimarus has a double merit.

spiritual

He

redemption

from the

first

in the recognized the importance of eschatology natural a to discover tried and of Jesus, thought connection of cause and effect, not only in the history

of Jesus, but also in that of primitive Christianity. By the manner in which he presents the life and the trateaching of Jesus, Reimarus claims to undermine introintention This base. the at ditional Christianity

duces a philosophical element into his research, which is as much a disturbing factor as the dogmatic prejudices

for

which

Reimarus

reproaches

his

antag-

onists.

The same may be activity

extends

said of the rationalists,

from

about

the

middle

whose of

the

Eliminating eighteenth century up to about 1830. at aimed portraying every supernatural element, they

whose teaching accorded Jesus as a master of virtue

JESUS

4

THE NAZARENE

with their own. Such is specially the character of the 6 8 works of Herder and of Paulus.

The

latter

of miracles.

is

particularly given to the interpretation real but perfectly natural

He sees in them

which his contemporaries have not understood, and which they have considered as having the character

facts

of prodigies. If, for example,

it

has been believed that Jesus mul-

tiplied the loaves, this

is

because, in the desert where

crowd had followed Him, He had given an exdisample of distributing the few loaves at His own of His hearers posal, an example followed by those the

7

possessed provisions. The rationalist conception of the life of Jesus does not differ in essentials from

who

the supernatural conception. The former limits itself to the recitation of the facts recorded while combin-

ing more or less happily the Synoptic and the Johannine statements, but instead of having perpetual recourse to miracle, the rationalists display an extreme ingenuity in giving to events a natural interpretation. The work of the French rationalists

of

the

less systematic chareighteenth century possesses a the greater for that. It rests acter; its import is only

upon no profound work of Herder,

Vom

exegesis,

and does not

Erloser der Menschen nach unsfrn drei ersten Evan-

g elicit: Vom Gottessohn der Welt Heiland nach Johannesevangeltum, Riga, 1797. Gesch. det Paulus, Das leben Jesu al Grundlage einer reinen Urchristentums, Heidelberg, 1828. *With rationalism may be connected the works of Bahrdt (Ausfuhrung det Plans und Zwecks Jesu, 1784-92), Venturmi (Naturliche Gesck des gross fn jropketen von Nazareth, 1800-1802), which reprcent Jesus as an agent of the sect of the Essenes. Concerning these authors see Schweitzer (Gesch., pp. 38-48).

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES end

in

5

opposing a new conception of primitive Chris-

tianity to traditional opinion.

In the involved and prudent manner forced upon him, Voltaire pointed out the small documentary value of Gospels "written by persons acquainted with noth8

the imof contradictions and imposture" probability of the eschatological prophecies, against 1 which good sense rebelled. "Let each ask himself, he ing, full

'

he sees the possibility of pushing imposture 9 and the stupidity of fanaticism farther." "The whole of Jesus only a fanatic or a stupid knave

writes, "if

history

would deny

it

should be examined in the light of

10

Voltaire on several occasions draws attention to the silence of non-Christian authors concerning 11 the Gospel history. Obviously, Christian tradition

reason."

does not inspire in him any confidence. However, he does not go so far as to maintain that it corresponds to

no

reality at

all.

He

is

aware that "certain followers

of Bolingbroke, more ingenious than erudite," considered themselves authorized by the obscurities and contradictions of the Gospel tradition to

deny the

exist-

12

ence of Jesus. In so far as he

concerned, he rejects this conclusion, and it appears that this is not entirely for reasons of prudence, as is sometimes the case when he is

wishes to hint at opinions which

it

might be dangerous

Voltaire, Examen important de Milord Bolingbroke (Edition Kehl), xxxiii, pp. 44-60. Cp, Sermon des cinquant, xxxii, pp. 399'4>; Hist, de Vetabt. du christianisme, xxxv, pp. 274-93. g 68. Id., Ex. de Milord Bolingbroke, xxxiii, p. 10 Id., * l ld. t

Dieu

et les

Hommes,

xxxiii, p. 271.

de 272; Sermon des cinquant, xxxii, p. 401; Hist, Fitabt. du christianisme, xxxv, p. 274. **Id.f Dieu et les Hommes, xxxiii, p. 273. ib.,

p.

6

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

Indeed, Voltaire in this case gives he for setting aside the negations weighty reasons of cites. He quotes precise cases of forged genealogies, stories embellished and transfigured, and as for the to profess openly.

between the hudisproportion which appears to exist the importance of mility of the person of Jesus and the movement which He inaugurated, he relates the case of Fox, "a ignorant shoemaker, founder of very

the sect of Quakers."

He

concludes

:

"It

is

necessary,

whilst awaiting faith, to limit oneself to drawing this conclusion : There did exist an obscure Jew, from the crucified as dregs of the people, named Jesus, who was it the of Tiberius, time in the a blasphemer Emperor 18

being impossible to determine in which year." Voltaire has not sketched any history of the origins of Christianity. His effort to place the study of the documents within the province of reason we should is none say in modern phrase the province of history the he dealt so the less very remarkable. In doing traditional conception decisive blows. The almost entirely negative character of the criti-

cisms of Voltaire explains the extreme conclusions stated at the end of the eighteenth century by Volney

and Dupuis. In

his

work

called

Les Ruines ou Medi-

tations sur les Revolutions des

Empires (Paris 1798unfolded among the a vision conceives 1808) Volney ruins of Palmyra. The representatives of the various * Voltaire, Dleu et les Hommes, xxxiii, p, 279. Further to what has been quoted it is necessary to read L'Essai sur les maeurs (especially Chap, ix); Les Homelies prononchs b Londres, 1765, xxxii; Conseils raisonnables & M. Bergier, xxxiii Questions de Zapata, xxxiii ; Epitr e ;

aux Remains,

xxxiii,

many

articles in the Dictionnaire philosophique,

zxxvii to xliii. With the ideas of Voltaire may be compared those of Holbach, Systeme de nature, Londres, 1770; under the name of Mirabeau, Le bons sens du cure Meslier, Londres, 1772.

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

7

how

priests have obscured which dogmas

in his turn, religions explain, each

deceived mankind the real religion, spiritual in its essence. In Volney's view, the entire Gospel tradition represented an astral in inventing

14

myth.

The

views of Dupuis 18

Volney.

18

closely resemble those of

According to him, the philosophers who

man

of Jesus are not less seriously in error than the theologians who have made of Him a God: "Jesus is still less man than God. He is, like

have made a

men have adored, the sun ChristianWhen we shall have shown," writes ity is a solar myth. the "that pretended history of a God, who is Dupuis, born of a virgin in the winter solstice, who is resusci-

all

the deities that

;

tated at Easter or at the Vernal equinox, after having descended into hell, who brings with Him a retinue of

twelve apostles whose chief possesses all the attributes a God, conqueror of the prince of darkness, of Janus who translates mankind into the empire of light, and is only a solar fable, as almost it will be unnecessary to inquire whether there was a man called Christ as it is to inquire whether Provided that it be is called Hercules. some

who ...

heals the

woes of the world,

prince

under proven that the being consecrated by worship the name of Christ is the sun, and that the miraculous 14

Napoleon

I

was under

versation that he had with

the influence of Volney when, in a conWieland at Weimar, in 1808, he said to decide whether Jesus had existed

was a great question (Schweitzer, Gesch , p. 445)' la religion universelle, IB Dupuis, L'Oriffine de tous Its cultes ou de tous les cultet, Paris, Paris, anno III (1794) ; Abregi de V engine anno VII (1798). These two works have been reprinted several

it

times.

"It was during a conversation with Dupuis that Volney conceived the project of his book.

8

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

element in the legend or the poem has this star for its that the Christians object, then it will appear proven are but sun worshippers, and that their priests have the same religion as those of Peru, whose throats they

have

cut."

1T

of the year 1835 was that of the publication 18 and it is a date of first Life of Jesus, by Strauss, critiprimary importance in the history of evangelical

The

Strauss attacks the problem with the absolute indifference to dogma which he owed to the philosophy of Hegel. The fundamental idea of religion in his cism.

view

is

that of the "Gottmenschlichkeit," and it is of whether this idea has been realized in

small import phenomena or not. It

and not

The

history.

is

first

the idea which

is

important,

Gospel accounts, in Strauss's

from an historical opinion, have not been drawn up the event as these point of view. They do not relate ideas certain but express took by means of place,

term that images and symbols, or to employ the exact Strauss makes use of, by myths. What is important in the notion of the myth is not the idea of unreality, but that of a symbolical expression of a higher truth. The mythical explanation seems to Strauss the syn-

which resolves the antithesis between the naturalist and the supernatural explanations of the life

thesis

of Jesus. The other novelty:

of Jesus of Strauss contains anput forward as had never been done

'Life it

been wittily Dupuis, Abregi, p. 251. The views of Dupuis have a curious by J. B. Peres, librarian of the town of Agen, in booklet in which he applied the method of Dupuis to the History of Napoleon to prove the latter had never existed. IT

criticized

ConcernStrauss, Das Leben Jesu, Tubingen, 1835* 1836, 1840. also A. Levy, David Fredsee Gesch., Strauss p. 69; Schweitzer, ing crick Strauss, Parii, 1910; Guigncbert, pp. xxii seq. i

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

9

problem of the relation between the fourth Gospel and the Synoptics. So long as one was content, as before Strauss, to

hitherto

the

combine the statements of the four evangelists, Strauss considers that the two traditions are irreconcilable with each other, and he solves the problem offered by their coexistence in a manner unfavorable to the fourth evangelist.

that it point of Strauss's construction was was not built upon a sufficiently thorough study of the sources. This omission was filled up simultaneously by the works of F. C. Baur and his disciples and by those

The weak

of a series of

critics

who combated

the theses of the

Tubingen school, such as Weisse, Wilke, Reuss, Albert 19 Reville, H. J. Holtzmann, Bernhard Weiss. The outcome of the discussions which took place on the evangelical problem was a theory whose essential literature points are that at the base of the evangelical are two principal sources : The Gospel of Mark, either under its present form or; one slightly different (proto-

Mark), and

a collection of discourses (the Logia),

20

the fourth evangelist being considered by the majority of critics as a secondary form of the tradition, domi-

nated by dogmatic and allegorical ideas. The life of Jesus which would be the result of this critical

work has never been

written;

it

is,

all

so to 21

of H. J. Holtzmann. speak, involved in the work To the school of Baur belong the works of Bruno i

and *

Concerning these works see Maurice Goguel, Introd., ii,

Usually referred to in England and

(Quelle). Schweitzer, Gctch.> pp. 124-40.

"

i,

p.

p. 27.

Germany by

the letter

67,

Q

io

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

Bauer," who in 1841 supported the priority of the of the Gospel of Mark. He explained the peculiarities other records by what he termed the creative power of the evangelists, and clearly showed the part played in the evolution of tradition by dogmatic and theological But he did not stop there, and maintained notions. that the forces which had guided the transformation of primitive tradition explained also the genesis of Mark's record. In Bauer's view the primitive evangelist was a creator, and his work is the product of the faith of the early Christians. Christianity was born at the beginning of the second century from the meetin ing of the different currents of thought originating of Jesus was Judea, Greece and Rome. The person fiction. Jesus is the product, not the a

merely

literary

creator, of Christianity.

Bruno Bauer remained but

little influence.

When,

a solitary.

His ideas had

at a later period, analogous

ideas to his were expressed, either by the radical Dutch certain modern mythologists, it was not school or

by

and

was only

after their expression that the authors of certain theories believed to be

under

his influence,

new found out that The publication

it

Bruno Bauer they had a pioneer. of the Vie de Jesus by Renan in

in

of 1863 marks a no less important date than that Strauss's work on the history of criticism. This is not because) the work was particularly original. Almost its entire substance was borrowed from the German 2(2

Bruno Bauer, Knttk des Evangelischen Cesch. des Johannes, Bre-

men, 1840; Kritik der Evangclischen Gtsch. der Synopttker, Leipzig, und die 1841-42; Knttk der Evangehen, Berlin, 1850-51; Christus Bruno M. see Bauer Bruno Berlin Kcgel, Casarcn, 1877. Concerning Batier

und

seine Thcorie uber die Entstehung des Christentums, 1908.

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

11

but although the work of Strauss had been translated, that of Renan was the first French work criticism,

on the question. It attracted all the more attention in that it was addressed to the general public. It thus 28 produced an enormous effect. Possessing in reality but little originality, the Vie de Jesus of Renan is, from the literary point of view, 24 a first-class work. Renan makes of Jesus a kind of gentle dreamer who walks through the midst of the Galilean countryside at the drama in smiling at life, and as though surprised which He takes part. When he disappears, the passion of a deluded woman gives to the world a risen God. of Renan was followed in the last forty a large number of years of the nineteenth century by other "Lives," from Keim to Oskar Holtzmann." all aim at presenting the results of literary

The work

They

combining, as Renan had already done, the facts of the fourth evangelist with those of the Synoptics. The point of view as to miracles varies, criticism, often while

there arc found attempts at the explanation of the Mcssiahship of Jesus

but in almost

all

psychological and of the manner in which

He

had concealed

it

from

2 3 See Schweitzer (Gcsch , pp 647-51) for a list of eighty-five booki and pamphlets published in 1863-64 concerning Kenan's work. 24 There erron in taite. are, however, in Kenan's work certain "There is no work," writes Schweitzer, "which swarms with so many and such grave errors in taste as the Vie de Jtsus. It is Christian art an art of waxen figures. The gentle in the worst sense of the word refined Galileans who make up the Jesus, the pretty Maries, the the windows retinue of the charming carpenter have been taken from of Mtrcel also See St. Place opinion the in Sulpice." of a shop Prout on the style of the work "A tort of Lovely Helen of Christianity" (Revue de Paris, Nov. 15, 1920).

Schweitzer, Gesch., pp. I93-***-

JESUS

12

THE NAZARENE

The the people and revealed it to His disciples. is the explanation of the scene made effort principal

(Mark viii. 27-33). "Lives" there is an effort to dithese of many minish the importance of the eschatological element, with the preoccupation more or less conscious of at Caesarea Philippi

In

unfamiliar discovering a Christ who shall not be too an ideal time same at the and for the modern man as is conceived representative of true religion, such

by Protestantism of the liberal school. In the neighborhood of 1890 a new period

in the

11

history of the "Lives of Jesus begins. Discussion was concentrated principally

Messianic consciousness and eschatology

on

the

two prob-

lems intimately connected.

Already had Reimarus emphasized the eschatological views of Jesus, and Strauss had accorded them a certain importance. But in a general

way

these writers

had scarcely been followed, and the aim was to give to the eschatological declarations of Jesus an interwhich eliminated, while spiritualizing them. pretation

**

Attention was brought back again to this problem by the progress of the study of religions in the world of

and of contemporary Judaism (with which eschatological ideas occupy a central

antiquity

Jesus), in

position; also

by the success of the school of

Ritschl,

who assigned capital importance to the notion of the Church more or less explicitly identified with the preached by Jesus, The of this doctrine led base examination of the Biblical idea of the

Kingdom of God

M Sometimes these were simply declared unauthentic, particularly by Colani, Jisus Christ ft let croytnccs mesnanigufs dt ton timpi, Strasbourg, 1864.

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES Johannes Weiss,

disciple

and son-in-law of

13

Ritschl, to

state conclusions of great import in a leading work of Jesus concerning the 'dealing with the preaching 27 Kingdom of God. In his view Jesus preached a Kingdom of God

and exclusively eschatological; He considered Himself as the King of this Kingdom that is to say, the Messiah. The thesis of Weiss was repeated and

plainly

pushed to zer.

its

farthest consequences

by Albert Schweit-

28

If the exegesis of the end of the nineteenth century has thrown light on the importance of the eschato-

and Messianic element in primitive Christianity, from being complete on .agreement, however, was far noted. A whole group ,the interpretation of the facts of the Messiaha notion on doubt threw of scholars logical

being a primitive element of Christianity. *This conception was formulated by William Wrede in 29 In his ra very acute work upon the Gospel of Mark. a fundaview the oldest Gospel tradition suffers from

'ship of Jesus

mental contradiction. It presents as Messianic a history which really was not Messianic. The contradicis concealed and resolved imperfectly it is true and imposed by observed of the secrecy theory by the Messianic that Jesus. Wrede takes pains to show

tion

must not be interpreted as a kind of pedagogic followers proceeding employed by Jesus to prevent His secret

27

Johannes Weiss, Die Predigt Jesu

vom Reich*

Gottes, Gottingen,

1892. 28

A. Schweitzer, Das Leidens- und Messiasoeheimniss, Tubingen, " psychiatrische Beurttilung 39O-443J

Leipzig, 1901; Gesch.> pp. Jesu, Tubingen, 1913. 29

W. Wrede, Das

Messiasgeheimniss In den Evangelien* Gottingen,

1901; Paulus, Halle, 1904.

i

JESUS

4

THE NAZARENE

throwing themselves into a movement of political Messianism which He would have been unable to aphave eluded Him. prove, and whose control would He sees in the Messianic secret a literary device, thanks to which the conceptions and beliefs of the Christian community have been inserted into the Gosbeen discussed in the pel history. This theory has studies devoted at the beginning of the nineteenth century to the problem of the relations between

many

80 Paul and Jesus.

The problem

discussed

is

this:

Who

is

the real

founder of Christianity? Is it Jesus Himself, or is it not the apostle Paul, who introduced into the Church the notions of Messiahship and redemption foreign to the thought of Jesus and the faith of His first disciples ?

did not, doubtless, go so far as to deny the historical reality of the person of Jesus end, nevertheless, in rendering it practically un-

The

theories of

Wrede

;

they

Him to necessary, and they reduce the part played by that of the occasional cause of the development of 81

From the notion one may so put it, only

Christianity.

of a Jesus having the pretext for the

been, if birth of Christianity to the thesis of His nonhistorical are character there is but a shade of difference.

We

thus brought to examine the 80

Concerning

this

literature

see

modern forms of

the

myth

Schweitzer, Gesch. der Pauhni-

ichcn Forschunff, 1911, pp. 119-40. 81 Such appears to be the point of view reached by

M. Loisy. the influence of the sociological school, many critics in recent years insist upon the part played by the community, and specially of worship, in the development of Christianity and of the evangelical tradition. As characteristic of this tendency we cite the work of Under

Bertram, Die Leidemgcschichte 2922.

Jew und

der Christiukult, Gottingen,

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

15

and Bruno concept formerly stated by Volney, Dupuis Bauer. In the last twenty years of the nineteenth century the

myth concept is only represented by an anonymous work published in London in 1887 under the title of Antiqua Mater and by some criticisms of the radical Dutch school, 82 which is, however, as a general rule, more occupied with the apostle Paul and his epistles than with Jesus and the Gospels. Pierson, Matthes, Naber, Van Loon, and for some time Loman, have decided against the historicity of Jesus. The reasons which are principally of the negative order.

determined their conclusions

These authors

on the uncertainty of the Gospel tradition, the absence of all external testimony, and thus consider as

insist

not only a skepticism regarding the possibility of reaching a positive conception of the life of Jesus,

justified

but also of His existence. fact that they have failed to give from their the origins of point of view a coherent explanation of the of formation the of Gospel tradiChristianity and tion explains the slight influence that their theories have exercised.

The

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES IN THE TWENTIETH

II.

CENTURY That there

existed in the

indifference

which the

Dutch school met with something more than a conspiracy of silence is proved by the volume

theories of the

this school, see a book, somewhat one-sided, by G. Van den van Eysinga, Die h oil and is che radikale Kritik dn Neuen Bergh 81

On

Testaments, Jena, 19x2.

JESUS

x6

THE NAZARENE

of discussion since the opening of the twentieth century upon the historical character of Jesus. 88 According to J. M. Robertson, religions develop

who by a regular law, continually producing new gods, someold the to ones, are substituted for or added times presenting themselves as sons of the latter. Jewish

Monotheism thus gave

birth to the Messianic cult.

only the reappearance of an old religion which existed in Israel at the time when

The adoration Abraham,

of Jesus

Isaac,

is

Moses and Joshua were

still deities.

these cults the most important was that of under Joshua, the solar-deity of Ephraim, worshiped This ram. the and lamb the symbols of the god Joshua is not unrelated to the Syrian Adonis and the Baby-

Among

lonian

Thammuz. The new

cult of

Jesus-Joshua spe-

the destruction of the Temple. cially developed after It created a whole legendary tradition, whose prina distinctly mythical character. cipal elements have It is possible, however, that in these developments have been included certain historical souvethere

may

nirs relating particularly to

John the Baptist and

to a

certain Jesus Ben-Pandera, put to death under Alex8i conander (106-79 B.C.) Albert Kalthoff

Janneus

Short Robertson, Christianity and Mythology, London, 1900, 1910; Studies in Comparative History of Christianity* 1902; Pagan Chnsts, Restatement of the Myth Theology, 1902-11; The Jesus Problem Schweitzer (Gesch.), see Robertson, Concerning Theory, 1917. resemble the astral Guignebert (p. 88). Some ideas of Robertson theories developed by Niemojewski (Gott Jesu im Lichte fremder,

Muncben, 1910; Das wervoende Dogma vom Leben Jesu, Jena, von Chnstus, 1910) ; and by C. P. Fuhrmann (Der Astralmythus cult of Jesus-Joshua is also adof a idea The pre-Christian 1912). mitted by Holland (De Evangelische Jozua Met Evangelien), Leiden, nach Rome, Untersuchun2907-10. Cp. also W. Erbt, Von Jerusalem des Geschichte Urchristentums, nur 1912. Leipzig, gen "Kalthoff, Das Christusproblem, Grundhnien *u finer Sotial*

etc.,

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

17

aiders Christianity to be a social phenomenon. The new religion was' born when the proletarian masses, opin the Roman world, came into contact with

pressed

of Jesus Jewish Messianic aspirations. The history the it reflects Christ is only that of the idea of the

development of the community. 86 concedes that there may be an historical Jensen element at the base of the Gospel tradition, but this fact is without import. Whatever the history of the man Jesus may have been, the Christ of the Faith was born of the transformation of the Babylonian myth of

-

is a person partly which Jensen finds that of the quest of immor-

Gilgamesch. Like Jesus, Gilgamesch

human, partly divine an astral character,

;

his history, in is

86

tality.

William Benjamin Smith,

87

mathematical teacher at

New

Orleans, sets out with a triple observation. It is inconceivable that one simple personality could have movement as inspired such an important religious In the second place, there are in the writChristianity.

Die Entstehung des Christentums, Leipzig, wissen wtr von Jesus f Berlin, 1904- Concerning Kalthoff see Schweitzer (Gesch , p. 345) and Guignebert, p. 78. P. Jensen, Das Gilgamesch-Epos in der Weltlitteratur, Strasdes Babylontschen bourg, 1906; Moses, Jesus, Paulus, Drei Vananten Gottmenschen Gilgamesch Eine Anklage wider die Theologie ein Jesus der Appel an die Laien, Frankfurt-a-M, 1906-9; Hat der Schweitzer see On p. (Gesch., wirklich Jensen gelebtf Evangehen theologie, Leipzig, 1902-3

1904;

466) and Guignebert, p

w H.

;

Was

85.

Zimmern (Zum Streit un den Christusmythe, Das Babylonische Material in semen Hauptpunkten dargestellt, 1910) admits, in addition to the influence of Gilgamesch, that of the cults of Marduk, Mithra and Thammuz. 87 W. B. Smith, Der vorchristliche Jesus (Giessen, 1906); Ecc* Deus; The pre-Christian Jesus (American Journal of Theology. Smith are thoie of G. T. 1911). Resembling the ideas of W. B. New the London, 1921. Behind Testament, Sadler,

1

JESUS

8

THE NAZARENE

of the apostle Paul and the first Christian of apologists but few allusions to the public activity have been so could Jesus. In the third place, no man ings

easily deified as In this mode

modern theologians suppose. Smith

is

led to adopt the idea of a

divine pre-Christian Jesus. It is this person who was worshiped by the Naassene Gnostics, known to Hip-

Nazarenes (or Nazolater Chap. Ill, renes), known to Epiphanius (see Section II). The name of this sect is not derived from

polytus,

and the Jewish

sect of

the village of Nazareth, whose existence is very doubtful. In the name is found the root NSR, which exand salvation. In suppresses the idea of protection Smith cites port of his theory of a pre-Christian Jesus, a series of other proofs, such as the conjuration "by the of god of the Hebrews, Jesus," in the magic papyrus cenfourth the Paris, which, in truth, only dates from the case of Apollos tury after Jesus Christ or, again, the and the disciples of John Baptist at Ephesus (Acts xviii. 24-28 and xix. 1-7), who know the "things con;

Paul. The cerning Jesus" before their meeting with xiii. 6magician Elymas, surnamed Bar-Jesus (Acts of 12) and Simon (Acts viii. 9-13) were worshipers Hellenized name His (the this pre-Christian Jesus.

and verb Greek meaning is "to heal." The history of Jesus had been created by

form of the name of Joshua)

signifies deliverance,

also related to the root of the

pre-Christian Jesus; it enof the shrines the history primitive community. The theories of W. B. Smith were welcomed with 88 who, in a work of enthusiasm by Arthur Drews,

the

worshipers

"A.

of the

Drews, Die Christusmythe, Jena, 1909-";

prankfurt,

19x0;

.

Das Markuwangelium

alt

*>*' Pelruslegende,

Zcugnis gegin

di*

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES philosophy published in

religious

that the cult of Jesus

was a

relic

19

1906, maintained of fetishism from

which it was necessary to purge religion. Smith's system seemed to him adapted to bring about the religious reform he desired. He therefore adopted the theory of a pre-Christian Jesus, while combining it with an astral system, and adding to the product certain conceptions of his own devising, in particular a conjunction unbetween the Christ as lamb expected, to say the least of God (Agnus Dei) and the Vedic lamb.

The

theories,

among which we have been sum-

marizing the most characteristic, have in Germany, during the early years of the twentieth century, been made the object of an intense propaganda. The controversy was not only carried on in scientific publications, but in a large

tracts designed for the lectures, sometimes as public

number of

general public, in popular 89 debates, in the presence of huge audiences. The negative theses called forth a multitude of 40

replies. Geschichthchkeit Jew, Jena; Die Entstehung des Chnstentums ausdem Gnostizismus. Concerning Drews see Schweitzer (Gesch , p. 483), Guignebert (p 107). 89 See in 1910, published particularly the public debates in Berlin A. Lipby the German Monist Union and translated into French by existef a-t-il Jesus 1912). (Pans, man,

Among

all this literature

we

shall only cite: Bousset,

Was

wissen

von Jesuf\ L. C Pillion, ^Existence histonque de Jesus et le ratlonalisme contemporam\ Julicher, Hat Jesus gelebt* H. von Soden, Hat Jesus gelebtf 1910; Wemel, 1st das "liberate" Jesus-bild wideroder Geschichtef legtt 1910; Joh. Weiss, Jesus von Nazareth, Mythus

vair

der mythologische Christus, 1910; Dunkmann, Der historische Jesus, Le Problem* 1910; S. J. Case, Historicity of Jesus, 1912, Guignebert, de 3e$us t 1914 The method employed by Pe>es against Dupuis (sec Section I) has been turned against the modern mythologists by J. Die Bismarcksmythe) and by an anonymous writer to Naumann (see

show that Martin Luther never Luther nit

existieri hat).

existed

(Beweis dast Docktor

M.

20

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

one passes over certain controversialists whose work has more resemblance to an historical 41 romance than to history, the thesis of nonhistoricity has been supported, with certain reservations, by M. Salomon Reinach, and in its entirety by M. Couchoud In France,

if

M. Stahl. M. Salomon

and

42

does not formally give his verdict for the negative thesis, owing to the testimony of the Pauline epistles, which he is unable to consider as unauthentic. But while admitting that Jesus lived,

Reinach

upon three objections to the historicity of the Passion. The first is on the ground of the si-

Reinach

insists

particularly the absence of a report of Pontius Pilate to the Emperor Tiberius upon the condemnation and execution of the Nazarene. The second argument is that the history of

lence of non-Christian authors

the Passion

fulfils

certain prophecies, particularly that

of verse 17 of Psa, 41

The most

xxii.

The

last

prolific of these authors is

argument

is

Arthur Hculhard (le MenPans, 1908-10, n vol la

songe Chretien, Jesus Christ n'a pas cxiste, Ver'Ue

Bar abbas,

le

based

Mensonge Jesus; Tu

;

est

Petrus I'histoire et la

his theory in the two legende, Paris, 1913-14). Heulhard sums up theses: following "i. It was the Jew known aa John the Baptist who said he was Christ and Bar Abba (son of the father), and he was certainly not

beheaded. "2. It

was Barabbas who, condemned

to

death

for his

public

crimes such as assassination, robbery and treason was crucified at Guol Golta by Pilate. The evangelists are a mystification invented more than a century after the execution of this scoundrel. It is Barabbas that the Church worships under the name of Jesus, an imagi-

and nary personage substituted by the evangelists for the crucified, invented by them to impart the hue of innocence to the individual by whose invention they exploited lucratively the remission of sins by baptism."

1909; Le Verset 17 du Psaume xxii; des proPropot de la cunositi de Tibere; Bossuet et Vargument Docetume. du source Une de Simon bibltque Cyrene; phetifs;

"Salomon Reinach, Orpheus,

A

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

21

which upon the Docetist heresy that is, the opinion of life human and Jesus to a reduced the historical

A very interesting attempt

has been

Couchoud* 8 to present the

Pauline

pure appearance.

made by M.

and testimony as concerned with a Christ purely ideal, so eliminate the difficulty which prevented M. Salomon Reinach formally supporting the thesis of nonhis-

M. Couchoud

of Jesus.

toricity

in that

differs essentially

from

he refuses to make Jesus a

the mythologists in fact, he posmythical being, but a spiritual being sesses a comprehension of the spiritual value of Christianity

which

religious influence of belief in Jesus theoretidistinguishes him radically from such

and of the

Drews, Smith, or Robertson. In M. Couchoud's opinion, the method

cians as

which historians, from Renan to Loisy, attempt to understand the history of Jesus and the genesis of Christianity is liable to

two main

difficulties.

The

first is

in

that

it is in-

conceivable that in less than a single generation a man should be deified, and this within the territory of Jewish monotheism. The second is that historically Jesus

The testimony of Josephus is an established The Talmud contains nothing about Jesus

escapes us. forgery.

which does not come from Christian tradition. Out of Couchoud, L'Enigme de Jtsus (translated into English by Mrs. G. Whale) Enigma of Jesus, with introduction by Sir J. G. Fraser; Le Mysore de Jesus (Mercure de France). ;

The

first article in

the

Mercure de France by M. Couchoud was

dis-

cussed by me. Under the pretext that it was not a review of religious in which I discussed history, the Mercure refused to insert an article the second article of M. Couchoud. On the other hand, M. Couchoud has explained his views in a series of informal discussions at the The development of the la Virile (Jan -April, 1924). Unto

pour

objections made by ent Tolume.

me on

these occasions will be found in the pres-

JESUS

22

THE NAZARENE

three of the oldest pagan testimonies there is one which may refer to an unknown that of Suetonius two Jewish agitator known as Chrestos. The other establish only the existthose of Pliny and Tacitus Christian ence of a movement, but as regards its oriborrowed from the gins, they give only information Christians themselves.

for the evangelists, M. Couchoud points out that these are not histories, but outlines of the good news in other words, they are writings of an essentially

As

;

They have two sources: the inand the visions. The Gospel of Mark,

mystical character.

spired writings the oldest, is the apocalypse of a man without elonot quence; it is the creation of imaginative exegesis,

an historical document; it is a free commentary made the up of Biblical texts and spiritual memoirs, on which such from ask Christian faith is fused. One must not a book humble and commonplace historical information. Beyond the evangelists it is requisite to go back to the oldest

form of the Christian

faith, such as the

Paul bring to our knowledge. The Christinor the cult of a anity of Paul is neither the deification

epistles of

man. His Christ is but a new form of the old Israel, Yahveh, as Messiah. When, after the

God

of

fall

of

a kind of Jerusalem, the populace entered the Church, transformation took place in the Christian faith. The

mystery of Jesus became fixed

from the

in record,

lyrical to the narrative

of Paul became an

artificial

form.

and passed

The ineffable The bold in-

legend. vention of popular preachers did its work; but this the secondary form of Christianity has but disguised

epic

real nature of the Gospel.

In reality Jesus

is

not a

man

progressively deified;

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

23

is not a progressively humanized. He God. new a but founder of religion, In his article in 1924, after emphasizing the very character of the problem of Jesus, M. Couch-

He

is

a

God

special

oud applies himself to

define his theory.

"At the

origin

of Christianity there is, if I am right," he says, "not a personal biography, but a collective mystical experi*4 revealed." ence, sustaining a divine history mystically

At

the beginning Jesus

which manifested

was not a man, but a

Spirit

itself.

Men

believed in this Spirit, because of its manifestaits existence and tions, and because it was supposed that in Isaiah and the history could be discovered and read show that it is into aims Couchoud Psalms. And M.

deed to a

spiritual being that the Pauline testimony

As

to the origin of the tradition concerning the words of Jesus, the Pauline epistles would enable refers.

one to solve this problem in reading them. It was from the 'Lord, Paul says emphatically, that he received the account he gives of the last repast of Jesus. Exegesis of prophetic texts, visions and revelations, of projection into the past, and the attribution to Jesus the facts of apostolic history in which the activity of such are the sources the Spirit had been discerned tradition has sprung. Jesus must, then, have been at the beginning the God of a mystery. At the time of Paul neither the

from which the Gospel

the mystery had become historical. They were to become so in the period to follow the creative when it would be no longer possible to understand

God nor age,

the high spirituality which had inspired the primitive faith, and when the celestial drama upon which Chris-

" See

Couchoud, Le Mysore de Mtus,

p. 1x7.

JESUS

24 tianity

of the

first

THE NAZARENE

generation had lived had been trans-

ported to earth.

by M. Couchoud in the Mercurc de France have been almost literally reproduced, under the title Le Mystere de Jesus, in the third volume of the collection, Christianity, published under

The two

articles published

objections which were offered in the part of the Rev. Father de Grandmaison as well as those advanced in the public dis-

his direction.

review on or myself,

The

this

(Union de la Verite), have been completely have not persuaded ignored by M. Couchoud; they him to modify his views in the slightest degree; he has not even considered it advisable to state in what cussions

He contented respect he thought them ill-founded. himself by adding three chapters to his previous exhe attempts to demonstrate that position. In the first non-Pauline study of the Apocalypse and the the conclusion confirm Testament New the of epistles to which his study of the Pauline epistles had led him; the

what he had already said the Gospel tradition; and in the last he concerning summarizes the conclusions of his research.

in the second he returns to

We

shall call attention also to an original but very

45 which has paradoxical work by Monsieur R. Stahl, the somewhat enigmatical title The Document 70. This "document 70" is the fragment of the Jewish

from

Apocalypse which Wellhausen has disentangled is Chap, xii of the Johannine Apocalypse. In this imheaven to Messiah a of found the idea transported mediately after His birth. sees in the Apocalypse of the

While Wellhausen <5

R. Stahl, Le

Document

70, Paris

book see the obierrationj of

M.

and Strasbourg, 1923.

Alfaric,

Rcwt

On

d'htstoirt, 1904.

this

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

15

made use of by the Chrisyear 70 a Jewish fragment tian author of our Apocalypse, M. Stahl thinks he can one in it the oldest Christian document recognize

might almost

call it the birth certificate

of Christianity.

The Apocalyptic Messiah referred to must have been first presented as an actual individual, in a symand later in a more material way in the Synoptic Gospels, which would be The letters of Paul younger than the Gospel of John.

bolic

are

manner,

all

in the fourth Gospel,

unauthentic. Paul

is

not, however, a completely

whose

porimaginary individual, but the real person, has been somewhat modified, has been preserved for us in the book of Acts. He was merely a Pharisee the Sadducees missionary who had some quarrels with M. Stahl has dead. the of resurrection the concerning of tried to sketch the development Christianity as he in the following represents it. It might be summarized

trait

series

:

Document 70

Apocalypse

Fourth Gospel

of the first manifestaSynoptics. He has no explanation tions of Christianity in Rome, and particularly of the be persecution by Nero. To get rid of this it would

on Latin necessary to overthrow the accepted ideas literature as well as those which appear the best established

upon the books of the III.

New

Testament.

THE PROBLEM

The review which we have

presented to the princithe critical work pal theories, which (while utilizing of the nineteenth century) have during the last twenty

of the hisyears opposed the traditional acceptance occasion to make several obtoricity of Jesus, gives servations. The difficulty of the problem consists not

JESUS

26

THE NAZARENE

of its data, but only in the complexity and obscurity it is a unique sense certain a in that fact also in the without analogy in the whole history of re-

problem

M. Couchoud

ligion.

has

much

46

on this fact. no ordinary his-

insisted

Jesus," he writes, "is torical difficulty. The case of Jesus is unique. For the ' But history, historian, unique cases are enigmas. less even in exceptional cases, is never-

"The problem of

1

contemplating

theless not exclusively a science of the particular.

remove from

wish to

its

The

jurisdiction everything which

does not present the character of collective fact is simply to prohibit it dealing with great personalities,

and to exclude from its domain a Julius Caesar, a Mahomet, a Luther, and a Napoleon, and thus to suppress one of the most important factors on human evolution. So also, when it is claimed that the problem of Jesus is no historical problem, it is nevertheless (and here M. Couchoud is no exception) by the methods of historical criticism that

it is

attempted to solve

it.

It is important, we think, to distinguish carefully the observation of facts from their interpretation. If in

second part of historical research there is more or less a philosophical element, it is not the same thing for

this

the

first part.

To

to carry the work out properly it is necessary oneself free to reach to an effort make impartiality,

preconceived ideas, and to see the texts as they and not are, to extract from them what they contain, to what one would like them say.

from

all

But is perfect objectivity possible in a question whose solution cannot fail to have a very direct bearSee Couchoud, Le

(March

1924).

Mysthe de

Jiiut

and Mercure d* Franc*

NONHISTORICAL THEORIES

27

and religious concepts? ing upon our philosophical a is The objection grave one; it does not seem to us decisive if only

we

and

put them

consent to admit as the first premise of every religious philosophy that it is not the facts which must be adapted to our theories, but rather that it is our theories which must, if necessary, be corrected rectified to

harmony with domain more than

the facts.

in

any other that the principle proclaimed by Paul holds most truly. "We can do nothing contrary to the truth; we have no This except in the truth" (2 Cor. xiii. 8). It

is

in the religious

in

strength

principle

was

also proclaimed

by one of the most emi-

nent representatives of German theology, Herrmann, at the beginning of this century, who delighted to repeat: "Die erste Pflicht der Religion It is a question of fact which tigkeit."

ist

Wahrhaf-

is

before us:

there historical proofs of value for the actual shall therefore leave on one existence of Jesus?

Are

We

side the discussion of the

more or

less

complicated

theories offered to explain (other than by the existence and activity of Jesus) the appearance and development

of Christianity. It would be easy to show how much there enters of the conjectural, of superficial resemblances, of debatable interpretation into the systems of the Drews, the Robertsons, the W. B. Smiths,

We

shall not linger on the Couchouds, or the Stahls. shall not discuss theories which the way to do it.

We

to a greater or less extent are inspired by considerations depending neither on history nor on criticism, but 47

upon

religious philosophy.

has been well noted by Guignebert (p. 23). Let us recall for example, the case which Drews has pointed out (p. 25* only, French edition). There is something similar with M. Couchoud,

"This

28

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

If there are sufficient proofs of the historical existence of Jesus, it is above all things necessary that the should actheory offered of the origin of Christianity were no there if even commodate itself to them. And of proofs, it might still happen that the explanation the genesis of Christianity as due to the work and less teaching of the prophet of Nazareth would be the in epic conjectural than the theories which bring of Gilgamesch, the astral system, the pre-Christian

cult of Joshua-Jesus, a collective mental representation, or the "document 70."

who, pointing out how the concept formed about Jesus was transformed according to the particular epoch, foresees that this evolution will continue and that in "about 1940 Jesus in His entirety will have passed from the historical stage to that of collective mental Have we not here a theory representations" (Le Mysore de JSsus) upon the essence of religious facts? The same author supposes that if Christianity had really arisen from the deification of an historical of a low personage it would be something very mean, a religion Roman Cult, in any type, on the commonplace level of the Imperial case quite inferior to Judaism and I si ami sm, which have taken great care that neither Moses nor Mahomet should be taken for gods. For him this is an objection to the historicity of Jesus, at any rate, "because he has a vague idea that Christianity is not there" We can hardly fail to recognize in this an a priori opinion calculated to hinder historical inquiry.

CHAPTER

II

THE NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY I.

THE j esus

1

FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS

most ancient nonChristian testimony concerning or rather would be, if it were authentic s i

In his works, as we read them, 2 and the Jesus is mentioned twice, in the eighteenth twentieth book of Jewish Antiquities. u The first of these reads thus: At this time Jesus that of Josephus.

For appeared a wise man, if He can be called man. He accomplished marvelous things, was the Master of those who received with joy the truth, and led away

many Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ. Upon the denunciation of the leaders of our nation, Pilate condemned Him to the cross; but those who had loved Him from the first ceased not to revere Him,

He

appeared to them on the third day, raised again from the dead, as had announced the divine prophets, as well as a thousand other marvelous things concern-

for

Him. There still exists to-day the sect which, " 8 Him, received the name of 'Christians.'

ing

after

X K. Linck, De antigutssimls qua ad Jesum Natarenum spectant tistimomis, Giessen, 1913. a The best edition of Josephus' works is that of Niese (Berlin, French translation is appearing under 1885.95) in six volumes. the direction of Th. Reinach (Pans, 1900). Concerning Josephus see

A

Schurer (Gtsch., i, pp. 74'rf)> Wlth very complete bibliography. 8 Ant. Jud., xviii, pp. 63-64. To the bibliography given by Schurer must be added the followHarnack (Der judischt Geschickting: Burkitt (Jotfphus and Chnst), 29

JESUS

30

THE NAZARENE

This text is given by three known manuscripts, of which none, it must be admitted, goes farther back than the eleventh century. Eusebius (//., i, p. 1 1> and Dem. ev.)

knew of

it.

But Origen seems to ignore

it,

for

upon two occasions he quotes the praise given by nevertheless Josephus to James, while remarking that Christ (Comm. Josephus did not admit Jesus to be the in Matt. x. t c. 17, also Contra Celsius, i, 47). the point of view of external criticism, the at least, to be passage is therefore strongly suspected,

From

an interpolation/

The arguments from still

"if

more

He

convincing. can be called a

internal criticism appear to be

had said of Jesus, man" and "He was the Christ," If Josephus

he had spoken of resurrection, of miracles, the fulfillment of prophecies, he would have been a

if

Christian.

From

the sixteenth century the authenticity of this

passage has been questioned, specially by Osiander; tchreiber Josephus und Jesus Chnstus), Smith (De Katholieck, as reLiock (op. gards authenticity), Batiffol (Orpheus et I'Evangile), K. Tacitus uber Jesus Chnstus und Messctt.)> Norden (Josephus und tanische Prophetie), Seitz (Das Christusteugniss des Josephus Flavins), Jacoby (Jesus bet Josephus), Ed Meyer (Vrsprung und Anfange des Christentums, for authenticity), Goetz (Die Urspungliche Fassung des Stelle Ant), Corssen (Die Zeugnisse des Tacitus und Pseudo-Josephus uber Christus), Goethals (Melanges d' his to ire for chretienne), Brunt (St. u. Kr , unauthentic text, but substituted

a text in which Josephus spoke of Jesus), R. Laqueur (Josephus, passage added afterwards by Josephus himself). 4 The text of Josephus seems to have existed under another form, for in an Apocryphal dialogue concerning a religious discussion at the court of Sassanides we read: "Josephus spoke of the Christ as a of signs just and good man manifested by Divine Grace by means and miracles, and who did good to many." (Bratke, Das soaenannt* Religions getprach am Hofe der Saisaniden).

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY one a

feels a certain difficulty in

Harnack has been

critic as

understanding

able to defend

31

how

such

5

it.

we read

betrays with evidence a Christian hand, but has not the interpolator confined himself to retouching that which Josephus had

The passage

that

And

6

hypothesis be accepted, is it text? Or is one possible to reconstruct the original of he that Jesus, which in spoke simply to maintain Schurer has itself would be a fact of importance?

written?

the expressions and phrases whose certainly Christian are put aside, the re-

observed that is

origin

if this

if

But the interpolator very insignificant. could easily have mutilated the primitive passage at the same time as he exaggerated it. Norden remarks

mainder

is

that the account of Pilate's government in the eight-

eenth book of the Antiquities consists of a series of arose among episodes presented as troubles which the Jews, the word 0opu(3oc (noise, clamor, disturbance) being the leit motif of the account.

The

interrupted by paragraphs 63 and 64, which speak of Jesus. If these are removed, 62 and 65 are in perfect connection with

general plan

is

paragraphs

The bond between them is broken by what this fragJesus. Norden therefore considers

each other. is

said to

ment

to be quite unauthentic.

But Corssen

replies

of the account against this that the general plan

is

Among the most recent defenders of authenticity we may cite Bole (Flavius Josephus uber Christus und die Christen in den juditchen altertumern), Kneller (Flavius Josephus uber Christus, Stimmen aus Maria Laack), Burkitt, Harnack, etc. 6 The thesis of unauthenticity is admitted, besides authors quoted, est apud by Schurer, Niese (De testimonio chnstiano quod etc. sur Reinach Mtus), of that (Josephe by interpolation Josephum) ;

32 artificial.

JESUS The

THE NAZARENE

events related are not

sense of the word, troubles.

There

is,

all, in

the strict

for instance, in

paragraph 62 a reference to an incident which hapwere not impened in Rome and in which the Jews plicated,

and

troubles

among

against them.

in

paragraph 65

it

is

not a question of

the Jews, but of measures directed might therefore be supposed, if the

It

had contained anything about Jesus, would equally have been presented as The reasoning which Corssen that of an agitation. uses against Norden's theory seems to us decisive, but Is it possible still it only establishes a mere possibility. original passage that His history

to go farther? In the retouching of a passage there very often appear certain peculiarities of the primitive form. According to Corssen this is the case in the "repassage we are concerned with. The expression is that formula a is very ceive with pleasure" Josephus fond of, and which he uses no less than seven times

Antiquities. The words, It "the chief among us" are also quite his style. u wise the would be possible to say as much of epithet it would be difficult to to as Jesus; man," applied in the eighteenth

book of the

understand from the pen of a Christian, while it accords well with the tendency of Josephus to class as philosophical schools such Jewish movements, essenthose of the Pharisees, Sadducecs tially religious, as

and Essenes.

The

selves with Jesus

is

idea of the Greeks allying themalso very characteristic.

It

may

be

that the Christian editor of our passage took pains to imitate the style of Josephus ; it is neverthless difficult to suppose that he succeeded so well in it. The passage might therefore be the retouching of one written by

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY Josephus himself.

33

This conclusion seems confirmed

by the fact that in the passage in the twentieth book, where the death of James is referred to, the latter is the presented as "the brother of Jesus, surnamed this that to indicate Jesus Christ," which would seem was a personage already known to the readers, of therefore Josephus must have made mention. Is it possible to reconstruct, by surmise, the original it is, passage of Josephus? Theodore Reinach thinks

whom

and, eliminating that coming from a Christian hand, u he restores the following passage: At this time there

He appeared Jesus, called Christ, an able man (for those to was a worker of miracles) who preached eager for novelties, and He led away many Jews and also Albeit that Pilate upon the denunciation of the leaders among us, condemned Him to the

many

Greeks.

cross, those

who had loved Him from

the beginning

(or those whom He had deceived from the beginning) ceased not to be attached to Him, and to-day there still exists the sect which from Him had taken the name of Christians."

Here

is

nothing more than a conjecture,

easy to recognize in the actual text that which comes from a Christian hand, it is not so easy to guess at what the portions suppressed by the interpolator might have contained. for

if it is

In the twentieth book of the Antiquities (paragraph It is found 200) there is another mention of Jesus. account of the death of James whom the high and put to death by priest Annas caused to be tried, of Festus during the period between the death in the

stoning,

and the

arrival of his successor, Albinus.

Roman

authority seemed to be

At

this

somewhat lax

time

at Jeru-

JESUS

34

THE NAZARENE

"Annas," says the text, "called the Sanhedrin before it the together, and summoned to appear brother of Jesus, surnamed Christ, and certain others under the charge of illegality, and caused them to be salem.

Eusebius

stoned to death."

cites

this

passage (H. 9

on three occaII, xxiii, pars. 21-24), but Origen, who 7 establishes (following Josephus) a relation sions between the death of James and the destruction of the

Temple, has read the passage

in a text

retouched by a

Christian.

Schurer (Gesch., i, p. 581) concludes from this that the existing text is also to be suspected of interpolation. This conclusion goes too far. that the Admitting that this passage is among those Christians might have been tempted to exaggerate, it does not at all follow that they did it. Besides, between the expression "Jesus, surnamed Christ," and the cateChrist" of the eightgorical declaration "He was the

The words a great difference. 9 8 believed has then be authentic. Mgr. Batiffol

eenth book there

may

is

an important possible to deduce from this passage conclusion. The accusation brought against James and it

his associates

couched

is

in

ambiguous terms which may

of just as well refer to the violation

Roman

laws as

In order to admit that to that of the Jewish Law. the ground of the charge against James was revolt attribute against Roman law, it would be necessary to to the high priest and the Sanhedrin a scrupulous loyalty to the Roman power which seems very far from likely to *

have been the

case.

On

this hypothesis

Origen, Comm. in Matt. 17 and Contra Cehum, This, for instance. Is the opinion of K. Linck. Batiffol,

Orpheus

et I'Evangile.

i,

47;

ii,

13.

it

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY would be

difficult

to understand

why

35

(as Joscphus

this before the Governor says) they were accused of 10 by the Jews. Batiffol, would constitute a revolt What, asks

Mgr.

against religion if

it

were not the Christianity of the

This argument

accused?

for tradition presents of the "Law."

The

in conflict with a difficulty,

is

James

as a very strict observer

text of Josephus seems to us too concise to allow

us to maintain that there could have been no other motive of opposition between the high priest and 11

James other than Christianity. Even if it be recognized that the silence of Josephus not so complete concerning Jesus and Christianity is the as was formerly said, extremely brief character of the allusions found in his

most favorable hypothesis)

How explain

it,

work (under even none the

is

seeing* that the

the

less striking.

work of Josephus

deals

stoning to Batiffol adds that the punishment inflicted This is not presupposes a crime of a religious character. alone were stoned convincing, for it does not appear that blasphemers 10

Mgr.

death

to death. 11

A

Slavonic verson of the

ditions to the

Greek

text in

De

Bella Judatco contains various adis referred to. It will suffice

which Jesus

to establish its character of secondary importance to summarize what on is said of the death of Jesus in the first portion: Jesus remains

the

of Olives and refuses to humble Himself as He is ordered and the Roman authorities. The Jews accuse Him then of

Mount Pilate

by The latter, fomenting a conspiracy, in the presence of the Procurator. after having massacred many innocent persons, seizes Jesus, ^tnd after having obtained finding that He is no malefactor sets Him free, from Him the healing of his wife The Jews, jealous of this success, the right to give thirty pieces of silver to Pilate, and so obtain the first editor, A. how understand to difficult is It crucify Jesus. Berendts (lie Zeugnisse von Chnsto im Slwvischem De Belh Judatco des Josephus) has been able to find in such accounts the authentic elements that Josephui made away with in translating his work from Aramaic into Greek.

JESUS

36

THE NAZARENE

and the epoch in which and born began to develop? Is it Christianity was not surprising that an author who spoke of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Essenes and the Samaritans has said nothing, or has said so little, about the Christians? So complete a silence is perhaps more embar-

precisely with the environment

rassing for the mythologists than for their opponents. By what right, indeed, should it be permissible to conclude from it that Jesus never existed, and not permissible to deny that a Christian Palestine prior to the year 70?

movement

existed in

Since Josephus has not only concerning Jesus, but also concerning Christianity, how is his silence to be explained? Uniquely by his character and the object of his work.

been

silent

The

writer desired to flatter the

Romans and

gain their good graces. To do this he expunged from the picture he drew everything likely to offend or excite their at all apprehension. Thus it is that he has scarcely conspoken of the Messianic cult which nevertheless stituted the center of Jewish thought in the first cenThat he did so was because this cult was a tury. menace to Rome, for the Kingdom of the Messiah

could only be built upon the ruins of the Empire. as a moral Josephus portrays John the Baptist

which preacher, and passes by unnoticed everything the one presented him as the prophet of the Messiah, to announce the baptism of

fire

(Antiquities, xviii. pp.

is thus de116-19). The preaching of repentance its support and prived by him of everything lending The little that Josephus giving it any signification.

him to flatter basely preserves of Messianism is used by with authority in connecting the Messianic prophecies

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY

37

12 It was not possible to speak of ChrisVespasian. tianity while amputating it from Messianism. Josephus therefore maintained silence on the subject. It might besides have been determined by another

reason.

At

and at least since the -Christianity was separated from

the time he wrote

persecution by

Nero

Josephus could thus consider it as outside 18 Doubtless the the history that he wished to write.

Judaism.

same thing was not the case as regards Palestine Chrisbut Josephus could not have spoken of it without exposing Judaism to the accusation of a compromisodious to ing solidarity with a dangerous movement, the governing class, and to which, it has been supposed, he had contributed to draw the attention of the court tianity,

of Nero. 14

The

silence of

Josephus

is

not therefore

the silence of ignorance; it is the silence of prudence and fear a silence actuated by interest. Far from

not proving that Jesus and the Christian movement did it exist in Palestine in the first century, only proves that Josephus did not wish, by speaking of it, to com15 promise himself, and with himself the Jewish people. The reasons which explain the silence or the discretion of Josephus account also

for the fact that,

of Tiberiade according! to Photius (Codex 13), Justus (author of a chronicle and a history of the Jewish war, written at the

same time and

in

the same spirit as the

Bella Jud., vi, pp. 310-14. The same thing is found in Taciwho have probv., p. 13), and in Suetonius (Vesp., p. 4)* ably borrowed in this matter from Josephus. i*

Df

tus (History,

Ed. Meyer, Ursprung und Anf i, p 2x1. Corssen thinks (Z.N.T.JT., xv, p. 135)* who P ints out **?* of the fire, and that he was in Josephut was in Rome at the time relation with the empress Poppcea. Weiss, Jesus von Nazareth, Mythus oder Gcschichte, p. 89. 18

"So

"Joh.

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

38

work of Josephus) has not mentioned Jesus or

Chris-

tianity either.

sometimes exof the pressed that in his works no mention is found died he that remember to it suffices shortly Gospel. But

As

regards Philo, astonishment

16

is

nothing to prove that this date. Christianity had reached Alexandria before 17 sources other and That the Talmud say Jewish is not the distortion of which about Jesus nothing Christian tradition is sufficiently explained by the date after the year 4O,

and there

is

of these documents and the fact that those who compiled them were governed by entirely polemical Their sole object was to combat considerations. the Christians; they were not interested in writing the history of their religion. The first mention of the Christians in this Jewish literature is the curse contained in the "Schemone Esre," the daily prayer of the (at close of the first century), "May the Naza-

Jews

renes and the

Minim

II.

The

first

perish I"

THE LATIN AUTHORS

Latin text to mention the name of Christ

from Pliny to Trajan the concerning the conduct to be observed toward

is

dated AJ>.

1

10.

It

is

the letter

iPhiIo wag one of an embassy sent to Rome by the Jews of Alexandria in A.D.4Q, and he was then very old. He speaks of himThe account of the self as an old man (Leg. ad Gaium, par. 28). embassy was written immediately after. im *7 Concerning this literature see H. Laible (Jesus Christus edition published in Cambridge (1893), with an Thalmud),

English

additions of Dalman and Streeter (Jesus Christ in the Talmud, etc.). See also R. T. Herford (Christianity in Talmud), A. Meyer (Juui im

Talmud), H. L.

Stracfc (Jesus dit

Hdrettker, Leipzig, 1910).

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY Christians.

He

18

recounts

his

methods of

39 action,

punishing those for obstinacy, who, after two or three interrogations, persisted in the confession of Christianity, releasing those,

who denounced

as being Chris-

tians, denied the charge, and who in the Governor's wine and incense presence invoked the gods, offered

before the statue of the emperor, and cursed the name of Christ. The case of those who confessed they were formerly Christians, but declared they were so no

caused Pliny some embarrassment; he had with inquestioned them and compared their replies formation obtained by putting two deaconesses to the torture. He had only discovered, he declares, a coarse longer,

and exaggerated

superstition.

concerning Christian practices

From what he states one point maybe noted:

The

Christians were in the habit of meeting upon a certain day and singing a hymn (carmen dicere), or, in other words, invoking Christ as a God.

This text does not say

evidence of the cult of Christ, but it conceived to be explicitly whether He was is

a personage having lived on earth or a being of enThe expression "Christo quasi tirely spiritual nature.

mean, however, that for Pliny, Was not the like unto others. Christ was not a fact that He had lived on earth, that which disThe testimony of tinguished Him from others? between Tacitus in the Annales, written 115 and 117,

Deo" appears

to

God

*8

X,

p. 96.

since Semler.

The It

is,

been challenged authenticity of this text has often admitted. See E. C. Babut however, generally

relatives aux (Remarques sur Us deux lettres de Pline et de Trajan Chretiens de Bithyme), Linck (pp 33-60), Rcmach (Orpheus, p. 37), Couchoud (Le Mystere de Jtsus). There may be in Pliny's letter some

Christian interpolations (cp. Guignebert, Tertullien, pp. 77 et seq.),

M. Goguel (L'Eucharistie des onaens a Justin Martyr, pp. 259 of view we may neglect them. stq.). Prom our present point

ft

4o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

more explicit "To destroy the rumor [which accused him as guilty of the burning of Rome] Nero invented some culprits, and inflicted on them the most excru-

is

:

for

those who, detested ciating punishments; they were the called their infamies, were populace, Christians. by

The author of

this

name, Christ, had under the reign

of Tiberius been condemned to death by the Procurator Pontius Pilate. This execrable superstition, held in check for a time, broke out anew, not only in also in the city Judea, the birthplace of this evil, but lfl flourish." and Jn which all atrocities congregate There are two remarks in this passage whose authen20

concerns the burning of Rome and the persecution of the Christians; the second 21 The first reflects the point of concerns the Christ. ticity is certain.

The

first

a

contemporaries of Tacitus. It is excited by the question of the hatred and contempt Christians and the infamies with which they were relaunched proached, whilst it is precisely the accusation Nero against them which seems to have unchained

view of the

by

and contempt. The second must originate in some documentary source, since it contains no such word as "dicunt" or "ferunt" which would authorize

this hatred

us to suppose that Tacitus is only relating gossip. There is in this remark a characteristic idea namely, **Annales, xv, 44. Sec further certain studies cited respecting et I'Evangilt, pp. Josephus, Linck, pp. 61-103; also Batiffol (Orpheus

4447).

S. Reinach (Orpheus). Hoan interpolation (Etudes au maintains that the sujet de la persecution des Chretiens sous Neron), entire work of Tacitus was an invention of the fifteenth century (De I'authenticity des annales et des htstoires de Tacite). Hochart'i theory has only been admitted by Drews (Die Christusmythe). ^Corssen, Z.N.T.JT., xiv, 1913, p. 135 (Zntschrift fur die Ntui-

*

It is

admitted without any reserve by

chart, after discovering in this passage

testamenltche fFissenschaft).

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY that Christianity

41

had been crushed out by the death of

and had only reappeared about the year 64, This resurrecsimultaneously in Rome and in Judea. be tion of the execrable superstition in Judea can only Christ,

understood

if

we suppose

any distinction between the sianism

make two manifestations of Mes-

that Tacitus does not

Christianity and Judaism.

The words "not only in Judea" would imply, then, the sudden outbreak of nationalism which caused the 22 and the Jewish war. We can here form an idea of the character of the source: it was not Christian, since it presumed an

revolt

21

of Christianity after the death of Jesus; neither was it Jewish, for no Jewish document would eclipse

have called Jesus "Christ," nor would it have presented Judaism as solidary with Christianity.** The hypothesis which asserts that Tacitus could have consulted official documents preserved in the imto be passed by, perial archives can only be mentioned and there is were archives that these secret, seeing nothing to authorize our supposing that any excep"Corssen, Z.N T W. xiv, 1913, p 123 t

In this argument the hypothesis of Meyer (who thinks the details made use of by Tacitus relate to a form of confession of the Christian faith) is invalidated. Meyer thinks that Tacitus was 28

obliged to occupy himself with the Christians during his government of Asia, and that he had made an inquiry into the origin of their movement. Meyer thinks he can recognize an affinity between the

adphrase of Tacitus, "per procuratorem Ponttum Pilatum supplicto Pontius fectus" and that found in Timothy, "He bore witness before Pilate" He also supposes that Tacitus became acquainted with the Christian faith by his examination of those who were persecuted. Besides what has already been said, it must be replied against Meyer's opinion that on one side it is merely a question of a condemnation pronounced by the Procurator, and on the other side the far from being profession of faith of Jesus. The two things are equivalent. 24 These

two points have been well emphasized by BatiffoL

JESUS

42

tion to a general rule

THE NAZARENE was made

in the historian's favor.

The dependence of Tacitus upon Josephus, as supposed by Harnack, has generally been discarded, particularly by Goetz, Norden and Corssen. The fact that in the account which he gives of the Judaico Jewish war, Tacitus has utilized the De Bello of Josephus 2B is hardly conclusive, because if it were difficult for Tacitus to ignore so important a document as Josephus' account of the war, there is no reason at to suppose that Tacitus, for whom Judaism was an object of the most profound contempt, had read the had sought therein Antiquities of the Jews, and that he of the burning account his any information to complete of Rome. Between the text of Tacitus and the pasall

difsages of Josephus there are, besides, appreciable death that ferences. The text of Josephus states Jesus'

was not the cause of a cessation of faith among his that disciples; Tacitus, on the contrary, supposes death Christianity temporarily disappeared after the

of

its

founder.

Christianity

is

The judgment

upon

of Josephus

upon

the whole a favorable one; that

of Tacitus was one of supreme contempt. Finally, name as the Christ the word to Tacitus appears accept is aware of the founder of the sect, while Josephus

was called Jesus, and that the word the Christ designates dignity to which he laid claim. 26 Goetz has surmised that Tacitus obtained his in-

that this founder

formation concerning Christianity from his friend,

The two writers certainly conPliny the Younger. view template Christianity from the same point of of all characteristic fact is this but that of the police **

History, v, 13, dependi upon De Bella Jud., vi, 310-14. Goetz, Z.N.TW., xir, 1913* P* *9S-

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY the Romans.

43

the other hand, between Pliny and If they are difference.

On

an important

Tacitus there

is

in

in only seeing in Christianity a super-

agreement

stition, the first considers it

calls

it

an innocent one, the second

execrable, and appears to endorse the infamous

brought against the Christians. Mgr. Batiffol, dwelling on the fact that Tacitus made use of the history of Pliny the Elder, has surmised that

accusations 27

he borrowed from

That

is

it

a supposition which in

to verify.

But one

about the Christians. its nature one is unable

his notes

fact

is

certain,

and that

is,

Tacitus

was neither Jewish nor connected which Christianity with the Christ Christian, The importance of this crucified by Pontius Pilate. observation does not require to be emphasized. In his Life of Nero (Chap, xvi) Suetonius mentions the persecution of the Christians, but he says nothing

knew of

a document, which

concerning their teachings. In the Life of Claudius to the expulsion of the (xxv, p. 4) he refers in passing Jews from Rome, to which the book of Acts also makes allusion (xviii. 2)

tumultuantes,

:

"Judaeos, impulsore Chresto assidue

expulit" (He expelled from Rome under the impulsion of Christ did not

Roma

the Jews, who 28 cease to make tumult). Is one obliged to see in "Chrestos"

29

an unknown

80

thence conJewish agitator, as do certain critics, and the Christians? to relate not does clude that the text 7

Batiffol, Orpheus et VEvangile, p. 46. Here again Hochart has in a very arbitrary way suspected a This thesis is indefensible, for no Christian Christian

28

interpolation.

would ever have expressed himself as Suetonius does. than eighty inscriptions at Rome in 29 Linck gives a list of more which the name of Chrestos is found. this interpretation Lmck, also Reinach and Couchoud, consider possible.

JESUS

44

THE NAZARENE

Or, stressing the fact that at Rome the Christians seem to have been called "Chresitanoi" and not "Chris-

must we suppose that it is Christ who is referred to, and that it was the disputes concerning Him which stirred up the Jewry of Rome and provoked the action of Claudius? The fact that Suetonius men81

tianoi,"

known personage without name quodam or aliquo 82 is favorable

tions Chrestos as a

to his

joining to the

second interpretation, and it is also the one generally 88 The text of Suetonius tells us only that accepted. the reign of Christianity had reached Rome under Claudius, and that it was considered to have connection with a personage of the name of Chrestos. But Suetonius could have believed that Chrestos

Rome

in the time of Claudius,

slightly the

Romans

84

and

this

had come proves

to

how

interested themselves at the be-

which ginning of the second century in the traditions the Christians invoked. What the Roman authors say about Jesus and Chrisamounts to very little indeed. Only the testitianity

plainly incompatible with the theory of a Christ entirely ideal. The rarity of the details

mony

of Tacitus

is

furnished by the Latin authors

One

is

aware how

is, however, striking. be in handling the one must prudent

"Chrcs"Tacitus, Annalcs, v (Codex Mediceus), has the form " In the three passages only in the New Testament where the word "Christians" is found (Acts xi 26, xxvi 28; I Pet. iv, 16), the Vaticanui first copy of the Sinaiticus has Xpijarwot. The MS. (B) hat Xpaoiwoe*. Compare with Justin (I Apol. 4), Tertullian (Apol. The form "Chrestianoi" is frequent in the inscriptions. Com3).

tianos

pare with Linck. 82

Batiffol,

Orpheus

et l'Evangile> p. 43*

"Meyer, Ursprung und Anf ,

iii,

4*3-

**PreuBchen (Chresto impuliore) supposed that some connection tradition that existed between the details given by Suetonius and the Section III.) Claudius* X, under died Chap. (See Jesus

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY "argument from it

convincing

silence"

(ex silentio).

45

To make

it

are not requires two conditions which

satisfied in the case

In the

before us.

first

place the

silence must be complete, which it is not, without taking conany account of what the portion not preserved of

temporary literature might contain. In the second in other place the silence must have a real signification been have obliged words, the authors considered must to mention, had they known them, the facts of which ;

Now

they say nothing.

been

satisfied either.

second condition has not Pliny, Tacitus and Suetonius this

a contemptible agree in seeing in Christianity only them just so far as it superstition. It only interested was a cause of social disturbance. They only mention it to relate the measures directed against it, not to inquire into its origin, and still of its real or supposed founder.

less to write

the history

The importance that Christianity eventually reached leads many modern minds to commit a strange error in perspective. Because the birth of Christianity appears to them as the most pregnant fact in the whole of firstthat century history, they find it difficult to understand same the from see not did ancients the point of things

view, and only paid any attention to Christianity at the happening of certain events which had no essential

importance for

III.

There

its

development.

"AcTAPiLATi" (THE ACTS OF PILATE) is

existed in

no reason to suppose that there has ever official document which refers

Rome any

to the condemnation of Jesus by Pontius Pilate." "Concerning an examination of documents and archives which,

JESUS

46

THE NAZARENE

two passages in his Apology, middle of the second century) the addressed (toward to Antoninus the Pious, to Marcus Aurelius, to Lucius It

true that in

is

Verus, to the Senate and all the Roman people, Justin Martyr invokes (to confirm the account he gives of the Passion and miracles of Jesus) the "Acts of Pontius Pilate" (I Apol., xxxv,

48).

Tertullian also in his Apologeticum, dating from a 197, mentions a report that Pontius Pilate, already Christian in his inner conscience ("jam pro sua conscientia christianus"), had sent to Tiberius.

who

Chapter v of the Apologeticum, the document of which he does not appear to he refers to the "Acts speaks, while in another passage the as of Pilate'' pagans as an arm against forged by literature of Christianity. There has existed a whole Eusebius,

cites

know

"Acts of Pilate," which (particularly in the form it has assumed in the Gospel of Nicodemus) enjoyed 86 Critics are in agreegreat favor in the Middle Ages. ment in considering this literature, in the form in which

we know

it,

to be of a later age,

and

in

any case not

fifth century, but it is not certain that does not go farther back, since element its primitive "Acta Pilati" Epiphanius (fourth century) knew of the

older than the

(Bar., 50-51). narratives for which Justin and Tertullian invoke the authority of the "Acta Pilati," or of a report the Procurator to the Emperor, rest on evansent

The

by

according to see later

S.

Reinach,

was made

at Antioch in the time of Ignatius,

(Chap IV).

PilatusakConcerning this literature consult R. A. Lipsius (Die Harnack (Gesch. des altchnsthchen Litt. bis Eusebius), Bardenhewer (Gesch. des Altkirchhchen Litt), A. Stuelken (Pilatusakten) in Hennecke (Handbuch Neutestamentischen Apokryphen). ten),

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY gelical tradition,

and merely accentuate

its

47 tendency

to portray Pilate as well disposed toward Jesus and 87 The documents desigconvinced of His innocence.

nated by them would therefore be of Christian editing, but is it certain that they were acquainted with them or had done anything more than suppose their existence ?

would not have expressed himself other than he does if he had merely heard the "Acts of Pilate" spoken of or had presumed their existence. Many writers have therefore 88considered that these "Acts" did not exist in his time, and the fact that in Justin

2) he of Quirinquotes in the same way the census registers It has been objected that ius confirms this opinion. cited the "Acts" not only to support his narra-

another passage of the Apology

(I,

xxiv, p.

Justin tion of the Passion, but also to support the account he

gives of the miracles of Jesus. it

is

thought, have

must, therefore, this document, or at any

known

something about

rate

He

contents.

its

89

But the

first

in hypothesis is excluded by the somewhat vague way which the "Acts" are cited the second is not without ;

some

difficulties.

existed,

how

is it

It

had it known should only have

If such an important document

that Justin is doubtless by mere conjecture that

by hearsay? he supposed the "Acta Pilati" must have narrated both the trial and the career of Jesus. Certain authors, however, following H. von Schu-

w Concerning Romam

ptre la Passion.

this tendency see M. Goguel, Les Chretiens ft VEma VEpoque du N.T.; Jutfs et domains dans I'htstoire de

and also 99 This is the opinion of Lipsius, Harnack, Bardenhewer, of Mgr. Batiffol. sestuelken (Handbuch).

JESUS

48

THE NAZARENE

40

have thought that a trace of the primary elements of the "Acta Pilati" was to be found prior

bcrt,

to Justin's period. They rest their case

upon the fact that the Gospel of Peter and Justin (I ApoL, xxxv) state that, to mock Him, Jesus was made to seat Himself in a chair, and 41 invited to act as a Judge. Seeing that the hypothesis of a direct connection between the Gospel of Peter and

Justin encounters certain difficulties, it has been supposed that both were dependent upon a common source. But even if this were so, there is nothing to prove that this source

was anything other than a mere extra-canon-

ical tradition.

that he regards Tertullian, Harnack considers in found he of what use made has simply Justin, and

As

work which suggested the composition Df the letter from Pilate to the Emperor which is found 42 in Chapters xl-xlii of the Acts of Peter and Paul.

that

The

it

is

his

words of this letter reveal, indeed, its polemand show that it must have been comof by Eusebius. piled to combat the pagan Acts spoken Nevertheless, Justin and Tertullian do not invoke the testimony of Pilate in reference to the same facts, last

ical character,

and the document is presented by Justin as the acts, and by Tertullian as a letter of Pilate to the Emperor. Tertullian, for his part, only makes one allusion, somewhat vague, to the document, and he does not know it *

H. von Schubert, pit ^Composition det pseudopetrinischen Evan-

feUenjragmtnts. 41 There is no trace of any

men

episode in the canonical Gospels

verb a transiunless, perhaps, in John xix. 13, if there is given to the tive sense. But even thus the scene would have quite another character than in Justin and the Gospel of Peter.

**ActaApQitolorum Apocrypha

(edition Lipsius

and Bonnet, 1891).

NONCHRISTIAN TESTIMONY At

at first-hand. if

the most he has heard

It

spoken

49 of,

he does not altogether guess at its existence. As neither Origen nor Eusebius make any allusion

to the "Acts of Pilate,"

the

work

48

it

may be

considered that

did not exist in their time.

What is the interpretation of this absence of testimony from Pilate concerning the punishment of Jesus? For M. Salomon Reinach it is decisive :

official report, while there ought to "The conclusion which is he been have one," says. forced upon one is assuredly not favorable to the his-

"There was no

toricity of the Passion."

44

So radical a conclusion appears to us unwarranted. From the fact that spurious "Acta Pilati" have been fabricated as well by Christians as it does not follow that an authentic

The

by their opponents, work never existed.

simply that these "Acts," if they existed, were not at the disposal of those whose interknow that the archives est it was to consult them. conclusion

is

We

of the emperors were not accessible to the Senate. Tacitus himself, notwithstanding his relations with Neva and Trajan, seems to have been unable to obtain 45 Still less reason existed to permit access to them.

them by private persons, and Christian apoloexamination of them. If their gists could make no and authorized to opponents had been more favored remained which fruitless, they would make researches access to

*

The

two men is important owing to their vast That of Eusebius is particularly significant. There are three passages in his Ecclesiastical History where it was silence of these

erudition. at least

difficult to

5,

9 (concerning Pilate),

ii,

5-7 (quoting the pagan "Acta Pilati"), propos de la curiositt de Tibere. Reinach)

Apology), 44 S.

4iad he known the a (quoting Tertuliian'i

avoid mention of the "Acta Pilati"

work. These are: ix.

A

* 8 Ph. Fabia, Li* Sources

de Tacite,

p.

3**

JESUS

50

THE NAZARENE

have made a point about it in their polemic. Because an official document has not been produced, no one is authorized to conclude that it could not have existed.

were proved that no report was made by Pilate to Tiberius, what would be the significance of this fact? Justin, who had presumed the existence of a report, says M. Salomon Reinach, was in a better But, even

if it

are to estimate the obligations of a

position than

we

Procurator.

But the death of Jesus was

in his eyes

an event of such capital importance that it was difficult for him to see that for Pilate it may only have been an incident without importance.

Besides, Justin is of Pilate a witness

influenced by the tendency to make favorable to Jesus and opposed to the Jews.

thing that

we know

concerning Pilate

as a cruel and unscrupulous man, for

whom

of those under his jurisdiction had but

tation.

resisted

Jesus was

him

the lives

little

impor-

sending to execution or became a pretext for agi-

tance; he had no hesitation

whomsoever

Every-

shows him to us

in

of his certainly not the sole victim To condemn to death

procedure of summary justice. was for him merely an act of administrative routine. Is it to be supposed that in each particular case he considered it necessary to send a report to the Emto his enemies by peror, and in so doing furnish arms ? allowing them to accuse him of cruelty and injustice

No

complete silence of furJosephus, or the rarity and paucity of the details nished by the Latin historians, does the absence of

more than

the

almost

any report from Pilate to the Emperor constitute an objection against the historical character of Jesus.

CHAPTER

III

HYPOTHESIS OF A PRE-CHRISTIANITY JESUS THE NAZARENE

I.

DOES

the

name of Jesus

the

or rather do

Nazarene

the two names associated in this expression an historical person or the hero of a cult?

designate Does the

signify "Saviour Protector," and be considered as a divine name of similar character to Zeus Xenios, Hermes Psychopompos, or Jahveh Sabaoth? "There is every reason to think,

term

should

Nazarene it

1 '

writes Drews, "that the name of Joshua or Jesus was that under which the expected Messiah was worshiped in certain

Jewish sects."

*

Upon

examination the argu-

ments offered in support of this opinion seem somewhat 2 shallow. Robertson finds in the worship of Jesus a

new form of

the old

Ephraim

cult of

Joshua, a solar

A trace

of this cult is to be found in a pasof the prophet Zechariah, where the sage in the book of the high priest Joshua appears before the Angel divinity.

Eternal,

who

causes

him

to take off his soiled garments

He

receives this promise : "If thou wilt walk in ways, and if thou wilt keep house and charge, then shalt thou also judge

and put on

festal clothing.

My

My

My

courts" (Zech. Hi. 7). Jesus was a divine name, Jesus the Lord was God, considered in His essential character as liberator, healer, guardian,

shalt also keep

1

a

My

Drews, Die Chnstusmythe, Robertson,

A

i.

p. 23.

Short History of Christianity, p. 5*

8.

JESUS

52

and saviour.

"Thou

Is

shalt call

His people from It

is

it

THE NAZAREKE not said, indeed, in Matt. i. 21: Jesus, for He shall save

His name

their sins ?"

8

unnecessary to inquire

if

Joshua, at a certain to note that at

period, was a solar divinity; the epoch with which we are concerned, the Jews who read his history in the sixth book of the Bible saw in it suffices

successor of Moses, and the

him a national hero, the continuator of his work.

He

was one of the most

popular heroes in Israelitish history, as is proved by the number of persons named after him, and of whom there is no temptation to make a mythical being or a divine hero.

The high

priest Joshua,

mentioned by

Zechariah, is also an historical personage; so little is he to be identified with Messiah that he receives the promise of the coming of the latter (Zech. iii. 9). Robertson and Drews also find mention of a preChristian Jesus in the magic papyrus of the BiblioU I adjure theque Nationale, where occurs the formula, thee by the

God of the Hebrews,

Jesus." This papyrus,

which is not earlier than the fourth century of our era, doubtless reproduce a more ancient formula there

may

;

is nothing, however, to authorize us to date it so far back as the mythologists would like. The form of words must doubtless be attributed to a pagan. It

merely proves that the name of Jesus was to have great power, a thing which is explained by the in primitive Christiangreat part played by exorcism have readily formulas The magical pagan ity.* 5 That does not adopted Jewish and Christian names. considered

*

"Jesus" signifies "Jahveh aids" Job. Weiss, Jesus von Nazareth, p. 19. 'Deissmann, Licht vom Often, Tubingen, 1909*

4

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY

53

6

prove as Reitzenstein remarks, that their authors were really acquainted with and understood Judaism or This is proved, for instance, in a text Christianity. 7 cited by Dieterich, in which Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are taken to be names for the God of Israel. is nothing to authorize us to consider the of name Jesus as a divine name, is the same the case with the designation "Nazarene" which accompanies Outside the New Testament, no text attests the it?

If there

Nazareth. Neither the Old Testament, nor Josephus, nor the Talmud mention it, but it is not legitimate to conclude existence

in

of a village

Galilee

8

called

and as the mythas proved, that Nazareth ologists willingly suppose fiction. We know from Josephus is only a geographical that Galilee was densely populated, and that it boasted

from

204

this silence, as

villages

and 15

Cheyne

does,

fortified towns.

a small part of these

219

9

localities,

We

only

and even

know if

the

given by Josephus were exaggerated, many Galilean townships would not be mentioned in any 10 There is nothing astonishing in the supposition text. figures

that

Nazareth u a

should be

T

among

village of very trifling importance,

the number.

12

Reitzenstein, Polmandres, Leipzig, 1904. Dieterich, Abraxas, Leipzig, 1891.

s

article in Encyclop. Biblica, Josephus, Vila, par 235.

Cheyne,

iii,

"Nazareth."

Meyer, Ursprung und Anf , iii. iiWellhausen has suggested that the word Nazareth designates in i Galilee in the form Gennesar (Garden of Nesar), met with Mace. ii. 67, Matt. xiv. 34, Mark vi. 53- The similarity of Matt, and Nazarene. xxvi. 69 and 71 proves the equivalence of Galilean 10

This ingenious hypothesis collides with the fact that if Galilee wai or Nazareth, it is very commonly designated by the word Nazar it is nowhere clearly found. fact that later tradition was acquainted with

strange that 12

The

Nazareth proves

JESUS

54

The

THE NAZARENE

fact that evangelical tradition represents Jesus

1S coming from Nazareth is far from being without According to Messianic dogma the Messignificance. siah was to be born at Bethlehem, and the Gospels of Matthew and Luke in different ways, which are mutu-

as

14

keep to this postulate. have created the fact not would Christian tradition

to ally irreconcilable, strive

destined to cause

it

so

much embarrassment,

that of

15

the birth of Jesus at Nazareth. The explanations of the term

Nazarene

offered

by This

the mythologists scarcely seem probable term, which constitutes the most ancient designation of the Christians, is derived, according to W. B. Smith, either.

from the root NSR, which is found sixty-three times in the Old Testament in the sense of protector and ancient still, for the Babyguardian. It is even more lonian term Na-Sa-Ru is met with seven times in the code of Hammurabi. The Syrian form Nasaryu, in to be recognized the divine name Yah, signi"God is Protector." It is not a term of geographi-

which fies

is

This hypothesis could some real proofs of only be entertained if there were the existence of a pre-Christian sect of Nazarenes.

cal origin,

but a cultural name.

has existed, nothing. So soon as one was persuaded that the place failure to find it again was impossible. is Matt xxi. n, Mark i 9, John i. 45, Acts x 38 The comparison between Mark vi. i and Luke iv. 16 shows that Nazareth was considered to be the birthplace of Jesus 14 Matt ii. 13-23 states that the family of Jesus was originally settled at Bethlehem, and returned after the flight to Egypt to lire in Nazareth to escape the jurisdiction of Archelaus, grandson of Herod.

Luke ii. 1-7 states that Jesus was born during a journey of his parents to Jerusalem on the occasion of the census made by Quirinius. 15 The birth of Jesus in Galilee constituted one of the Jewish objections to his Messiahship.

Cp. John

yii. 41.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY

55

indications which the mythologists invoke cannot take the place of these. There is in the Gospel of Matthew a passage which puzzles interpreters. After the death of Herod, Joseph and Mary leave Egypt to

The

settle in

The

Nazareth of

Galilee.

evangelist says that this was "that it might be which was spoken by the prophets he shall

fulfilled

be called a Nazarene" (Matt ii. 23). It is impossible to identify with certitude the prophecy here alluded to, and if it be desired to avoid recourse to the gratuitous hypothesis of the use of some apocryphal work which has not been preserved, it is necessary to suppose that the evangelist connects the word Nazarene

with some passage of Scripture containing a word from 16 the same root or having some assonance with it. There would be here a play on the words which we should (owing to its obscurity) be unable to understand.

of the

One cannot suppose that this is the true origin word Nazarene. Rather would it be incumbent

to suppose an assimilation

who

worked out by Matthew,

always aims at showing in the Gospel history the

fulfillment of prophecy.

The word Nazarene to John the Baptist and

was

certainly

in

contains perhaps an allusion his disciples,

relation

at the

with

whom

Jesus beginning of His

It is well-known that the ministry. tion represents Jesus as an apostate

Mandaean tradifrom the Baptist

16 H. and F Nicolardot (Procfdtt J Holtzmann (Die Synoptiker) de redaction des trois premiers evangelistes) think of Es. ri. i, in which the Messiah is called "Nfcser" (offspring). It is impossible the to connect the word Nazarene with the notion of the sect for Christian tradition (Matt. xi. 18, 19; Luke vii. 33, 34? Mark ii. 18has preserved a clear memory that Jesus was not an ascetic

20, etc.) like John the Baptist.

JESUS

56 community.

THE NAZARENE

Thus would be explained

the Christians were

the fact that

also called Nazarenes, while

it

would not be at all natural to have designated them as people of Nazareth because their master was a 17

native of this village. But the problem of Nazareth

is

still

not solved in

this way. There occur in the New Testament the two 18 W. B. Smith 19 forms, Nazarenos and Nazoraios. considers these equivalent, and supports his opinion by the coexistence of the two forms, Essenes and Es-

senians.

not conclusive, for the two forms do not only differ in their termination, but also in the If the form Nazaquantity of the second syllable.

The analogy

is

20

renos can be philologically derived from Nazareth, the same does not hold for Nazoraios, which must

have another

origin.

to Jesus, simplest explanation is that, as applied the term Nazarenos related to his native village, and that the association with the word Nazoraios, by

The

which name the called,

disciples of

John the Baptist were

caused the Christians to be called Nazarenes.

Wetter, L'Arritrc plan hist, du Chnsttanisme primttif; R H.L.R., 1922; Wellhausen, Das Evangellum Matthan, Berlin, 1904, p 1421 8 The first is found in Mark i. 24, x. 47 *iv. 6 7 *vi. 6; Luke The second in Mark ii 23; Luke xvni. 37; ir. 34 and xxiv 19 xviii 5*7 and xix. 19; and Acts ii. 22, in. 6, iv. 10, vi. 14, xxii 8, *T

John

There is a certain variation in the manuscripts. The 5, xxvi. 9. the testimony of the book duality of form is, however, certain, and of Acts proves that it is the form "Nazarcne" which prevailed. 19 Smith, D. vorchr. Jesut, p. 53. xxiv.

*The correctness of the derivation (Nazarenos) if admitted by In the New Testament Meyer, who cites the opinion of Lidzbarski are to be found the farms, widely divergent, as follows: Nazara, it Nazarat, Nazaret, Nazareth, etc. In the oldest manuscript there no consistent spelling.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY

57

that they were was desired to emphasi the from Baptist community. only apostates

In this It

it

seems very

likely indeed that at first the Chris-

and and Nazarene names the that and later on "saints," Christian were given to them by their opponents. tians called themselves "disciples" or "brothers,"

OF A SECT OF PRE-CHRISTIAN NAZARENES, WORSHIPERS OF JESUS

THE HYPOTHESIS

II.

The

explanation which

the words

we propose of

Nazarene and Nazarenian would have no import if it were possible to prove the existence of a pre-Christian Nazarenes, worshipers of Jesus, as

sect of

is

main-

by W. B. Smith, who entitles one The of his books pre-Christian Jesus. The first proof alleged in favor of the existence of 21 who this sect is based upon the hymn of the Naasseni,

tained, in particular

date back to the most remote antiquity and attest the 22 cult of a celestial Jesus. The subject is the Soul who has quitted the Kingdom of Light and groans in suffering and tears. Lost in a 23 labyrinth, vainly escape is sought. Father! this tempted "Then Jesus said: 'Behold, being who, far from Thy influence, wanders miserably on earth. He longs to fly from bitter chaos, but he

O

knows not how send

Me

hands, 21

;

to ascend.

For his

may descend with the may traverse the aeons, that

that I

that I

O Father in My seals !

salvation,

Preserved by Hippolytus, Philosophoumena, v. and Drews.

2*

I

may open

xo. 2.

** Smith *8

The text is Dot absolutely certain. >* It is often a question of seals with the Gnostics, particularly in

the Pistis Sophia.

JESUS

58

THE NAZARENE

may reveal unto him the essence of unto him the mystery of the holy announce God, and " life which is called the gnosis. According to the mythologists, the Jesus of this

the mysteries, that I

1

contact with Christianity, and was a Being to have been entirely celestial. Their conclusion seems drawn with some precipitation. Nothing authorizes

hymn had no

us to date the Naasseni

hymn before

the Christian era.

has shown that the Naassenes had made Hilgenfeld use of the epistles of Paul and of the fourth Gospel. In the form known to us, and whatever its distant 26

doctrine betrays the origins may be, the Naasseni 28 therefore be unIt would influence of Christianity. able to prove the existence of a pre-Christian cult of This argument is strengthened by the conJesus. sideration that, following a very judicious remark of Bousset, it is not certain that in the hymn preserved

not proceed by Hippolytus the name of Jesus may

For a retouching of a corruption of the text. at the beginning of the hymn there is presented the "Nous" along with Chaos, and the Soul to be In these conditions the decisive argument saved.

from

that the mythologists thought they possessed disappears.

Epiphanius (H#r. } xviii) mentions among the Jewish heresies a sect of Nazarenes, and what he says about

it

does not permit him to attribute a Christian As he does not state that it was deit.

character to

veloped only after Christianity, this would prove, a preaccording to Smith, that the Nazarenes were doubtless which from Christian sect Christianity Hilgenfeld, Die Ketzerfetch, des Vrchristcntums. *'Reitzcnftein, Poimandret, p. 81.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY

59

27

And against this conclusion, accordnot be possible to urge as arguit would to him, ing students of heresy, who, being other ment the silence of

adopted much.

less

honest and

naive than Epiphanius, saw

less

how

dangerous to the official Church doctrine was the existence of these Nazarenes, and kept a discreet silence 28

There is a singular lack of proporthe statements of Epiphanius and the tion between conclusions which he claims to deduce from them. An

concerning them.

entire historical construction of the greatest importance, which would overthrow many facts apparently solidly established, rests

upon one

single testimony

that of a man who does not always show himself well informed, and who frequently has not made the most 29

If at his disposal. judicious use of the information we of we scrutinize closely the testimony Epiphanius, find that concerning these Nazarenes he appears to

know nothing more than

the name; it is noteworthy that he says nothing which attributes to them a worship 80 All that there is in common between them of Jesus.

and the Christians conclusion to be

show what would be

a

it

To

name

drawn from

that

sary to

is

only. this fact

it

permit any

would be

neces-

cannot be a simple coincidence, or,

still

more probable, some confusion

by Epiphanius or by the author of whom he makes use. Now this proof has not been furnished.

made

7

28

w

either

D. vorchr. Jesus, pp. 56, 57. Smith, D. vorchr. Jesus, p 64. . The . "His criticism is not sound.

Smith,

moment he leaves the reinformation should be checked; it is gion of contemporary facts his temconfused and lacks precision. He had a relatively uncritical Patrologie, 1918, acuteness." Tixeront, intellectual without perament p. 253-

.

Weiss, Jesus von Nazareth; Wmdisch, Der geschichtliche

Jesus (Th. R.).

6o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

the contrary, two scholars, Schmidtke and Bousset, have proposed a simple and plausible explanation of the testimony of Epiphanius. There might, perhaps, be certain reservations to make on some details of their

On

does not appear a matter of doubt that they are well founded, and that they have consequently caused the disaphispearance of the pre-Christian Nazarenes from

main

theories, but in their

outlines

it

tory.

In the course of his research in Judeo-Christianity 81 and the Jewish Christians, Schmidtke has proved that all the narratives found in the writings of the Fathers of the Church concerning a Judeo-Christian sect going under the name of Nazarenes and not under the usual name of Ebionites originate with Appollinarius of

Laodicea (310-90). The Nazarene sect really existed at Beroe in Syria it was strictly Judeo-Christian, and used an Aramaic gospel, some fragments of which are preserved, and which seems to have been a translation of the Gospel of Matthew slightly revised. Con;

cerning these Nazarene Christians, Epiphanius speaks in the twenty-ninth chapter, according to Appollinarius. The details he concerning them seem worthy of gives

belief.

chapter that he speaks Nazarenes. Schmidtke says that

It is in the eighteenth

of the pre-Christian here he depends both upon Hippolytus and a list of 82 He believes that Epiphanius heretical Jewish sects. has substituted the Nazarenes for the Ebionites. 81 Schmidtke, Neue Fragment* und Untfrsuchungen chnstlichcn Evangclien, xxxvii, 1911, Leipzig.

**Id.,

tb., p.

199-

He

88

vu dtr Juden-

..

.

writes their name with a sigma and not with a zeta, to distinfrom the Nazarene Christians, just as he distinguishes them guish between the Eastmans and the Osseniant.

He

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY even believes that

in his

work, as

first

61

sketched out,

Epiphanius had called them Ebionites.

The

peculiarities of those

which he describes in

Chapter xxx correspond exactly, in fact, with the account given of the Nazarenes in Chapter xviii. Epiphanius was misled in taking for a Jewish sect the Nazarenes, whom the Jews in their daily prayer cursed under the name of Nozrim simultaneously with the heretics

(Minim). 85

84

accepts the argument of Schmidtke in its generality, and who believes that he has definitely to the enigma, supposes that in the found the

Bousset,

who

key

source of which he makes use concerning the Nazarenes, Epiphanius had only found some geographical details about the place in which the sect was met with,

and that in order to write his account he had utilized, from what he knew about the Judeo-Christian groups, character. everything which had not a Christian Bousset supposes that the Nazarenes were mentioned of Jewish heresies utilized by different The Jewish author who had furnished it Fathers. mentioned in fact Christianity as among the heresies the

in

list

to be rejected. In these circumstances one has no choice but to endorse the conclusion reached by Bousset in these

terms: "The pre-Christian Nazarenes of Epiphanius are definitely consigned to the domain of error and in the text s* The twelfth request of the "Schemon* Esre" is given discovered in the synagogue of Cairo and published in 1897: "May there be no hope for the apostates! Mayest Thou, in our time, anniMay the Christians (Nozrim) hilate the domination of the insolent! and the heretics (Minim) be suddenly annihilated! May they be no Praised be Jahveh, who bring! longer written in the book of life' low the insolent!" (Strack, Jesus die Htretiker, etc.) 95

Bousset, Tk. Rundschau, xir, 1911.

62

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

misunderstanding, and it is to be hoped that they will forever disappear from the arsenal of proofs invoked 8* in support of a pre-Christian cult of Jesus." But even when deprived of the hymn of the Naasseni

and the Nazarene sect the mythologists are not disarmed there remain for them the positive indications of the existence of a pre-Christian Jesus which they think they find in the New Testament itself. The first of these is the passage in the book of Acts which refers to Apollos. For Smith this text is ;

87

the most valuable of ancient Christian literature. read in Acts xviii. 24-26: "And a certain Jew

We

Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures, came to Ephesus. This man was instructed in the way of the Lord, and being

named

as

he spake and taught diligently the the baptism of things concerning Jesus, knowing only in the synagogue, to he speak boldly began John. And had heard, they whom, when Aquila and Priscilla took him unto them and expounded unto him the way fervent in spirit

God more

of

perfectly."

this text, thinks Smith, that Apollos about knew nothing Jesus, otherwise he ought to have known everything, including the doctrine of baptism. u This ignorance did not hinder his preaching that

It follows

from

which concerned Jesus." therefore," writes Smith, "as clear as the noonwords can have no relation day sun that this form of It must mean the doctrine to the history of Jesus." a doctrine which a man who knew concerning Jesus "It

is

Bou9sct, 7

Th Rundschau,

xiv,

19",

P- 3*i.

Smith, D. vorchr. Jew, p. 7. The text is translatable in two different ways.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY

63

nothing about an historical Jesus could not only proThis text is therefore for the mythfess, but preach. ologists

timable diamond." But,

is

(the expression

when

again Smith's)

"an

ines-

89

closely examined, the passage may not all the significance attributed to it, or,

perhaps have to put it more precisely, its value and significance may have a quite other character. Whatever the origin of the reference used by the editor of the Acts may be,

we

are not certain

we know

its

original purport.

It

is possible, indeed, that the form "that which concerned of the editor, and Jesus" may be put to the account 510

merely expresses the belief that the religious attitude of Apollos, when he arrived at Ephesus, fitted him to become a Christian. Prisciila and Aquila that

it

doubtless recognized in the ardent and eloquent Messianist a man who would be able to render eminent

and they succeeded in gaining him over to their cause. But we have no wish to insist on this interpretation, which to a certain extent is service to their faith,

conjecture. a postulate which exegesis of Smith rests upon This is in contradiction with certain historical data. of Christian doctrine the baptism, postulate is that the Baptist, is an essential of that to John opposed element in the history of Jesus in that he who ignores

The

the Christian baptism must perforce ignore all the If at the opening of His ministry evangelical history.

22 and

John Jesus (as shown administered a baptism in every in

of John the Baptist,

iii.

He

way

iv.

i)

may have

identical with that

seems to have relinquished

Smith, D. vorckr. Jesus, pp. Meyer, Ursprung und Anf.,

7-9. iii,

p.

na.

it

JESUS

64

in the sequel.

No

41

THE NAZARENE text attributes the institution of

when acbaptism to Jesus during His ministry, and in coverhad count is taken of the interest the Church her rites, it is ing with the Master's own authority pass over this extremely significant alone (xxviii. 19, 20) relates that to His disciples at the moment said risen again, Jesus, he was to leave them "All power has been given to in the heavens and in earth. Go ye therefore and impossible

to

Matthew

silence.

:

Me

teach" (literally "make disciples") "all nations, bapthe Son, and the tizing them in the name of the Father,

Holy

Spirit."

42 contains any equivalent Neither Luke nor John of this narrative, which thus appears as relatively recent. The passage in Matthew has for its object to

upon the authority of the resurrected Christ

support,

Christ as Spirit), the institution of baptism This reveals nothing as as practised by the Church. to the real origin of the rite, but merely shows that it 43 In has no place in the historical mission of Jesus. it was that understood is these circumstances it easily not immediately introduced in all the Christian com(that

is,

The

Paul (i Cor. vii. 14), without making any allusion to baptism, admits that the that is, belong to children of Christians are saints born of parents themare because they God,

munities.

fact that

uniquely

little belief that baptism goes back to Jesus, that Gospel after quoting a statement that Jesus had baptized, itself corrects this (John iv. 2) to the * 2 The testimony of Mark is lacking on this point, owing The nonauthentic end of Mark, mutilation of the end of his book. which appears not to be anterior to the second century, gives (xvi. the practice of 16) something equivalent, with this particularity, that

Tradition has so

the

fourth

baptism *8

is

only supposed, but not directly attributed to institution.

Meyer, Ursprung und Anf.,

iii,

p. 245.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY

65

shows that the baptism of children was unknown in the Pauline communities, and it allows us to suppose that the rite was only practised for those who entered the Church, not for those born in it. It selves saints

not have been in use at the beginning in the Jerusalem community. Doubtless the accounts in the 44 Acts on several occasions speak of baptism, but their

may

book testimony is not conclusive, for the editor of this has naively projected into the primitive community the situation which existed in the Church of his time. The use of baptism might have arisen, as Bousset supposes, not in the midst of the Palestine Community, but perin the Diaspora at Antioch, in analogy with the

haps

A

teaching which was Jewish baptism for proselytes. historical the with ministry of intimately connected this ministry, might Jesus, and based upon memoirs of the of known have baptism of John. only very easily It exegesis of Smith evokes another objection. is in no way proved that the expression "that which must be understood in the sense of concerned

The

Jesus" "the doctrine concerning Jesus." Smith himself recog45 "the nizes that the Greek words used may signify that considers he but story told concerning someone," the three passages of the New Testament (outside of the Acts) where this form of words is found refer to the doctrine and not to the story of Jesus, or at least to Acts xxviii. 31, they originally did so. According in Rome, in during his two years of captivity passed his own hired house, Paul taught freely "that which concerned the Lord Jesus Christ." Paul did not tell

histories to the

"Acti

ii.

*

is

Thi

Romans; he preached

the Gospel to

l8 > * 4*38-41; viii. 12, 13, 16, 3$, 3J in Acts xxviii. 15. evidently the meaning of the phrase

JESUS

66

THE NAZARENE

it down as a principle that the Pauline doctrine a concerning Jesus which contains Gospel no historical element is to suppose, as resolved in favor

them. But to lay is

of the mythological theories, the very question in the Romans, as dispute. In the teaching imparted to in that which had been given to the Galatians (iii. i), the crucifixion of an historical personage was^he starting-point of the Pauline preaching. The two passages in which is found the phrase "that

which concerned Jesus" are story of the

woman

In the

characteristic.

with the issue of blood

Mark

it: "Having heard the things concerning Jesus, in the crowd behind and touched His garcame she ment; for, said she, if I but touch His garment I shall

has

be made whole.'

1

the things concerning Jesus" could only mean sufferer hope story of His miracles, which made the that she also would be cured. Smith is certainly com-

"The

is indeed the meaning pelled to recognize that such of the passage, but he attempts to put aside its evidence by maintaining that it must be attributed to some

Mark. 46

had been primarily a question of healing, he thinks, the woman would not have said "I shall be saved," but "I shall be cured." This observation takes no account of the fact that in many "to be saved" has exactly the same meaning reviser of

passages as "to be healed"

If

it

(Mark

v. 23, vi.

56; Luke

viii.

36-

50). here no impropriety of expression, since, of the period, the according to the current conception disease was caused by the action of a demon, from

There

1* lttttk

is

D, wrchr,

Jesui.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY whom healed.

67

the sufferer must be delivered in order to be The phrase attributed to the woman "I shall

be saved" does not therefore prove that it was origother than healing. inally a question of anything Smith also supposes that the words "having learned that which concerned Jesus" cannot belong to the either primitive text because they have no equivalent

or Luke. But these two evangelists give of the passage considerably briefer than a recension that of Mark. The comparison of the three narratives leads one

in

Matthew

(as is fairly often the case) there is an abbreviation of the account by Matthew and Luke,

to think that

and not

a

development by Mark.

That which

is

found,

indeed, only in his narrative is too insignificant to induce us to find a reason for its addition, while the single desire to condense

a narrative

fairly lengthy

It explain the form they have adopted. subordia to attribute therefore not possible to

suffices to is

nate editor the phrase "that which concerned Jesus" as interpreted in the sense "that which Jesus had

done."

The passage in Luke xxiv. 19 is not less significant. The story is well known of the two disciples who the while day after the death of Jesus reach Emmaus talking over what had just taken place. as yet, comes Jesus, whom they do not recognize asks them He road. same the takes and up to them them reof One what they have been talking about. a stranger in Jerusalem plies: "You must indeed be has of what not to be aware happened in these last few days ... the matter concerning Jesus of Nazareth.

11

68

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

The matter concerning Jesus of Nazareth can only be the condemnation and execution of the prophet in whom they had placed their hopes. To understand the phrase as referring to some doctrine about Jesus, a divine Being, would be to give it no meaning at all,

has obliged to suppose that the passage undergone a radical revision. But this is a conjecture which rests nothing, and is only put forward for so Smith

is

upon

the exigencies of the case. The expression "that which concerns Jesus" refers, then, to the story, or certain portions of the story, of

no reason to give to this expression any other meaning than in Acts xviii. 25. We must not, then, see in Apollos a Jew who teaches a form of doc-

Jesus.

There

is

which ignores the Gospel hisof baptism. tory, but a Christian who knows nothing of in"diamond the of If Smith is thus deprived estimable value," the stones which he has attempted trine concerning Jesus

to group around of their value.

it

We

to

make

a tiara lose very

much

are not, however, for that reason 47

excused from examining them. There is in the first place the case of Simon the It is

Magician.

narrated in Acts

viii.

9-13 that when

he met a magician Philip came to evangelize Samaria, named Simon, enjoying great authority over the popuconsidered him the "great power of God." Like other Samaritans, Simon was converted by the little further on it is narrated preaching of Philip. that when, after the arrival of Peter and John, Simon

lation,

who

A

learned that by the laying on of hands the apostles 47

We

pass

Ephesus, and

over for the moment the case of the shall deal with

it

further on.

dasciples

of

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY conferred the

Holy

Spirit,

69

he offered money to Peter

Peter rejected his proto receive the same power. a malediction posal with indignation, and pronounces the apostles to pray for asks then Simon him. upon him, so that his sin may be pardoned (viii. 18-24). The rapidity of the conversion of Simon and the explained, for Smith, by the fact that similar to they were already won over to ideas very those preached by Philip. They were therefore Christians, they were strangers to the tradition

Samaritans

which

is

although it is claimed

48

Jesus.

connected with an historical

is

Smith deduces here from the text something

what it contains. The point is the conversion of Simon and the Samaritans to the gospel 9 preached by Philip,* and not the fusion of a group of Simon's followers with the Church which Philip a fusion which would have been deterrepresented mined by recognition of the fact that at bottom the quite other than

ideas professed by each side were the same. There are in the second portion of the narrative

about Simon

many

suspicious elements.

In

it is

found

a theory concerning the apostolate and the laying on of hands which is not a primitive one, and it is possible to

discern, with

an apologetic

fiction

M. Meyer and M.

which shows

how

50

Alfaric,

the Christian

missionaries anticipated the conversion of the Simonian community and prefaced it by that of Simon him48

Smith, D. vorchr Jesus, p

n.

nothing to show that this conversion was more rapid than that of pagans unacquainted with any ideas analogous to those 49

There

is

of the Christians.

Chnstianumt Meyer, Ursprung and Anf , hi; Prosper Alfaric, tt

Gnosttcisme (Rev. Hist., 19*4)-

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

70

The

self.

portion of the narrative has quite Samaria, at

first

another value.

It reveals the existence in

the time of the

first

mission, of a pre-Christian Gnos-

was not without sensible influence 51 But this Christian thought. of on the development Simonian Gnosticism, so far as we can form an idea

ticism which perhaps

not the pre-Christian doctrine that the mythin worship paid to ologists imagine, which consisted a divine personage. All that we know concerning the

of

it,

is

Simonian Gnosticism

is

idea of the incarnation in

its

a man, Simon, of the "great

power of God."

B2

This

an extremely valuable indication that certain theorists ought not to lose sight of

shows

and

the idea of a ciple

is

it

human being

incarnated

was not

idea in the environment

in

whom

a divine prin-

any way a strange which Christianity was

in

in

born.

Neither do we recognize an adept of pre-Christianity in the magician Elymas, or Bar-Jesus, a Jewish false in the coterie which prophet whom Paul met at Paphos xiii. Paulus 6-12). Smith surrounded Sergius (Acts of "servant sense interprets the name Bar-Jesus in the M a sense which would be or worshiper of Jesus" of name Jesus was not attested as plausible if the

one

in current use.

It

is

only by an argument in a "Bar-Jesus"

vicious circle, in postulating a priori that

formed from a divine name, that it is possible to find in the episode an argument to support a pre-

is

Christian worship of Jesus. Alfaric, Rev. Hist., cxlv, 19*4-

M It

seems to us not possible to admit, as some have supposed, that Simon could have been influenced by the teaching of Jesus, as Meyer thinks, and still less that of Paulinism, as Harnack admits, 01 Smith, D. vorchr. Jesus, p. 16.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY Smith consul,

71

54

also lays emphasis on the fact that the pronot yet initiated into the preaching of the

to hear from them "the word of God" apostles, asks that the terms of the (Acts xiii. 7). It is very evident

narrative must be put to the editor's credit. If the proconsul really expressed the wish to hear Paul and

Barnabas,

it

was not because he saw

in

known

them the

to him, but

preachers of a doctrine already because they presented themselves as bearers of a divine message. The case of the exorcists of

xix.

13not has also the stress, on which lay mythologists 20), it. to attribute the significance they Impressed by the miracles of Paul at Ephesus, seven Jewish exorcists, sons of a priest named Skeuas, attempted to make use of the same formula used successfully by the apostle, and adjured the spirits saying: "I adjure you by Jesus, whom Paul preaches." But the spirit answered them: " but who are ye? Jesus I know, and Paul I know, And the one possessed fell upon the exorcists and Ephesus (Acts

1'

maltreated them."

The

fact

is

without significance as

cult of Jesus. regards the existence of a pre-Christian It is merely a case of the imitation by outsiders of a formula of exorcism whose efficacy has been observed. This, at any rate, is so in the text as we read it, and

nothing authorizes us to suppose that

it

was otherwise

According to the mythologists, Chrishad no unique source from which it was spread,

in the original.

tianity

as Jerusalem. *

Id

>

ib

It

had several simultaneous sources.

p, 22.

There; arc certain incoherences in the account. Sometimes it ia a This appears to of several. question of one demoniac, sometimes arise from the fusion of two parallel accounts, and is without im*B

portance.

JESUS

7a

THE NAZARENE

Afterwards the memory of

this

fact

was

lost,

and

of Jesus. Christianity was connected with the preaching However, it may still be recognized that Cyprus and

was Cyrenaica were centers from which Christianity of Jerusalem. According spread, entirely independent to Acts xi. 20 it was the men of Cyprus and Cyrene who were the first (at Antioch) to preach the gospel 66 But we know (see Acts iv. 36) that to the pagans. a Cypriote, destined later to play an important part at Antioch, was converted to the gospel at Jerusalem, and we learn in the book of Acts (vi. 9) that persons 87 and belonging to the synagogue of the Freedmen,

and Asia, raised viopeople from Cyrene, Alexandria lent opposition against Stephen, which proves that the gospel had been preached by him in this synagogue. There is therefore no reason to suppose that it was anywhere other than in Jerusalem, or in the communities which grew out of that of Jerusalem, that the an active Cypriotes and the Cyrenians who played to Chrispart in the early missions were converted "a a certain to Mnason, This equally applies tianity. in his Paul Cypriote and old disciple," who received house on the latter's arrival in Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 1 6), and in whom some have tried to also see an adept of the pre-Christian cult of Jesus." Although he was a Cypriote, he lived in Jerusalem, and in stating that he was an "old disciple" (we are between the years that 56 and 58), the editor only desired to indicate a Christian. been he had long 56

Smith) D. vorchr. Jesus. Certain critics think that instead of "Freedmen" the phrase should read, "the people of Lybia." In Greek the confusion between the two words is, from the paleographical point of view, very easy. 7

" Smith,

D. wrc/tr. Jesut.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY

73

CHRISTIANITY AND THE DISCIPLES OF JOHN THE BAPTIST

III.

the beginning of Chapter xix of the book of Acts stated that, after his arrival at Ephesus, Paul met

At it is

with a group of a dozen disciples who had never heard of the Holy Spirit. "What baptism have ye then received?" he asked. They replied: 'That of John." the baptism of "John," he answered, "baptized with was to come after* repentance in speaking of Him who

order that they should believe, that is to say, in on these disciples the bapJesus." He then conferred tism in the name of the Lord Jesus he laid his hands in

;

upon

and began tongues and to prophesy (xix. i-

them; they received the

Holy

Spirit,

to speak in different these twelve 7) . In the view of the mythologists

men

were, like Apollos himself, pre-Christians, and the shows how closely their facility of their conversion 69 Paul himself. point of view resembled that of 60 Many critics see in them the disciples of John the 01 But the word "disciples," by which these Baptist are designated, is that commonly employed in the Acts for the Christians, and it is not stated that these

men

60

Reitzenstein, Das iranische Erlosungsmysterium, 1921. As Reitzenstein shows well in the above work, no objection can be raised against the presence of disciples of John at Ephesus. The fact is that we know nothing about the conditions in which the know nothing doctrine of John was spread outside Palestine either of the conditions under which Christianity was carried to 61

We

We

can especially urge in support of the existence of the the fact that the fourth disciples of John the Baptist at Ephesus is a direct Gospel in its present form originates at Ephesus, and

Rome.

polemic against the disciples of John the Baptist Cp. Baldensperger, Der Prolog des vierten Evangelwms; Maurice Goguel, Introd. au

N.T. t

ii,

p. 508.

JESUS

74

THE NAZARENE

received instructions along with baptism. to suppose that the position of these us This leads men must have been similar to that of Apollos. But even if they were really disciples of John the Baptist,

men

twelve

no very important conclusions can be drawn from

their

story.

serious reasons for thinking that neither did the during the life of Jesus nor after His death remain out of contact with the of His

There are

group

disciples

combated

The two movements Baptist community. and influenced each other reciprocally.

The preaching

of Jesus Himself was very strongly

influenced at the beginning by John the Baptist. The Gospels present John as the forerunner. According

was to announce the arrival of one be to im"greater than himself," whose work would of fire (Matt. iii. part the baptism of the spirit and ll). This last word opens out already an interesting to them, his duty

of the Baptist perspective in showing that the thought had already broken through the limits within which 62

has recogWellhausen the Bapof a nized one source emanating from group it

was sought to imprison

tist's

it.

Messianic

his disciples in the statement about

Matthew (iii. Where Mark you with the Holy

teaching which belongs peculiarly to ii, 12) and to Luke (iii. 16, 17).

merely says, Spirit,"

"He

shall baptize

Matthew and Luke add "and with

has His fan in His hand, and

purge His

floor.

granary; the chaff is

He

shall

burn

shall

thoroughly

shall store in

His

in everlasting fire."

John the Baptist announces in these an Apocalyptic Messiah who pronounces judg-

The personage words

He

The wheat He

He

fire.

that

aWellhausen, Einlfitung in die drti ersten Evangchen, 1911.

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY ment, and

it is

view of

in

this

75

judgment that repentance

administered. Jesus had preached and baptism been in contact with John the Baptist. His first sermon, as it is given by Mark (i. 15) and Matthew almost word for word identical with that (iv. 17) is is

is

of John (Matt. iii. 2). Christian tradition, so jealous to maintain the originality and the independence of have arbitrarily imagined Him as Jesus, would not it only merely reechoing the teaching of one in whom

saw

a forerunner.

even in point upon which Christian teaching, the from itself of lifetime Bapthe Jesus, separated

The

teaching is of capital importance. While for John and his followers "He who is to come" (Matt. xi. 3 the Son of man (the idea, if not and Luke vii. 19) belongs the word, is at the heart of John's thought)

tist's

to the future, for the Christians He has come, although He may not have had all the attributes of power. The fourth Gospel clearly shows this contrast in the

John was not the light (i. 8), and makes him declare that he was not the Christ (i. 20),

way

affirms that

it

while light

it

states,

(i.

9,

the divine iii.

1

iii.

not 19,

Logos

less categorically, that

(i.

is

Jesus

the

12, 46), and that He is 14), the Son of God (i. 18 and xii.

viii.

6, xx. 31, etc.), the Christ (xi. 27, xx.

34, Reitzenstein

68

31). has extracted from Mandaean writ-

an Apocalypse which appears to him slightly 65 e4 and which he believes to to the year 70, posterior ings

68

Reitzen8tem,

Das Mandaische Buck des Herrn der Gross und

der Evangelienuberheferung. 64 It

is

markedly

known

that

syncretist,

disciples. 65 This date should

is

the

Mandaean

related

to

religion,

the

whose character

tradition

of

the

is

Baptist's

be received with reservations. See those stated

THE NAZARENE John's disciples. A passage

JESUS

76

from

originate

of this

Apocalypse presents at once an analogy and a striking contrast with the reply of Jesus to the messengers of John, who asked "Art thou He who should come, or do we look for another?" "Go," declares Jesus, "and tell unto John that which ye see and hear; the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the :

deaf hear, the dead are raised, and to the poor the In gospel is preached" (Matt. xi. 4, 5 Luke vii. 22). other words, the Messianic program of Isaiah (xxxv. ;

5)

is fulfilled.

In the Mandaean Apocalypse the same program is announced as destined to be fulfilled by the expected

Messiah

:

"Enoch Uthra

enters into Jerusalem clothed

with clouds; he walks in bodily form, but he has no

[Pilate].

He

comes in the years of Paltus Enoch Uthra comes into the world with the

material clothing.

power of the great king of

light.

He

heals the sick,

he causes the blind to see, he cleanses the lepers, he he causes the imstraightens those who are bowed, to speak. With the potent to walk and the dumb the power of the great king of light he brings back dead to life. Among the Jews he wins over believers

and shows unto them there is life, and there is death, there is error and there is truth. He converts the Jews in the name of the great king of light. Three hundred and sixty prophets go out from Jerusalem; they testithe Lord of might. Enoch Uthra fy in the name of ascends on high, and places himself near unto Meshume Kushtra. All the Uthras are hid from the eyes by M, Loisy.

From our

Apocalypse reflects hardly contestable.

the

that the present point of view, it suffices ideas of John the Baptist, which seems

A PRE-CHRISTIANITY

77

of men. Then shall Jerusalem be laid waste. The Jews shall go forth into exile, and shall be dispersed in all cities."

thus presented this text does not appear to be homogeneous it must have been, in certain points, influenced by Christian tradition. It suffices, however, to show that the disciples of John taught as necessary

As

;

to be fulfilled by the Apocalyptic Messiah the program that the Christians said had been accomplished

by Jesus. the great difference between the ideas of For the John the Baptist and those of the Christians. in the is future; first named the coming of the Messiah

Here

is

for the second

it

is

in the past,

The

and only His second

is a capital one, expected. coming movements were two if the that to and suffices prove be reduced to cannot born on the same soil the second the first, but appears with reference to it, as though it were an original creation.

is

difference

CHAPTER

IV

OBJECTIONS TO THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS

TWO PRELIMINARY THE

I.

FROM

POLEMICS OF THE OPPONENTS OF CHRISTIANITY

the earliest period of its existence Christianity on the part object of the liveliest attacks, both

was an of in

at

Jew and pagan, in Jerusalem and Palestine, as also the Greco-Roman world through which it spread an early date.

We

are familiar enough with the anti-Christian that polemics from the second to the fourth century; of Lucian by the witticisms of De morte Peregrini; that of Celsus (in his True Discourse, composed in the

makes from year 180) by the quotations which Origen * of and unknown the of that Porphyry it philosopher (233-304) by the refutation of Macarius of Mag;

nesia (about 410) that of Julian the Apostate (33163) by the refutation of Cyril of Alexandria. By means of the various apologies of the second century ;

(those of Justin Martyr, Tatien, Aristides), and by the dialogues of Justin with the Jew Tryphon, we can of the doctrines which gain a fairly accurate conception in the course of the Christians the to were opposed

second century. Just as there was an apologetic tradition, so was there a polemical one. They are always *In

his

Contra Celsum, written about 348. Concerning this work its refutation by Origen consult Neumann and De

of Celsus and

THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS

79

more or less the pens from flow which of ability and penetration, of the opponents of Christianity.

the

same

critical ideas,

characterized with

The pagan

polemic did not present a physiognomy very different from that of the Jews. One philosopher, Celsus, sought in the Jewish arsenal for weapons to 2 wield against Christianity. For everything which concerned evangelical history the discussion had to depend Christian tradition. It was upon the ground of

upon

the Gospels that the opponents of Christianity took their position. They called attention to the lack of

up

culture of the evangelists, pointed out in their narra-

and improbabilities, but they never stigmatized them as purely and simply 8 fictions. They only attempted to give to the story of from it the Jesus an interpretation which eliminated miraculous and the supernatural they did not contest tives incoherences, contradictions,

;

4

its

veracity.

not possible to extend to the first the period century the conclusion which holds for it Is it. not, however, improbable that which followed the disputants of the second century would have nean efficient weapon which they found had been

Doubtless

it

is

glected

used by their predecessors? Already, from this point of view, there are strong presumptions that the nonhistorical thesis was not supported in the primitive period. Bauer gives a table 2 This has been well shown by W. Bauer. and pagan opponents showing the life of Jesus according to Jewish This table shows the fundamental agreement of of Christianity. the

two

sides.

Bauer, Das Leben Jesu, etc. Tubingen, 1909. Cacilius *Lucian, De morte Peregnm, Celsus (in Origen's work); a man punished with with Christians worshiping the reproaches 8

death.

8o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

M. Salomon Reinach thinks that of the

first

century in

which the

if

we have no work

historical character

5 of Jesus is questioned, the reason is that if such very subversive documents had existed the Church would 6 not have permitted them to survive. It may be ad-

mitted that the Church would have eliminated them

from the canonical books and from orthodox literature, but to that,

have

and

it is

not easy to see

in a its

more general way power was limited

how

the Church

succeeded in completely prohibiting

would

them. If the

not striking that all the polemical literature of Jews and pagans has been preserved for us by Christian apolohow would the central question of the existence ?

work of Lucian we know about

is

is it

excepted

gists

of Jesus have been treated otherwise than for other controverted questions? Would not opponents have made capital out of this attitude, which would have

avowal? Although no polemical antiChristian document belonging to the first century has come down to us, it is possible to form an idea of been

its

an

quality

Christian

four

the

by the

influence

tradition.

evangelists

The

exerted upon comparative study of

which

shows

that

it

solicitude

for

which most diapologetics was one of the factors which they were rectly influenced the form into cast.

7

be otherwise, for the Gospels were not written to satisfy the curiosity of historians, but to It could not

combated in Exception is made of opponents whom Ignatius shall return to this passage the Epistle to the Philadelphians. when treating of Docetism 6 S. Reinach, Questions sur le Docetisme. * de la primitive Eglise; Urchristlicht

We

Baldensperger, L'apologetique Apologit.

THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS

81

and to strengthen the convic8 won. tions of those already gain

men

to the faith

therefore had to present the facts in the likely to answer the objections of opponents in advance. Now in none of the four Gospels is there to be found anything which directly or indithat the person rectly is directed against the thesis

The editors way the most

are in several Jesus had no historical reality. There accounts of apparitions, remarks to emphasize the but never reality of the body of Jesus, resurrected?

does any evangelist feel the need to affirm the reality of the body of Jesus during His ministry. This is because they were not engaged with opponents who denied

it.

The importance of this was on the morrow of His

fact

birth

is

considerable, for

it

that Christianity was

confronted with Jewish opposition.

How is

it

possible

to suppose that the first antagonists of the Church could have been ignorant of the fact that the entire

His teaching, and His death correno reality at all? That it might have been

story of Jesus,

sponded to

but it apignored in the Diaspora may be admitted, if such a thing and at Jerusalem; pears impossible had been known, how did the opponents of Christicome to neglect the use of so terrible an arguanity

ment, or how, supposing they made use of it, does it happen that the Christians succeeded in so completely them that not a trace of the controversy has refuting

been

preserved

by

the

disputants

of

the

second

century? This is evident from the express declaration of Luke and John (xx. 31). Luke xxiv. 39-4*; J onn *

(i.

4)

JESUS

82

THE NAZARENE

argument the opponents of the historical thesis may be tempted to rejoin that no decisive case can be based upon our Gospels, since under the most favorable hypothesis the oldest among them Against

this

than forty years after the events which they relate or are supposed to relate. In a period of intense religious ferment, forty years suffice for exact memories to disappear or undergo profound

was not compiled

less

transformation, or for the birth of a legend ready made. But our Gospels are not the first narrations which saw the light; and before their compilation had there existed an oral tradition capable of pre-

begun

serving the facts with remarkable fidelity. pel tradition in its essential elements goes

The Gosmuch far-

ther back than the compilation of the first written shall attempt in a later chapter to prove Gospels. that the theology of Paul implies this fact.

We

II.

DOCETISM

the opinion of those who believed that in the person of Jesus the human element was only an appearance. Such as we find this belief, for instance

Docetism

is

iM

Hubert Pcrnot (Etudes de literature grecque moderne) has quoted a very curious case of the fidelity of oral tradition. It "In 1890," writes M. refers to a Cretan poem (La Belle Bergere) withPernot, "an inhabitant of Chio, Constantine Kaneallakis, gave, out knowing its ancient origin, a version of it, which is a guarantee of authenticity so complete that I supposed it to be a revised copy of one of the Venetian editions, until one day this conscientious worker told me that he had picked it up at Nenita, his native village,

being

The women of middle life old peasant woman in these places, the latter had only been able poem read. This is a characteristic example of the

from an

all

illiterate

to hear the

whose memory has not yet astonishing facility with which people, are capable of retaining use of the writing, by works of considerable length."

been enfeebled

THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS in

Marcion and

many

in

second-century

83

Gnostics,

Docetism is not an affirmation of historical order: it is an interpretation of the history on which the Chris-

was based. Among the second-century theothe first century, there are logians, and even those of found side by side these two theses Jesus is a man and He is God. Herein was presented a problem for tian faith

:

How

define in the person of the Christian thought: Christ the relation between the human element and

diverse attempts were made in ancient Christianity to solve this problem up to the time when the orthodox doctrine was fixed. There

the divine?

The most

were attempts which sacrificed one of the terms of the a mere man problem, either in making of the Christ raised to the heavens by His resurrection, or, on the in Him to but a contrary, by reducing the humanity mere appearance. That which the Docetists of the second century denied, was not that the story narrated by the evangelists but that the humanity of the person to whom the story referred was anything more than a mere ap-

was

real,

11

pearance or a garment worn by a divine Being. Docetism is a theological opinion; it is not an historical affirmation.

12

particularly the character of Marcion's systhat deep and daring thinker who in the first tem, half of the second century gave, concerning the Chris-

Such

is

18

11

Justin,

De

resurrection,

ii;

Tractatus Ongensis, Origen, Contra

Celsum, ii, 16 12 Concerning the character of Docetism, see Harnack, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichtc 18 Concerning the Doceticism of Marcion, see De Faye, Gnostiques et Gnosticisme; also Harnack, Marcion, Das Evangehum vom frem-

den Gott.

JESUS

84

THE NAZARENE

which he sought to free from every link with so fertile, Judaism, an interpretation so original and the of apostle and which Harnack compares to those tianity

Paul and St. Augustine. In Marcion's view Christ had not been begotten He had nothing of the human about Him; He was and remains a Spirit. He appeared in human form (in hominis forma) His body was but ;

;

It is necessary to conceive Him as an appearance. like the angels who appeared to Abraham, who ate and 14

"

drank and performed all the actions of human life Christ of (Gen. xviii. 2-8). Harnack writes: "The Marcion is a God who appears in human form, feels, acts and suffers like a man, although the identification with a carnal body, naturally begotten, is in His case assert merely an appearance. It is incorrect, then, to not did Christ suffer, and that according to Marcion His adonly died in appearance. This is the opinion

He only predicated ie flesh of Christ." of the appearance to the substance Marcion was so far from denying the Gospel history

versaries attributed to

Him, but

that he accepted a Gospel (that of Luke) which he had only purged of what he considered Judaising addihis ideas, particularly in of the birth of Jesus and in narration the suppressing 'making His history begin at the baptism. tions.

This he adapted to

Cerinthe also believed that Christ was time of baponly united with the man Jesus at the of the tism, and separated from Him at the time

The Gnostic

Passion, so that Christ Himself

"Irenaeiis, 15

Adv. .Ear., Hi, 16, i. Adv. Marciontm, hi,

Tertullian,

"Harnack, Marcion. 17 Irenaeus, Adv. Har.>

i,

26.

9.

had not

I

17

suffered/"

THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS This solicitude to preserve the

full divinity

8$

of Christ

by discarding the idea of suffering gave rise to rather strange interpretations of the story of the Passion. 18 taught Irenaeus, for instance, states that Basilides that Simon of Cyrene not only carried the cross of substituted for Jesus, but that he had been miraculously

the latter, been crucified in His stead, while Jesus, lost in the crowd, looked on, laughing at the punishment 19 In the A eta Johannis (Chap, xcvii) of his double. there may be read how at the moment of the crucifixion

and said to Jesus appeared unto John, who had fled, him: "John, for the people who are there, at Jerusalem, I am crucified; I am pierced with thrusts of have vinegar and honey to drink, but to thee I speak; harken to what I tell thee." All these legends do not deny the story of the Passion; they develop upon the basis of the Gospel tradition an interpretation

lance, I

of the facts which eliminates the idea of the suffering and the death of a God. If such was the Docetism of the second century, it

would be surprising if there had been previously a Docetism of an entirely different character. That Docetism is met with at the beginning of the second room to doubt. century, and perhaps earlier, there is no

Jerome

attests its high antiquity

blood of Christ was

still

when he

fresh

says that the

in Judea,

and the

Clement 18 DC Faye (Gnostiques ft Gnostictsmc) thinks that if of Alexandria had known of this theory of Basilides, he would not have failed to attack it, and for this reason it should be only attributed to later adepts of the sect. iIf one may judge by the formula of abjuration imposed upon them, the Manicheans seem to have had the same opinion (Kessler). is found, according to Photius, in the "Acts of The same

thing

John" (Leucius Charinus). that it was Judas who was

There

is

also

a legend which has

it

crucified in the place of Jesus (Liepsius).

86

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

apostles were still living when to affirm that the body of the

men

could be found

Lord was merely

a

20

phantom. M. Loisy has with

justice pointed out, as is shown in the context, that there is in the passage from St.

Jerome an oratorical exaggeration in which hyperbole and inaccuracy abound. The phrase about the blood of Christ has no more significance than the statement concerning the apostles. As regards the latter, its sole in origin is in the fact that Docetism was combated the Johannine Epistles (i, iv. 2 and 2, 7). The formula in the first Epistle of John about the confession of Jesus Christ having come in the flesh (i, iv. 2)

to which

not sufficiently precise to enable the thesis This might is opposed to be reconstructed.

is

it

just as well

have been a negation of the Messianic

character of the personality of Jesus as of the reality or His body. It is doubtless in the second sense that

be intertestimony of the Johannine Epistle should more precise, preted, because of an analogous, although of in the Ignatius. The Epistles controversy found 'the

facts Bishop of Antioch insists upon the reality of the to it suffices this show To of the Gospel history. quote

a passage

from the Epistle

It refers to Jesus Christ, ten,

who had

to the Christians of Tralles.

"who had

eaten and drunk,

really been begot-

who had

really been

and put to judged under Pontius Pilate, really crucified who had really been raised from the death .

.

.

And

Ignatius in his next chapter formally opstated to those of the unbeposes the opinion thus He only appeared to suflievers, who maintained that

dead."

o

Jerome, Adv. Lvciferum, 23.

THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS

87

21

The Docetism attacked by Ignatius may have with Judaising tendencies combated in associated been 22 The evidence of Jerome on the Philadelphians ix. i. fer.

Palestinian origin of Docetism

is

favorable to this

in-

terpretation. 28 Docetism According to M. Salomon Reinach, far older than Ignatius already it is found attacked

is

in

;

the Gospels, particularly in the episode concerning Simon of Cyrene, who at the time when Jesus was led to Calvary was forced by the soldiers to carry the xv. 21

Matt,

xxvii.

32; Luke

xxiii.

26). alone states that this Simon was the father of 24 In Reinach's view the hisAlexander and Rufus. torical character of this episode is inadmissible, in the cross

(Mark

;

Mark

of any requisiplace because there is no instance the object, and was Simon which of that tion similar to in the next place because the condemned was obliged to first

because the carry the patibulum himself, and lastly 21

Cp Eph.

vn. 18;

said that Jesus, pain.

Smyrn.

i,

2; Polycarpe, Phil., vh, p.

also found in the Gospel of Peter, when crucified, kept silent, as though

trace of Docetism

M. Reinach

is

He

A

i.

where

it

felt

is

no

(Source bibhque du docetisme) has with justice passage in Isa. 1. 7:

proposed to seek the origin of this idea in the face like unto a rock." "I have made

my

admitted, for instance, by W. Bauer (Die Brief e des Ignatius von Antioch, etc.)* 28 Reinach, Simon de Cyrene. The criticism of Reinach by Loisy should be read (Revue d'Histoire et de literature religieuses> 1913). Some authors, 24 This episode is not found in the fourth Gospel. such as Jean R6ville (Quatrieme toangile), consider that the evan22

This

gelist

is

has omitted

it

in the

interest

of anti-Docetism

;

others,

like

Holtzmann-Bauer, believe that he was influenced by the words of or by the story of Jesus on the necessity of carrying one's cross,

The for the burnt-offering. Isaac, who himself carried the wood fact that John has allowed other details of the Passion to be of the narrapassed over leads us to consider it a simplification The incito concentrate all attention upon Jesu. tive,

designed

wanting also in the Gospel of Peter. au N.T., ii.)

dent

is

(M. Goguel, Introd.

JESUS

88

THE NAZARENE

only the illustration of the words of "Whosoever will come after Me, let him take

whole episode Jesus, up his cross

arguments

is

None

and follow Me."

is

of these three

requisition of Simon the in it one certainly not legal one must see

convincing.

The

Cyrenian was of the thousand daily annoyances the Romans did not hesitate to inflict on the Jews. It must not be explained by the compassion that Jesus would have inspired in ;

the soldiers, but by the physical impossibility for Him, after flagellation, to carry the cross. Lastly, it is inconceivable that the episode should have been sug-

of carrygested by words in which it is a question not cross. ing Jesus' cross, but one's own There is therefore no reason to recognize in the

account the remains of a tradition analogous to the the conception of the Gnostic Docetists concerning crucifixion of

substituted Jesus for Simon, is

If the evangelist

Simon of Cyrene.

not comprehensible

who

why they

really

was

had

crucified, it

should not have pushed

the substitution to the end, but instead have preserved the details of the carrying of the cross by Simon. As for the names Alexander and Rufus, which are

Mark, these are generally explained by these persons must have been known in saying that the community in which the second Gospel was comfound only

in

25

posed.

Matthew and Luke

neglected this detail, which had or their readers. M. Reinach,

no interest for them on the contrary, considers that the names Alexander and Rufus were added afterwards in Mark because of a tradition which represented them as associates of 28 This community was probably Roman. an N.T., L)

(Sec

M. Goguel,

Introd.

THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS Peter.

26

But

this tradition

is

89

only supported by a text

"The Acts of Peter and Andrew"

of very recent date,

;

Alexander and Rufus had been persons suffito make it worth while to invoke their known ciently testimony (which, moreover, is only done in Mark in a very indirect way), it would not be intelligible that their names should have been omitted in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. It is not legitimate, therefore, to dispute the authenticity of the incident of Simon

and

if

carrying the cross of Jesus. The system which boldly dates back to the period which preceded the composition of the Gospels a form of Docetism for which Irenaeus is the first wit-

and claims to explain the origin of the episode as a reaction against it, must be considered Simon of

ness

an arbitrary construction. The conclusion to which we are thus led is that there is no evidence for the existence of Docetism older than is to be found in the Epistles of

John and

The Docetism

Ignatius.

at the beginning of the second cenarisen from the same beliefs which

tury must have Docetism. It is necesinspired the theories of Gnostic not a negation of the Gossary, therefore, to see in it,

which in no pel history, but an attempt to interpret it, of the degree compromises the transcendent character Saviour by representing Him as accomplishing His work on humanity without partaking of the frailty

of

human

nature.

A different

interpretation has been proposed by 27

M.

Docetism an attempt

Salomon Reinach, who to reconcile the Christian affirmations about Christ *

Reinach.

ST

M., Question* sur

finds in

.

It

docetisme (Revue Moaerniste).

9o

JESUS

with a Jewish

THE NAZARENE

"X" who

is

the negation of the whole

Gospel history.

The

Christians, incapable of opposing to this negation positive proofs based upon authentic documents, a Bereplied that Jesus was a kind of divine phantom, had ing ethereal and entirely spiritual, that human eyes seen,

and whose voice human ears had heard, but who

could not be touched.

To

M.

28

rightly objects that the to the answer Jewish negation would have been without efficacy, since the Jews denied precisely that this

theory

Couissin

which the Docetists affirmed, namely that Jesus had been seen and heard, either as an illusion or otherwise. M. Loisy observes that the answer of the Docetists 1'

would have been a "masterpiece of human stupidity, and that "we are here in the domain of pure phantasy, of stark improbability, of conjecture based upon nothing."

Indeed, the question discussed by the Docetists was not whether there had lived a man in the time of who acted, suffered and died, but Pilate named Jesus,

the problem was to determine the nature of His mani29 thinks he finds festation. Here it is that M. Reinach his of in favor theory in the a decisive

argument

to the Philadelphians. Epistle of Ignatius

80

"I have

heard certain men say," writes Ignatius, "if I do not find (a certain thing) in the archives, I do not believe And as I replied to them It is written in the :

Gospel. answered: (in the Old Testament), they 28 P. L. Couissin,

Quelques reflexions sur la

lettre

That de

M.

is

the

Reinach,

Revue Modernutc, reproduced by Reinach. Reinach, St. Ignace et le Docetume. M. Reinach's translation is given. The text of the passage is not certain. For basis of discussion we accept that of M. Reinach. 29

THE NONHISTORICAL THESIS

91

But for me the archives are Jesus cross, His death, His resurrection, and which comes from Him."

very question.' Christ,

His

the faith

generally understood that Ignatius in this passage replies to those who demanded proofs drawn from the Old Testament before they accepted the affirmaIt

is

tions of the Christian faith.

proofs exist, and he appeals to what

He

declares that these

as his adversaries dispute their value, is

for

him the supreme demonstra-

tion, Jesus Christ. In M. Reinach's view the archives referred to in the first part of the phrase are those of Csesarea, the capital of Palestine. Ignatius had to deal

which, demanding documents concerning the terrestrial life of Jesus, and seeking these vainly among the archives, annoyed Ignatius with These critics are also aimed at in its negations.'

with "a

critical school,

1

that the

prince Ephesians (xix) where Ignatius says the of either no had of this world virginity knowledge of Mary or of the death of the Lord. If this critical school of Antioch had existed, it would be inexplicable that its arguments have not been used by later controversialists. But that is not

again

all.

If the

word "archives" can be

to the archives of Caesarea,

it

rigorously applied holds none the less that

the demands of his opIgnatius thinks he replies to referred to are atfacts the that ponents in proving tested by the

Old Testament, for the words

"It is

written" cannot, as M. Reinach recognizes, refer to His opponents anything except the Old Testament.

do not deny that the proof offered by Ignatius, if it were really furnished, would be convincing. They only doubt that it is really given. If they had insisted on documents from archives, why should they have been

JESUS

92

THE NAZARENE

able to content themselves

with scriptural proofs?

There must be some correspondence between the demand and the answer. If Ignatius were dealing with the Gospel persons requiring documentary proofs of should he not have attempted to give them? In ignoring the question he would have given his opponents a manifest proof of feebleness. It apnot the Docepears, as M. Loisy admits, that it was tists, but the Judaising Christians who, while admitting history,

why

in their generality the evangelical facts, disputed the

The coninterpretation that Ignatius gave of them. DoceThe : clear is therefore reach clusion we quite tists did not contest the Gospel history. They were the notion to Christian idealists, attached above all of the divinity of Christ and the celestial character of His person, who attempted to give it an interpretation harmonizing with their ideas. So understood, Docetism was only able to develop in the soil of evangelical tradition. If the Docetists had had the slightest reason to think that Christ was no more than an ideal not have person without historical reality, they would

an interexpended such treasures of ingenuity to give off completely Him cut which His of story pretation from too intimate contact with humanity. The Docetists

thus appear as witness to Gospel tradition.

CHAPTER V

THE APOSTLE PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION I.

THE

EPISTLES OF

PAUL 1

canon of Muratori, a Roman document of the second half of the second century, states that what the apostle Paul wrote to the Christians of a particular church is meant for all (omnibus dicit). This is the

THE

conception which

inspired

the

canonization of the

and which has prevailed, but it was certainly not with the idea that his letters would become elements of a sacred collection that the apostle wrote Epistles,

them. It is only by a kind of transposition at times not without prejudice to their true spirit that these sensitive letters, which spring spontaneously from a and enthusiasms whose indignaemotions, personality, into been tion they reveal, have encyclicals or changed of a dogmatic treatises and interpreted in the style code.

Deissmann has maintained that

it

is

a radical mis-

We

consider the letters of Paul as authentic with the exception of that to the Ephesians and the Pastorals (i and 2 Tim. and This conception, generally admitted to-day, will be vinTitus). The majority of those dicated in Book IV of our Introduction. who deny the historical character of Jesus repudiate the testimony

of Paul's Epistles. M. Couchoud is the sole exception. The position of Drews is uncertain. Nevertheless, he takes some account of their testimony not, it is true, without dismissing (as interpolated) certain important texts, such as i Cor. xi. 33 et seq. (See Die Chris-

tutmytht,

i,

p. iai,

by Drews.) 93

JESUS

94

THE NAZARENE

take to consider the Epistles of Paul as literary works, for they were only written as substitutes for conversations which distance rendered impossible. They are

not in the technical sense of the word "Epistles" that is, works which in an epistolary form are intended for a larger public in time and space than those to are addressed, and treat of questions which or a might just as well be the object of a dissertation book. To thoroughly understand the Epistles of Paul it is necessary to forget the halo which for eighteen centuries has surrounded them, but which, while gloridistorts them. They are writings adapted to

whom they

fying,

circumstances, improvised hastily between two jourafter a day devoted to neys, dictated in the evening manual work or to preaching, to meet some unfore-

seen circumstance, to solve some difficulty, to give instruction or warning, or to prevent a misunderstandanswers to some complex situaing. Each one of them disappeared, the main reason for which, tion,

having

existence has disappeared also. Further, there apon the part of the pears no trace of any custom its

churches of the apostolic age of regularly reading the were communicated to the Epistles of Paul. They

assembly when they were received perhaps they were read again as it happened, so long as the question which had dictated their composition was not settled, but afterwards they were simply preserved in the archives, and that, it appears, with but little care. ;

of these letters have disappeared, and among those preserved to us several seem to have undergone various alterations. When in Thessalonians (i, v. the Lord 27) Paul writes, "I charge you in the name of be read unto all the Brethren," he that this

Many

epistle

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

95

merely requests that all may be informed of his mesTo the sage, and in no wise thinks of a second reading. read is Colossians Paul writes: "When this letter among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that ye likewise read the epistle

from the Laodiceans" (Col. iv. 16). The apostle is so far from the idea of a regular reading that he speaks of the dispatch, not of a copy, but of the original itself. There is nothing more unsound than to see in the Pauline Epistles theological treatises. Therefore complete of the faith or system of thought of the expositions

for those apostle must not be sought in them. Written stress his received had upon who teaching, they lay what these knew, and proceed very often by allusions to

persons what he had taught and the

The fundamental

dition of Christianity.

common

tra-

doctrines are

not more systematically treated than the facts upon rest. The initiates to whom they were ad-

which they

knew

dressed

both, and

had no need

them

to have

recalled.

PAUL, BEFORE His CONVERSION, A WITNESS TO THE CROSS

IL

Through viii.

1-3,

tive of iii.

6),

book of Acts (vii. 58, narraand particularly through the 2),

the narratives in the

ix. i,

Cor. xv. 9 Gal. i. 13, 23 Phil, that before his conversion Paul was a

Paul himself

we know

(

i

;

;

bitter persecutor of the Christians. It

is

scarcely prob-

able that the future apostle ever saw Jesus Himself, in spite of the passage in which he says: "If even we

have known Christ after the

more" (2 Cor.

v.

16).

flesh,

we know Him no

The words

"after the flesh"

JESUS

96

may

THE NAZARENE

as well belong to

"we know Him no more"

as to

"Christ." It is therefore possible to understand this as "we have known Jesus during His earthly life," or "we have had a carnal and Judaic conception of the

Messiah." tions

is

Even

if

the

to be preferred,

of these two interpretaaccount must be taken of the first

Paul hypothetical element contained in the phrase. to a appears to allude, in order to contest its value, boasted. of which certain of his opponents

privilege

In this passage merely an hypothesis is outlined. It must be added that if Paul had known Jesus he would have been among His enemies. Why should he who accuses himself of persecuting the disciples not have 2 said that he had fought against the Master Himself?

period which immediately followed the drama of Calvary that Paul must have come into 8 contact with Christianity. Even if it be supposed that It

was

in the

the disciples of Jesus had only seen in Him, during His to hold ministry, a prophet or a doctor, it is impossible

that after the Passion they remained grouped together in His name without attributing to His personality a quite peculiar value. 2

Among

name

the critics

who

Sabatier, Joh Weiss,

They must have been

led to see

believe that Paul had seen Jesus

Machen.

Renan, Wellhausen, Feme, Prat.

The

opposite opinion

Some few

is

we may held by

writers, like Pfleiderer,

consider the question insoluble (Das Urchnstenttsm). 8 The time when Paul came into contact with Christianity cannot consider that Jesus must have be very much after the Passion died at Easter, in the year 28, and that the conversion of Paul must be placed at the end of 29 Concerning the fixing of these two dates see my works Essai sur la Chronologic Paulintenne and

We

Notes d'histoire evangehgue' Le probltme Chronologique. While I have followed, pursuing an entirely different method from that or 28 and the in of death the ends 27 Jesus by putting Meyer conversion of Paul in 28 or 29.

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION in

His death the

97

by God do not know how

realization of a plan conceived

for the salvation of humanity.

We

far Christology had developed before the conversion of Paul. It suffices to explain his sentiments and the attitude which they imposed upon him to know that

the Christians continued to invoke Jesus, and to consider

Him

Law.

He

from God. to give him the name by which he Saul of Tarsus seems to have been known in the Jewish world was then a young Rabbi, full of fanaticism and zeal for the as one sent

must have been profoundly scandalized by men who proclaimed themselves disof a madman whose pretensions had been con-

the attitude of ciples

demned by the Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish tribunal, and who had perished at the hands of the Roman aucharacterized by the phrase he was to employ later on: "Christ crucified, a, scandal to the Jews" ( i Cor. i. 23 ; cp. Gal. v. 1 1 ) It as a missionary to epitomizes at once his experiences the Jews and his personal feelings before he was yet a Christian. His thought was dominated by the princithorities.

The

attitude of Paul

is

.

ple of the

Law, which he

recalls in his Epistle to the

everyone that hangeth on a tree" In permitting (Gal. iii. 13; cp. with Deut. xxi. 23). Him to die this infamous death, God Himself had pro-

Galatians, "Cursed

is

nounced against Jesus, and declared

Him

accursed.

Those therefore who declared that this accursed one was the Son of God, the promised Messiah of Israel, were guilty of an appalling blasphemy. Wellhausen has supposed that, taught wisdom by hatred, Paul from this time recognized in Christianity a doctrine whose development would ruin Judaism. To admit this would be to misunderstand Paul's fanaticism and

JESUS

98

THE NAZARENE

the depth of his faith in the destiny of Israel. It is that the still more rash to suppose, as does Pfleiderer, things which Paul knew and heard concerning Jesus exercised upon him a secret attraction, and that he was by the spectacle of the lives of the

impressed

Christians.

That would have been

the spur for

him to kick

which he would have wished against, the secret anxiety to silence by persecuting the Christians. That Paul, unknown to himself, may have been influenced by Chris4

Jewish period of his life is, a priori, very at all conscious of it appears plausible, but that he was less likely. The testimony which he gives of himself tianity in the

the persecutions directed by him not permit any doubt of against the Christians does the sincerity of his motives. The explanation of his attitude is more simple. Paul considered the Christians

when speaking of

and blasphemers and sacrilegious. Now blasphemy it which sins belonged sacrilege, in antiquity, were not alone to God to judge; they were crimes which exIn posed the nation to the risk of divine anger.

this

respect the judicial authorities had to take cognizance of them, and it was part of the duty of every one to aid them, and if need be to stimulate their zeal. An impor-

tant consequence flows from this fact; it is that the cross had dominated the period of Paul's antagonism to Christianity, just as later it was to dominate his

Christian thought. Paul the Christian

Paul the persecutor and not only thus appears to us as a witness to

*Acta xzvi. 14. If this detail is authentic, it is astonishing that is only met with in one of the three narratives in the Acts. Moreover, we do not believe that these narratives can be taken to be rigorously historical, although sometimes, and especially in recent times, their value has been too much depreciated. it

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

99

the cross, and this also within the few months which followed the day of its erection on Calvary. Here is a decisive objection against the doctrine that the entire Gospel history has been deduced from a theory or from a preexisting myth and, if the word is allowed, from the supernatural life of an ideal Christ of whom the experiences of Peter and the initial manifestations. primitive Christians were the

III.

PAUL AND THE UNITY OF PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANITY

Notwithstanding the opposition

(exaggerated by

the Tubingen school, nevertheless real) which existed between the apostle Paul and the Jerusalem Christians,

attached to Judaism and its traditional ritual than he was himself, there existed with-

who remained more

Christianity a fundamental unity. Paul conscious of it when summing up the essentials

in primitive

was

of Christian teaching. He said "Therefore whether it were I or they (the apostles at Jerusalem) so we preach and so ye believed" (i Cor. xv. n). Upon :

their side the Jerusalemites

had confirmed

this unity

in offering Paul the hand of fellowship and in recogto preach the nizing that he had received the mission

7-10). How is it possifundamental unity of Christianity if

gospel to the pagans (Gal. ble to explain this

ii.

to origin there only existed conceptions relating manifestations? His to an ideal Christ and spiritual Paul insists in the most formal way that his conversion

at

its

took place without direct contact with the Jerusalem church. He declares himself "Paul, an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ and

God

ioo

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

him from the dead" (Gal. i. to reconcile this absolute indeis it possible i ) . of Paul pendence of Christianity and the apostleship with the unity of primitive Christianity unless by the fact that the apostle recognized in the activity of the the Father,

who

raised

How

celestial Christ, to

whom

he attributed the birth of his

historfaith, the continuation and consequence of the ical ministry of Jesus to which the Christianity of the

Twelve and the Jerusalem church owed

IV.

THE BROTHERS

its

origin?

OF JESUS AND THE JERUSALEM APOSTLES

Before examining the testimony that the apostle Paul renders directly to the evangelical tradition, it will be convenient to point out two facts which prove is indeed a real human personthe apostle speaks incidentally occasions ality. of James and other brothers of the Lord (Gal. i. 19; In neither of these two passages is it I Cor. ix. 5).

that the Pauline Christ

On two

in an inadmissible possible unless the text be distorted 5 "brothers" any other inmanner, to give to the word to it in its natural terpretation than that which belongs 6 the in then were sense. There Jerusalem church (Paul knew it, and the churches of the Diaspora were not 5 There can be no reason to see in the phrase "brother of the Lord" the designation of an ecclesiastical function or title, first because it would be a conjecture resting upon no foundation, and to differentiate this secondly because it would not be possible function from the apostolate, with which, nevertheless, it could not

be identified. 6 there were given to the If, as is done by Catholic exegesis, brothers (sons of * phrase "brothers of Jesus" the meaning of half of Jesus, the force of premier marriage of Joseph) or of cousins our argument would not be seriously affected.

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

101

for being the brothers ignorant of it) men who passed flesh. the to of Jesus according How can this well-established fact be reconciled with the theory that the Christ preached by Paul was a 8 7 Drews, it is true, has mainpurely ideal personage? tained that the phrase "brother of the Lord" meant the simply member of the community, but to designate faithful the merely said "the brothers" or

apostle "the brethren in the Lord," and in the passages in which the brothers of Jesus are referred to Paul

names them besides other Christians, the apostles and these. In Cephas, and he does not confuse them with i

Cor.

ix. 5, in

particular,

it is

remarkable that Paul,

speaking of the wife that he might have, says quite of the Lord" simply "sister," while he says "brethren 9 concerning the persons to whom he compares himself. One other fact imposes a similar conclusion. Paul assimilates his apostleship entirely to that of the

in

difficulty, the recoghis of vocation the nition of by the Jerusalem validity church (Gal. ii. i-io). He connects his apostleship, like that of the Twelve, with an apparition of the risen

Twelve; he obtained, not without

but he must have been obliged to fight a hard and persevering battle to establish that he was in nothcalled the ing inferior to those whom in derision he The xii. xi. and Cor. latter, n). 5 archapostles (2 Christ,

10

or at any rate their partisans, must have maintained that Paul lacked a qualification of which his rivals could i

There

Mark

in

rii. 3-5;

is iii.

Acts

also

i

and Luke vai.

a reference to the brothers

31; Matt.

xii.

46, xiii. 55;

sisters

19;

of Jesus

John

14.

8

Drews, Die Christusmythe, 5, pp. 125-27. von Nazareth. 10 This follows by comparing z Cor. ix. z and Joh. Weiss, Jesus

z

Cor. xv.

8.

ii.

i,

102

JESUS

boast. It

THE NAZARENE

was impossible to question either the qualififrom the Judaic point of view (Phil,

cations of Paul

4-6; 2 Cor. xi. 21, 22) or his services to the cause of the Gospel and the sufferings accepted by him for 11 X 7) or * it (l Cor. xv. 10; 2 Cor. xi. 23-33; Gal the signs accomplished and visions obtained by him iii.

-

A

text in the epistle to the Gala(2 Cor. xii. 1-12). the nature of the objecunderstand to tians enables us tion raised against the Pauline apostleship. Concern12 "But of ing the apostles at Jerusalem Paul said: be somewhat to these who seemed (whatsoever they

were it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no for they who seemed to be somewhat man's person) in conference added nothing to me" (Gal. ii. 6). The qualification on which the Jerusalem apostles referred to prided themselves and which Paul lacked, of boast the past. The Twelve could having been Christians and apostles before Paul, but he in no wise attempted to hide the fact that he had formerly persecuted the church and that he was a late recruit for the 13 On the contrary, he boasted of it as someGospel. to be proud of (i Cor. xv. 8-10), because he

thing considered

it

a manifest proof of the intervention of

God What

in his life.

could this former qualification of which the than that they Jerusalem apostles boasted be, other the historical of associates and had been witnesses

" The

marks referred to in Gal. vi. 17 are in all probability the from blows received in the service of Christ. 12 There are three designations of the Jerusalem apostles employed

scars

in the Galatians, tion of the origin. 18 This

It

appears that Paul alludes to a current designawhich it is no longer possible to find the

apostles of

explains

why

in z

value in the fact of having

Cor. v.

known

16 Paul

Jesus.

seems

to

deny any

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION The

ministry of Jesus?

103

controversies between Paul

and Jerusalem apostles thus establish that the latter boasted of having been witnesses of the life of Jesus a fact which Paul did not contest.

V.

EXAMINATION OF TEXTS SUPPOSED TO CONTAIN ALLUSIONS TO A CHRIST MYTH

In the opening salutation of the Epistle to the Romans Paul speaks of "Christ Jesus, born of the seed of David according to the flesh, as God had announced in advance by the prophets in the holy scriptures"

(Rom. follows from

i.

2,

3).

In

M.

Couchoud's view

14

it

this passage that the human (or apwas not told, but reparently human) life of Jesus that and to vealed Paul, by prophecies. The fact that

the apostle thought he recognized concordance between the history of Jesus and certain prophecies does not that the history has been deduced from the

prove

15 But this is not all. Two announcements prophecy. one is the existence are made in the phrase before us from David. descent His asserts of Jesus, the other The Davidic origin asserted by Paul on the faith of

notion of prophecies gives Jesus a human lineage. The a have to the Davidic origin of Jesus appears theological source. The Gospels record no word of Jesus which

supports

it.

It is

merely implied

in certain episodes to

16 which no great importance can be attached.

The

"Couchoud, Le Mysore de Jhus, 15

We

p. 131. shall return in a later chapter to the relations

prophecy and evangelical

between the

history.

We

16 put aside two genealogies, which are, besides, not concordant, found in Matt. i. 1-16 and Luke iii. 23-38. Both presume the Davidic origin of Jesus, but they are recent elements of the

tradition wanting in

Mark.

JESUS

104

THE NAZARENE

blind man, Bartimeus, addressed Jesus once as "J csus Son of David," and on another occasion as "Son of

David," according to

Mark

(x.

47, 48)

and Luke

both occasions 39), while Matthew has on 17 of the entry narrative In the simply "Son of David." into Jerusalem, organized to fulfill the prophecy of Zechariah (ix. 9), the mention of David in the popular welcome does not occupy the same place in Mark (xi. (xviii. 38,

9) and

in

Matthew

(xxi. 9),

lacking in Luke any rate, to consider One single idea re-

and

at (xix. 38), which requires us, 18 its authenticity as not certain.

is

and that is, considvague manner as the ering Jesus in a Messiah, He was sometimes spoken of as the Son of David. But there is nothing to show that Jesus Himself accepted it, and still less that He claimed this title. On the contrary, in a remark whose authenticity is be-

mains from study of these

more or

19

yond

question,

texts,

less

of Jesus appears to oppose the notions

17 It is the same in the narrative of Matt, ix 27, which is only a variant of the story of Bartimeus. We do not attach much Canaanitish woman calls importance to Matt xv. 22, where the a comparison with Mark Jesus "Lord, Son of David," because ihows that there is only a literary development involved, nor of Matt. xii. 23, where Jesus, having cured a blind and dumb demoniac, some of the bystanders ask, "Is not this man the Son of David?" because this narrative is an editorial element which offers the starting

of possession brought point supposed by Mark of the accusation Jesus against 18 The text of Zechariah contains no allusion to a Davidic Messiah. 19 It is so because the text goes directly counter to the conception of a Davidic Messiah universally received in the Church since Paul. In the ancient Church only one exception can be found. It is 10), which is directly dependent on and dominated by the idea of a supernatural birth. It should also be pointed out that the fourth Gospel appears to know of the idea of the Davidic descent, but as an objection to the Messiahship of Jesus. It does not appear that the evangelist (who holds Jesus to be a Galilean) makes a reply to the objection (vii. 42).

in the Epistle of Barnabas (xii

our

text,

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

105

the Messiahship and the Davidic origin one against the other. In the Temple Jesus asks "How is it the scribes of David? David himself, say that Christ is the Son the Holy Spirit, says, The Lord said unto inspired by :

Lord, Sit Thou upon My right hand until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.' David himself calls Him his Lord how then can He be his son?" (Mark

my

xii.

35-37, Matt.

xxii.

In the context, as

41-46, Luke xx. 41-44). this question appears to

we read it,

be a subtle problem propounded by Jesus to the Scribes, and which they were not prepared to solve. It is to some extent an argument ad hominem. But it is doubt20 that of the opinion of some exegetists, have here only a flash of wit. The text has a wider It establishes an antinomy between the

ful, in spite

we

implication. true Messiahship that Jesus invoked and current notion of the Messiah,

and the popular 21 Son of David.

idea of the Davidic origin of Jesus has therefore a secondary character. It is a theological creation made

The

under the influence of prophecies and popular beliefs. This tends to restrict the affirmation concerning the if not excluprophecies in Rom. i. 2-3 principally, 1 the seed of David.' sively, to the words "born of The fact that, either by Paul or by others before

him, the notion of the Davidic origin had been introduced into Christology is not without importance. The

two Jewish Messianic conception oscillated between *Zahn

(Das Ev. des

Matthau*),

Wohlcnburg

(Das

Ev.

d.

Markus). 21 This

is admitted (with various reservations, varying according to their opinion concerning the question of the Messianic consciousKlostermann and ness of Jesus) by Wellhausen, Wrede, Loisy. Job. Weiss think the passage only criticizes the Jewish conception

of the Messiah.

inadequacy.

Lagrange thinks that Jesus only wishes

to

show

it*

io6

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

and celestial Messiah poles the idea of a transcendent the execute to to come with power judgments of God, and that of a human Messiah, a king of the race of :

David, for whom and by whom the national monarchy of Israel would be restored. The first conception is found specially in the books of Daniel and Enoch, the second in the Songs of Solomon. These two concep-

have sometimes been combined; they are conChurch. stantly so in the Christology of the primitive The two currents of the Messianic conception are none the less distinct. If the Jesus of the most primitive a purely Christianity and of Paul himself had been tions

Being with no connection with humanity except an external and unreal form, why should the apostle have contradicted himself in connecting his Messiah to a human lineage? In another passage M. Couchoud thinks he also understands the inner significance of the debt of Paul spiritual

and

celestial

to the prophecy of what is supposed to be an historical tradition. The reference is to the passage in which the apostle, summing up the essentials of Christian I delivered unto teaching, expresses himself thus : "For

how that all that which I also received the to sins our for Christ died Scriptures, according and that He was buried, and rose again the third day you

first

of

Then according to the Scriptures" (i Cor. xv. 3, 4). of follows an enumeration apparitions (xv. 3-8). In the opinion of M. Couchoud, the words "according 11 to the Scriptures mark the source of the knowledge. follows therefore from this passage that faith in and partly on the Jesus rests partly on the Scriptures is in faith The possible, but not the Jesus It

apparitions.

knowledge of Jesus implied

in this faith.

The

apostle

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

107

draws a parallel between "I have transmitted" and "I have received." which They are facts of the same class, therefore, lead us to suppose that the apostle presents himself as witness of a tradition. The teaching given and the be thus assimilated if on teaching received could not been had the one side there supernatural revelation or deduction, and on the other didactic teachexegetical

of the context confirms this first ing; the examination It may be admitted with reason that the impression.

the first rudiment of passage in question is, so to speak, It is of faith. a confession unnecessary to bring in the narrative of the visions, which belongs to the affirmation of the resurrection, and which in its amplitude contrasts with the brevity of the phrase preceding.

account of the apparitions is added to the epitome of the faith as a confirmation of the point on which Paul makes his entire argument depend. While three

The

facts are

named

in the

Pauline formula, the words "ac-

cording to the Scriptures" are only found twice in it, and these are with reference to two facts the death

which possess in Paul's thought a redemptive character. The words are wanting in in the respect of the burial, which has no importance

and the resurrection

Pauline theory of salvation, and which is only incidentally touched upon in the symbol of baptism (Rom. ii. 12). This proves that the formula the to Scriptures" has no bearing upon the "according knew facts, but upon their interpretation. What Paul

vi.

4 and Col.

but that Scriptures was not that Christ died, he when even died for our sins. Paul, persecuted

from the

He

the Christians,

knew

perfectly well that their

Master

was dead; he either did not knotf or refused to believe

JESUS

io8

He

THE NAZARENE

It was the Scriptures which, sins. of the living Christ in his certitude the once he had inner consciousness, enabled him to understand the

that

died for

meaning of

Christ's death.

Similarly, if Paul believed

in the resurrection, it was not because of the prophBeseen. ecies, but because of the apparition he had

he had read the prophecies long before he was a Christian, but he only discovered the resurrection when, in an entirely different way, the faith in the Christ still living, in spite of death, had developed sides,

within him.

M. Couchoud 22

can only see a mystical, almost the in idea Gnostic, passage of the Epistle to the Galatians, in which Paul says that in the fulfillment of

time iv.

His Son, born of a woman" (Gal. In his view there is no historical reference. alone, this text would constitute, in fact, but not even the short and insufficient biography not it does But of contain, at of a life Jesus.

"God had

4).

Taken a very outline

least, the idea

what

sent

of the historical

right besides

is

life

of Jesus?

And by

this affirmation isolated?

The

Galatians do not separate it from the teaching in which the apostle retraced the story of the crucifixion in so vivid a

manner that they had the

feeling of contem-

Paul does not plating it with their own eyes (iii. i). return to this part of his teaching because it was not contradicted by the missionaries of his opponents. Benot insides, the expression "born of a woman" was

He

from the Old Testais used to designate man under the The ordinary conditions of his birth and existence.

vented by Paul. 28 ment, where it

82 28

borrowed

Couchoud, op. cit.t p. 130. Job xi. 3-12, adv. i, rr. 14,

it

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

109

declaration of Galatians (iv. 4) would be unintelligible had not lived under the ordiif, in Paul's view, Jesus

nary conditions of humanity. very special importance attaches to the long pas-

A

in which, in a sage of the Epistle to the Philippians, way otherwise accidental, Paul epitomizes his whole thought concerning Christ and His work. The apostle

"

being in the form of God, thought it 24 not robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself and took upon Him the form of a of no writes

:

Who,

reputation,

servant,

and was made

in the likeness

of men.

And

humbled Himbeing found in fashion as a man, He the death even death self and became obedient unto of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him and given Him a name which is above every name. That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus is Lord, to the glory of the Father" (Phil.

ii.

5-1 1).

that in this passage is found the ancient epitome we possess of the story of Jesus. to him to include two elements firstly, the

M. Couchoud thinks most It

appears

descent of the divine Being into humanity and His death; and secondly, His ascension and glorification.

M. Couchoud this

considers that a less lyrical version of

myth, but one containing more

details,

is

found

in

24 Often translated "as a usurpation." This translation does not seem to us permissible, because it assumes His existence in its divine form was equal with God AUTHOR. Translator's Note.Modtrn English version, based on Westcott and Hort's text, reads: "Though the divine nature was Hi from the with God as above beginning, yet He did not look upon equality all

things to be clung to,"

etc.

i

JESUS

io

THE NAZARENE

the Ascension of Isaiah.

and carried

The prophet was

away from world

seventh heaven.

caught up world up to the

to

In this region he was a spectator of drama which will mark the end of

the mysterious time. God commands a Being who is called the WellBeloved, the Chosen One, or the Son, to descend through the seven heavens, the firmament, the air, and

the earth

down

to Sheol,

where

He

is

to bind the angel

of death. That His descent shall not be perceived by the angels inhabiting the successive worlds, the Son receives the power to take to Himself in each of them a form resembling that of the beings who dwell there-

His mission accomplished, the Son ascends, this time in His own form, up to the seventh heaven. While looking upon His glorious ascension the angels are astounded. They ask how the descent of the Son of God could have escaped their perception, and they in.

are obliged to glorify Him. The celestial Being then seats Himself at the right hand of the Supreme Glory.

There are two questions to be successively examined Is the passage from the Epistle to the Philipand is the myth it expians an Apocalyptic element, :

find in the Ascension presses quite identical to that we of the affinity bethesis the that of Isaiah? Seeing tween the Ascension of Isaiah and the Epistle of the

manner into Philippians only enters in a subordinate first of all shall we the reasoning of M. Couchoud, examine

this point.

What which we

is

the Ascension of Isaiah?

know it,

it is

a fairly complex

In the form in

whole

in

which

three principal portions are easily distinguished: of i. purely Jewish narrative of the martyrdom

A

the prophet Isaiah sawn asunder by order of

Manasseh

in

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

It appears once to have had and to have been known in an independent existence, 25 this form to Justin Martyr, Tertullian and Origen. 2. An Apocalyptic vision about Antichrist, the decadence of the Church, and the return of the Lord. In its present form this portion, whose Christian origin (i. i, 2,

12,

and

v.

1-16).

not doubtful, betrays a certain dependence as regards the Ascension, properly so called. It seems that this may be owing to editorial work, for the conception of the work of Christ found in the vision differs from is

that in the Ascension, and can neither be considered as the iv.

germ of

it

nor a development from

it

(ii.

13-

22). 3.

(vi.

The Ascension, i-n, 43), is the Isaiah

us.

was

in the exact sense

of the word

portion which specially interests away by an angel up to the

carried

seventh heaven; he received an explanation of the descent of the Well-Beloved from the higher heaven down to Sheol, whence He was to reascend to the

heaven.

The prophet

is

afterwards a witness of the

events which had been announced to him. The date of the compilation of the Ascension of

completeness as well as in each of the be determined with portions which constitute it, cannot almost Critics are absolute precision. agreed in conexact sense) cansidering that the Ascension (in the

Isaiah, in

its

not be older than the middle of the second century. It is even possible that it may be necessary to bring the date of its composition considerably later. The fact that Origen mentions the martyrdom as a Jewish book in its present proves that he did not know the Ascension 5

Justin, Dial.

c.

Tryphon; Tertullian, Scorpiace,

xiv; Origen, In. Matt., xxviii,

Comm.

viii,

De

in Matt., x. 18, etc.

patientia,

ii2

JESUS

form.

True, istence before

it

THE NAZARENE

might have had an independent

its

incorporation into the

book

as

ex-

we

The amount of Christian retouching which

read it. has undergone

eleventh chapter)

(especially the

it

is

favorable to this hypothesis. But even supposing the Ascension not anterior to the

middle of the second century, the ideas which are deInveloped in it might date back to an older period. deed, it appears necessary to distinguish in the Ascenthat concerning sion between a fundamental myth a Christian interand the descent of the celestial Being of two elements pretation given of it. This compound For inbook. the of explains certain peculiarities the Well-Beloved

stance,

receives

the

command

to

transform His image into that of the beings inhabiting various spheres of the universe, so that He may arrive without difficulty at Sheol, where He is to despoil the not pursue His angel of death (ix. 16), but He does be so expressed), it descent in a straight line (if may

and when

He

arrives

tervention of Satan

on earth

in

He has need of the inHe may reach Sheol.

2G

order that

Satan raises the jealousy of the Jews against Him, and 27 This causes them to put Him to death (xi. 19-2 1 ) in noted be is to elements of two dissimilar .

compound

another matter.

The triumph

attained through the

power Himself while traversing the

universe. 26

He

which

It is

of the Well-Beloved

He

is

receives to transform

different spheres of the

not stated that, having reached Sheol,

birth (xi 2-14), only attains to this through a supernatural an evident embellishment, and by which the narrative is

is

related to recent Apocryphal legends. 27 The incoherence betrays itself by an embellishment. In xi. 19 the Well-Beloved, crucified through the action of Satan, descends to die angel of SheoL In xi. 20 Isaiah sees Him hung on the cross.

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION He

113

battle with the angel of death.

It appears of the Chosen that the latter is incapable One, resisting and is conquered at the instant the Lord reaches Him.

wages

After

this victory the

Well-Beloved, recognized by

all

the angels, judges and annihilates the princes, angels and gods of this world and the world over which they

He

have dominion. at the right

hand of God

of the Chosen

One

This idea

sion.

is

sits down The triumph

ascends in glory, and (x.

12-15).

therefore attained by his ascenquite different from the Christian is

and anniconception, according to which the judgment hilation of the powers hostile to God is the work of Christ returning from the heavens to His second comto heaven after the ing, and not of the Lord ascending There is thus recognizable behind the resurrection. Christian interpretation which dominates the present form of the Ascension of Isaiah a myth of the reestablishment of the sovereignty of God by a divine being

descends into Sheol to despoil the angel of death, and afterwards ascends gloriously to the heavens. It that the myth may be older than Chrisis

who

possible 28

tianity. 28 It docs not appear to us that there is any direct contact between Outside the idea of the descent Paul and the Ascension of Isaiah of a celestial Being, which has a general character, and that of the ignorance of the angels, developed in both in very different but which are found ways, there are only two ideas in common, celestial of idea are the these and garments and that of elsewhere, the superposed spheres, or heavens. But Paul is only carried away Ascento the third and not to the seventh heaven, as Isaiah. In the Paul sion the five first heavens belong to the lower world, while has the feeling of having been carried away to a higher world. In Paul the revelation takes place by audition of ineffable words. Paul cannot In the Ascension it is by visions commented upon. what he heard. Isaiah relates his vision to Hczekiah and

repeat

to other prophets. viii.

14.)

(Compare 2 Cor.

r. a, xii. a,

and Aac,

iv.

16,

JESUS

ii 4

THE NAZARENE

a certain affinity between this myth and the idea dominating the Christological development of the Epistle to the Philippians, but while in Paul's Christ divests Himself of something, in the

There

is

thought Ascension of Isaiah He merely transforms Himself. The development of the Epistle to the Philippians cannot have been from the myth, because (the negative determination in which the development of the a proof of it) the work of Christ is in opposition to another myth, in Paul described by which there is recognizable the story of Satan, who desired to raise himself to supreme power and to claim for himself the adoration of men and angels, and who

myth begins

is

as a consequence of this rebellion must be annihilated. The correspondence between the work of Satan and

that of Christ ish

is

not, however, complete, since to

Jew-

thought the idea of an incarnation of Satan

was

unknown.

The

relation between the

myth of Satan and

the

drama as Paul conceives it is therefore not one of simple and direct dependence. Paul has a doctrine simply interpreted the story of Jesus by Christological

opposition to the Satanic myth. It would only be possible to see in the Christological of the Epistle to the Philippians the old-

formulated

in

development

form of the history of Jesus if this portion had been written to make the Church known to persons who had never heard it spoken of which is certainly est

not the case.

The

incidental

manner

in

which the development

even if we proceeds would alone suffice to prove it, to addressed did not already know that the Epistle is Christians to

whom

it

may perhaps be

necessary to ex-

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

115

of the work of Christ, but superplain the importance its fluous to rehearse Replaced in its historhistory. the text of Paul is an attempt to epitomize ical setting,

the history of Jesus in one grand drama of redemption. That it contains dogmatic elements or, if you prefer is undeniable, but these elements elements it,

mythical

do not make up the substance of the story they serve as comments on it, and supply the materials for the ;

speculative construction thus furnished.

erected upon the foundation

Attention must be called to an idea borrowed from

Judaism by Paul, and which in his eyes possesses capthat of preexistence. The conception ital importance of the preexistence of souls is found distinctly in certain 29

but more distinctly still that of the pre80 Paul affirms the preexexistence of the Messiah. istence of Christ not only when, in the Epistle to the

Jewish

texts,

15), he speaks of Christ's part in creation, but also when he uses such terms as the "man from heaven" (i Cor. xv. 47, etc.), or again, when in

Colossians

(i.

a portion of rabbinical exegesis he identifies Christ with the rock which accompanied the Israelites in the desert

These affirmations do not contradict

(i Cor. x. 4).

earthly personality of Jesus; they merely imply that humanity is unable to explain to its Weinel observes roots this personality and activity. the

human and

(Wisdom of Solomon), Enoch zhii. 4 and Enoch and xhx 2 4 (Slavonic) 80 Enoch, also Esdras. Certain authors hold that in fourth Esdras the conception of the preexistence of the Messiah may be due to Schurer justly remarks against this idea that Christian influence. 29

Sap. Salomon

xxm

to Christianity, particularly post-Christian Judaism had, in opposition insisted on the humanity of the Messiah, as proved by the declaration

of the

who

reported by Justin: born of men" (Dial.,

Jew Tryphon,

will be a

man

"We

all

ilii. i).

expect a Messiah

ii6

JESUS

THE NAZARENE must only be judged was habitual to explain

in this connection that these ideas

by those of

antiquity,

when

it

the mysterious in a personality by forces belonging to 81 the spiritual another world. Just as Paul felt that ii. him Christ dwelt and lived in 20), without for (Gal. that reason losing consciousness of his own human personality, so also

was he able

to see in Christ a celestial

and preexisting Being without thereby forcibly deforced to cultivate priving humanity of Him. One is the mentality of antiquity in order to understand the of primiconceptions in virtue of which the theology

of Paul) atChristianity (and especially that of Jesus that work and in the person tempted to explain of humanity. which surpassed the common standard tive

notion of the Messiah furnished the idea of preexistence; that of divine Sonship tended to identify and the Jesus with the hypostasis of "Wisdom" "Word." In this manner, starting from soteriology, the

The

charquickly led to attribute a cosmological acter to Christ. But the movement of Pauline Chris-

mind was

from humanity tology, if so it may be called, progresses to to divinity, and not from divinity humanity. If in the Epistle to the Colossians Paul develops the theme character of Christ and the idea of of the cosmological

His sovereignty over

all celestial

beings,

it is

because

whom

he addressed were fascinated by speculations concerning angels, and it was of moment to show them that the worship of Christ attained the realities

those

of the celestial world

in a

manner more complete and

than devotion paid to angels. The whole of this side of Pauline Christology thus appears to be

efficacious

11 The supporters him was incarnate

of

Simon also believed that power of God" (Acts via. 10).

the magician

"the great

in

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

117

the development of a doctrine elaborated on other

grounds.

The tology

Chrisdistinctly theological element of Pauline is not the point from which he sets out in

It is the result it. thought. It is the conclusion of of an effort imposed on him in the interest of practical of speculative curiosity, to apologetics, rather than and work of Jesus give an interpretation of the person harmonizing with conceptions about spiritual beings current in his time, and with the position assigned to

Paul's thought assumes Jesus by the faith. At times a character distinctly philosophic. In certain passages we have the impression of being in presence of a cos-

mological theory instead of a human history. Such, for example, is the character presented by the portion of the Epistle to the Colossians (i. 13-20) where God is referred to as He "who has delivered us from the of darkness and brought us into the Kingdom of

power His well-beloved Son." Then follows a lyrical de"in Him we have scription of what this Son is like, "For Christ is redemption, the remission of sins." the very image of the Invisible and head of all creation ; for in

God

the first-born

Him

was created all the visible and the

heaven and on earth, of angels, archangels, and all the powers for and Him created been has heaven. All through Him. He was before all things, and all things unite in Him; and He is the head of the Church, which is

that

is

in

invisible

His body. The first-born from the dead, He is to the Church the source of its life, that He in all things may stand first. For it pleased the Father that in

Him

the divine nature in

and through

Him

all its fullness

should dwell,

to reconcile all things to

Himself

JESUS

ii8

THE NAZARENE

Christ's blood (making peace by the shedding of earth or in on whether the offered upon cross)

Heaven.'

1

"

where conception developed in this passage, an almost a divine as hypostasis, Christ appears Being, in Philo, and is certainly closely resembles that found Are we to conclude that the Christ related to it.

The

of Paul

is

an ideal Being

like the

Logos of Philo?

It does not seem necessary, for the ancient mentality saw no contradiction between the human character of

a person and his divine character. One example of the association of the two concepts is given us by the fourth of a man who evangelist, who means to relate the story with the identifies he whom and has lived on earth, creative Logos. The case of the Epistle to the Colossians is quite of analogous; and if the historical side of the person the of touched is by the mention

Jesus

upon

only

cross, this

is

of explained entirely by the character decisive as considers M. Couchoud quite

the Epistle. in favor of the nonhistorical theory the passage in which Paul speaks of the wisdom of God, "that none of the great ones of this world had known, for if they had known it, they would not have crucified the glori-

Lord" (i Cor. follows from this

fied

ii.

8

)

.

M, Couchoud

text that those

who

8S

finds that

it

crucified Jesus

were mythical beings, not persons of flesh and bone, and that the drama consequently took place between heaven and earth, in an Apocalyptic atmosphere. Note. This passage is taken from the Twentieth Testament, translated from original Greek into Modern

2 Translator's

Century

New

English (Westcott and Hort's text).

M Couchoud,

op.

cit.t

p. 132.

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION And

to prove that

we

with a mythical theory,

are

certainly

M. Couchoud

119

dealing here points to the

analogy that exists between our passage and the Ascension of Isaiah, where it appears that if the angels had perceived the descent of the Son of God, they would have opposed it, and would have hindered the

accomplishment of His work. They, however, did not collaborate in any way. The part played by them 84 But, on the was entirely negative and unconscious. archons crucified contrary, according to Paul, when the the Lord, they were not ignorant that He was the 85 but they did not know the divine plan, nor Savior, did they realize that the death of Christ would cause The two concepts differ so their own annihilation. much that one cannot have been deduced from the

other they have only a very general theme in common, that of the demon deluded. It is consequently illegitimate to interpret the indication given by Paul in an ;

incidental

way by

sion of Isaiah.

the theory developed in the AscenBut there is more than this. It is

Paul attributes to the archons anything more than responsibility for the death of Christ. doubtful

if

There

easily to be recognized in

is

them the seventy

to an idea particularly deconfided the veloped in the book of Enoch, God has 86 of the world. They direct the nations

angels to

whom, according

government 84

The passage

referring to the crucifixion belongs, as

een, to a Christian modification

we have

(Asc xi. 19). 85 At any rate, Paul does not say that the archons were ignorant We cannot accept the interpretation of Dibelius, of who was Christ that Paul, like the author of the Ascension of Isaiah, thinks the archons were ignorant of who Christ was. 88 Enoch There is also a reference in the book of (Ixxxix. 59) Daniel to an angel of Persia, who fought with Michael, the angel of the people of Israel (see Dan. x. 13-20).

120

JESUS

THE NAZARENE 7

In saying that they had the Lord, Paul does not appear to have thought of anything other than the crucifixion of Jesus by men, but by men whom he considers as agents of

and

inspire their actions.*

crucified

demoniacal powers. This conception is in all points similar to that found in the fourth Gospel, where Jesus is

arrested by the cohort and tribune (guided by Judas,

Satan had entered) judged, and condemned by Pilate at the instigation of the Jews, and finally The whole drama is explained crucified by soldiers. by the action of "the prince of this world" in other into

whom

,

88

There is therefore, words, Satan (see John xiv. 30 ). as Dibelius justly remarks, no contradiction between I Cor. ii. 8 (which holds the archons responsible for the death of Jesus) and i Thess. ii. 15, where it is stated that the Jews put Jesus to death. have thus passed in review the principal pasthe Pauline Epistles where allusions to a of sages Christ myth are supposed to be found. In Paul's writdoctrine in which ings these reveal a Christological are incorporated elements borrowed from the dogmatic

We

and even fragments of myths, but it is illegitimate to reduce the whole Pauline which Christology to these, and to pass over everything to reference had in the Pauline Epistles and teaching the historical person of Jesus and to His life on earth.

tradition of Judaism,

In another chapter we shall return to the subject of the relation between these two elements. Let us only note here that this relation appears to be that between **They arc in any case responsible, since, according to Enoch, they roust be judged (xc. 22). 8 the devil excites the Similarly in the Ascension of Isaiah Him. who the crucify Well-Beloved, Jews against

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION admitted fact and

its

interpretation.

121

Far from con-

tradicting the historical personality of Jesus, Pauline Christology would be incomprehensible

had not made the

if it

historical facts its starting point.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

VI.

the

IN

PAUL"

The Epistles of Paul contain but few allusions to the Gospel history, but when these are closely examined it is found that the apostle was much more familiar with of Jesus than a superficial reading of the Epistles would lead one to think. Paul presents Jesus as a man born of woman (i Cor. xv. 21 Rom. v. 15 Gal. iv. 4), belonging to the the

life

;

;

(Gal. iii. 16; Rom. ix. 5), and i. 3). descending from the family of David (Rom. He lived under the Jewish Law (Gal. iv. 4; Rom. xv. The Epistles say neither when nor where, but 8). since it was importance need not be attached to this, race of

Abraham

the evolution of only at a relatively secondary stage in considered necessary to esthe tradition that it was tablish synchronism in the history of Jesus (Luke 40 Paul places himself at a point of view similar iii. i )

,

know

the parents of and gives the name Jesus, he mentions His brothers, ix. Cor. of one of them, James (i 5; Gal. i. 19 and to that of

Mark.

If Paul does not

41

ii.

9; cp. i Cor. xv. 7). It is impossible to decide

how Paul

conceived the Paul

et

Msus

*See upon this subject Maurice Goguel, VApotre to which the Christ, 1904. In this work will be found a bibliography names of Joh. Weiss and P. Olaf Moc must be added. 40 These are only indicated in relation to John the Baptist i

In Paul's writings there

birth

is

no trace of the idea of a supernatural

(see Lobstein, Etudes Christologiques, 1890).

122

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

character and moral physiognomy of the Lord. It is, in fact, not always possible to recognize whether the ideas apply to passages dealing with this order of or His gloriJesus or the Christ in His preexistence the that apostle made fication, and it does not appear

upon

this subject a

even

if

very clear distinction.

However,

u the passage where Christ is called He who knew not sin" (2 Cor. v. 21) relates to the preexistent Christ, it would at least show that Paul had a belief in the perfect sanctity of Jesus. This, no doubt, at any rate, it cannot be that the is a dogmatic idea

the historical life of Jesus conapostle's conception of The exhortations to the imitation of tradicts it. Christ (i Cor. xi. I and Col. i. 10) imply also the idea of this sanctity. The love of Christ referred to in

Rom.

viii.

27,

in connecbeing presented as real, must be considered tion with the glorified Christ. But the gentleness and

meekness of Christ,

in the

horted the Corinthians (2,

name of which Paul x.

i), refer to

acter, since in this passage there

is

ex-

His char-

a transparent allu-

sion to a saying of Jesus (Matt. xi. 29). Concerning the middle period of the life of Jesus, the Epistles

contain but very

little

we who

Nevertheless, as

indeed.

have seen, Paul knew of the existence of apostles were associated with the Master's ministry. The cross

as occupied a predominating place in the preaching ii. i i Cor. iii. and in the theology of Paul (Gal. 2). The death of Jesus was portrayed as an act of

God and ii. 20). Gal and

obedience towards (Phil.

ii.

8

of love towards It

by the enmity of the Jews (i

men

was brought about Thess. ii. 15) and

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

123

through the ignorance of the celestial archons who Paul is aware that Jesus passed the directed them. evening preceding His death with His disciples, and that it was during this last meal that He instituted

We

shall return the Lord's Supper (i Cor. xi. 23). Does it also imply that Jesus was to this testimony. His followers? This cannot be of one betrayed by

determined with certainty, for the term employed

may

well signify "betrayed" as "delivered over just It has sometimes been believed that the to death." as

execution of Jesus is indicated in the passage in which the apostle assimilates the death of Christ to the sac-

We

shall see of the paschal lamb ( I Cor. v. 7). later that this interpretation is far from being certain. rifice

At almost every page of his readers that Jesus died

his Epistles

Paul reminds

He speaks of the of shedding of 10),

on the

cross.

His violent death (2 Cor. blood (Rom. iit. 25), of the sufferings He endured Phil. iii. 10), of the (2 Cor. i. 5, 7; Rom. viii. 17; exhaustion He passed through before expiring (2 Cor. xv. xiii. 4), of the insults He submitted to (Rom. iv.

the burial of Jesus Finally he specially refers to and confirms the tradition concern(i Cor, xv. 4-8), xv. 4-8 ) ing the apparitions ( i Cor. When all these indications are grouped together the

3)

.

.

if Paul does not provide a impression is gained that coherent view of the history of Jesus, he nevertheless

and more distinctly still, possesses one. Furthermore, *2 went the of he is a witness sayings of Jesus. Resch a thousand much too far in asserting that there were 42

Resch,

criticized

Der Pauhnismus und

die Logia Jesu.

very severely, but justly, by

Wrede and

Resch has been Juiicher.

JESUS

124

THE NAZARENE

allusions to the sayings of Jesus

48

in the authentic

Those which are met with may be divided

Epistles.

allusions

suffi-

the admission that ciently precise to authorize

Paul

Into three groups: direct quotations,

had the saying of Jesus

in

cences almost unconscious.

third

series

of

allusions,

mind, and

We

finally reminisshall leave aside this

which cannot be exactly

which are far from being without signifisusfor cance, they show how the mind of Paul was Thesthe reassure To of tained by the sayings Jesus. salonians, anxious about the fate of believers who died before the second coming, Paul declared to them that at the time of the Savior's return these would be

defined, but

resurrected to join the living, and he gives this teachThess. iv. 15). It is ing "in a word of the Lord" (i the clear what it is in not teaching given which quite

attempts which have been made an allusion to a known saying of Jesus, to a passage in the Old Testament, or to an work such as Esdras (iv.), have not suc-

answers to

this.

The

to rediscover in the text

Apocryphal

44

think that Paul in this passage is writing under the speaks by revelation, and that he This interpretation conflicts inspiration of the Spirit. with the fact that when Paul communicates any teach-

ceeded.

Some

writers

he expressly ing which he holds was revealed to him, The xii. 2 Cor. xv. Cor. out i). 51; (i points this most natural thing is to suppose that Paul is quoting in this

passage an agraphon, or

in

other words a say-

Exactly 925, of which 133 are in Ephesians, 100 in the pastoral Acts. He only arrived Epistles, and 64 in the Pauline discourses at this result by stating that a parallelism existed between Paul 48

m

and the Logia, when the two texts compared possessed only one word in common. "Lucken, and Couchoud (Le Mysore de Jhus).

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

125

tradiing of Jesus not incorporated into the Gospel 46 first of the In the seventh chapter tion. Epistle to

the Corinthians Paul gives instructions to married he writes, "my people. "To those who are married," the Master's) but direction is (yet it is not mine,

woman

is not to leave her husband" (verse 10). referred to is the reply of Jesus to here The saying the Pharisees concerning the subject of divorce (Mark

that a

12; Matt. xix. 9), preserved in a slightly different form in the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. v.

x.

ii,

What gives to this citation all its importance the fact that two verses farther on, considering a wife is not particular case (that of a Christian whose 32). is

a believer, or on the other hand, that of a Christian u woman married to a pagan), Paul writes: To all others I say, I, not the Master." Similarly, in the

course of the chapter, Paul says that, concerning vir-

"has no

command from

gins and unmarried women, he is content the Master" (i Cor. vii. 25; cp. 40). If the word of the Master to give his own opinion.

He

was

in

thinks,

Paul a revelation of the it

Spirit, as

M. Couchoud

would be very surprising that upon a matter

so important for the

produced no oracle.

life

of the Church, the Spirit In is more than this.

But there

the Lord, Paul gives his own to it. It is not opinion, and he attaches great weight that of one to but the opinion of an ordinary man, whom the Master has given the power to be faithful,

the place of the

word of

can thus boast of being an authorized interthe Spirit. preter of His thought and who possesses Notwithstanding this opinion, Paul takes good care

who

not to claim an authority equal to that of the Master's 46

Schmiedel, Dibelius, Feme.

126

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

a decisive proof that it was indeed from a word coming Jesus that the apostle meant to and to this word he attributes an absolute cite,

words.

.

Here

authority. In the

is

cites a saying of who preach the those of Jesus to establish the right the churches. 'The Lord gospel to be maintained by u that those who preach he writes, has commanded," the gospel shall live by the gospel." Here is certainly an allusion to the words spoken at the sending forth

same Epistle also Paul

of the disciples on a mission: "If ye are received in a house, eat and drink what is set before you, for the laborer is worthy of his hire" (Luke x. 7; Matt, now reach the last of the citations of x. 10). the words of Jesus found in Paul's Epistles, and it is

We

almost the most important and the most discussed chapter of the first among them. In the eleventh 40 Paul, in combating the Epistle to the Corinthians defective manner in which the Lord's Supper was celebrated at Corinth, recalls what took place on the last 47 He writes "I have received from evening of Jesus. I have in turn given to you." and Lord the :

.

Many critics

.

.

48

consider that the words "I have received

from the Lord"

indicate that there

was

a vision at

the origin of the tradition concerning the last supper. They mean "I have received" in the sense "I have it

Other writers adopt a less directly from the Lord." 49 and Bousset 50 think that radical opinion. Loisy Paul, by a kind of autosuggestion, reached the point of rejects this text as an interpolation. Maurice Goguel, L'Eucharutte des ongmes & Justin Martyr. "Percy Gardner, The Origin of the Lord's Supper, 1893.

Drews (Die Christusmythe)

7

*

Loisy, Les Mysteres patens et le mystire Chrttien, 1919. D. Schr. d. N.T., ii, p. 3.

w Bousset,

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

127

had

contemplating in vision the scene that tradition 81 and transmitted to him. Others, like Pfleiderer 52 believe that Paul obtained from a revelation, Haupt, not the account of the last supper of Jesus, but the knowledge of the sacramental character and significance of the

Eucharist

Paul authorizes or justifies can we accept the hypotheNeither such a distinction. sis of Lietzmann and Ed. Meyer, who suppose that Paul synthesized in the vision on the Damascus road

Nothing

in the text of

knew of

Besides, the initial vision Jesus. did not determine Paul's knowledge of Jesus; it caused his faith to be born. All intermediate solutions should

that he

all

be put aside.

We

are in face of a dilemma: Either

the entire tradition about the last supper possessed for Paul a visionary origin, or the formula, "I have received from the Lord," means something other than

"I

know by means of

a vision."

there had been

a vision,

If

it

would not diminish

in the eyes of the apostle the value of the tradition

it

the contrary, its authority would be the more increased it would be surprising that the apostle should not expressly relate a detail of a nature to related.

On

;

impress his readers. Paul draws a very close parallel between the two and "I have transexpressions "I have received" mitted" (or "passed on"). They are of the same if on one side nature, which would not be the case received it was a case of a supernatural communication

imby the apostle, and on the other didactic teaching 1

Urchnsttntum, i. die Ursprungliche Form Veber "Haupt, Abtndmahlswrtt, 1894. Pfleiderer,

und Bcdtutung der

128

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

above all, nothing parted to the Corinthians. And, received from the have "I understand to authorizes us 11 Lord in the sense "I have it direct from the Lord. 1 '

here uses preposition "apo" which the apostle exwithout but the of tradition, marks the first origin to say is cluding an intermediary. What Paul wishes tradition goes back to the Lord, that in the last

The

analysis the words which he relates.

who pronounced

in the Epistle to the Galatians (i. i) Paul affirm that he holds his apostleship direct to desires

When

from Christ and from God without any human intervention, he uses the two prepositions "apo" and "dia," which proves that he perfectly conceives an apostlehuman intership coming from God, but not through mediaries. The use in our passage of the single preposition "apo" shows that the apostle only means the What he means to say is first origin of the tradition. that the narrative comes from the Lord by the interbe mediary of men. This detail did not require to announced; for the Corinthians it was clear from the very position of the apostle. The direct study of the text and its comparison with

explicitly

the

tradition fixed in the Gospel of Mark Doubtless the Gospel of conclusion.

form of the

confirms this

Mark was

after the only. compiled a couple of decades

of the comEpistle to the Corinthians, but the date be identinot must pilation of a work like a Gospel

with that of the traditions it contains. The two texts read as follows: Mark xiv. 22-25: "While they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and

fied

after saying the blessing, broke it and said : Take it ; this is body.

My

cup,

and gave to them, Then He took the

and after saying the thanksgiving, gave

it

to

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

129

My

covethem, and they all drank from it. This is nant blood, He said, which is poured out on behalf of many. I tell you that I shall never again drink of the juice of the grape until that day drink it new in the Kingdom of God."

The

first

when

I shall

Epistle to the Corinthians, xi. 23-25 : "For Lord the account which I

I myself received from the have in turn given to you

how

the

Lord

Jesus,

on

the very night of His betrayal, took some bread, and, after saying the thanksgiving, broke it and said: This own body, given on your behalf. Do this in is

My

Me.

And

in the same way with the cup, This after supper, saying: cup is the new covenant made by My blood. Do this whenever you drink it, 58 in memory of me." In order to keep to the essential points, we shall

memory

of

note the following peculiarities:

round of the cup as well as after the distribution of bread, an order of There is none either in Mark or Matthew. 1.

Paul

gives, after the passing

repetition.

the dis19) gives the order only after bread. the tribution of

Luke

(xxii.

the phrase 'This is body," which accomPaul adds "given panies the distribution of bread, 2.

My

To

For the question before us we confine ourselves to comparing the of Paul and Mark, bringing into the question Matthew only The latter, compared with Mark (xxvi 29) in a subordinate way The account in Luke variations some offers unimportant only, to arise from the combination of two different 88

texts

(xxii.

15-20) appears For a more detailed study see

traditions.

M. Goguel

(UEucharistie,

pp. 105-26),

Translator's

Century Hort.

New

m

Twentieth Testament in Modern English, based on Westcott and Note.

Verses

quoted

arc

from

text

of

I3

o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

for you," which has no equivalent in Mark or Matthew, but only in Luke. to the words which end 3. Paul has no equivalent that is to the repast found in Mark and Matthew He would drink that from Jesus say, no declaration no more of the juice of the grape before drinking it In Luke (xxii. 16) of a first cup. the distribution this phrase accompanies It must, however, be noted that in a fragment which

new

in the

Kingdom of God.

narrative of appears no longer to form part of the the is the last supper, but which commentary on really

Paul says: "For whenever drink this cup, you proclaim He comes" (i Cor. xi. 26). of the eschatological formula it,

stitute

you eat

this

bread and

the Lord's death until

This is a reminiscence which appears to conof the Lord's elements of the principal one

Supper. All these peculiarities have a common character; they tend to assimilate the two elements constituting the rite to each other and to present them as a special

by Jesus. They progress, therefore, exactly same way as the evolution of the rite. This which at first appears to have had a double character,

institution in the

the carrying out of a of Jesus of that which at the origin had

was the transformation

command

into

probably only been an instinctive repetition favored by the memory preserved of the last evening passed with Him. On the other hand, the evolution had as its result to form out of the distribution of the cup and while parallel and equivalent symbols, the at that to reason there origin these suppose every the same two actions of Jesus had neither object nor the same significance. The distribution of the bread the bread is

two

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION

131

symbolized the gift that Jesus made of Himself to His followers and for His followers; the cup illustrated the meeting place that He gave them in the Kingdom of God. Now the evolution of the texts must have tended continually to conform more closely the narratives to the

rite.

It is inconceivable, while

had the feeling, in he was repeating the that Eucharist,

celebrating the actions of Jesus, that additions should have been made to the story which would have differentiated it from the rite. The

the

believer

subordinate compared with the Its origin is not to be tradition preserved in Mark. in a supernatural revelation, but in an his-

of Paul

text, then,

is

sought

torical tradition to

which Paul

is

the witness.

Beyond quotations, properly so called, there are in Paul's writings a certain number of allusions to words of Jesus. It will suffice here to indicate the most characteristic

M

:

4: "Therefore he who disregards this warning, disregards not man, but God, who gives you His Holy Spirit." Compare with Luke x. 16: "He I

who jects

Thess.

iv.

listens to

you

is

you

is

rejecting

Me, and he who reMe; while he who rejects Me

listening to

Me as His Messenger." to isolate you." wish Compare Gal. iv. 17: "They with Matt, xxiii. 13 "But alas for you, teachers of the is

rejecting

Him who

sent

:

You Pharisees, hypocrites that you are. faces. in men's of Heaven turn the key of the Kingdom do not go in yourselves nor yet allow those For

Law and you

who

try to

go

in to

do

so."

versions are taken from the Testament, baicd on Westcott and Horf text from original Greek. 84 Translator's

NQU.

Twentieth Century

New

The English

JESUS

I32

THE NAZARENE

"Bear one another's burdens, and so carry out the Law of Christ." Compare with Mark ix. 33 "If anyone wishes to be first, he must be last of all and Gal.

vi.

2

:

:

servant of all" u

We

meet abuse with blessings, we meet persecution with endurance, we meet slander with gentle appeals." Rom. xii. 14: "Bless your perMatt, secutors, bless and never curse." Compare with "Blessed are you when people taunt you, and v. 1 1 Cor.

I

iv.

12, 13:

:

evil about you persecute you and say everything sake." Luke vi. 28 "Show kinduntruly, and for

My

who hate you, bless those who insult you."

ness to those

pray for

:

who

those

curse you,

"Having been present in spirit at your with meetings when the power of the Lord Jesus was us." Compare "For where two or three have come them" (Matt, together in My name I am present with i

Cor.

v.

4

:

:

xviii.

20). Cor. xiii. 2: "Even though I have such faith as 20: might move mountains." Compare Matt. xvii. could faith were only like a mustard seed, you "If i

your

to that,' say to this mountain, 'Move from this place and it would be moved." Compare Mark xi. 22, Matt

and Luke xvii. 6. "Even though I give My substance 1 Cor. xiii. 3 to the poor." Compare Luke xii. 23 "Sell what beCompare Mark longs to you and give in charity." x. 21 and Matt. xix. 21. "I exhort you by the meekness and 2 Cor. x. i

xxi. 21,

:

:

:

Matt. gentleness of Christ." Compare meek and lowly in heart."

Rom.

xii.

xi.

29: "I

am

17: "Never return injury for injury."

PAUL AND GOSPEL TRADITION Compare Matt.

v.

39: "I say unto you,

133

resist

not

evil."

Rom.

xiv.

14: "I

know and am persuaded

that

Compare Matt. xv. II : nothing mouth that defiles a man's enters "It is not what is

defiling in itself."

him." speculate on the that the origin of the acquaintance apostle Paul had with the Gospel tradition. The nucleus of what It is impossible to

do anything except

he knew must have dated back to the period preceding his conversion, and have depended upon what was told about Jesus in the first church of Jerusalem. The knowledge which he possessed in his pre-Christian

days was enriched and developed afterwards. The abundance of the allusions to the words of the Jesus and the reminiscences found in the Epistles, fact that

ings

Paul appears more often to allude to sayto his readers, causes one to think he must

known

have been acquainted with a collection of the sayings of Jesus. The majority of those to which he refers

Hence appear to belong to the tradition of the Logia. Paul that one is induced to entertain the hypothesis must have been acquainted with a form of this collection.

Epistles of Paul afford then precise testimony tradition besupport of the existence of the Gospel

The in

fore him.

They presume

a Jesus

who

lived,

acted,

and who

for believers, taught, whose life was a model that in Paul are only is it True cross. died on the found fragmentary and sporadic indications concernbut this is explained ing the life and teachings of Jesus,

on one hand by the fact that we possess no coherent and complete exposition of the apostle's preaching, and

i

34

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

on the other hand by the character of his interests. He had no special object in proving what no one in his time called in question namely, that Jesus had existed. His unique aim was to prove (what the Jews refused to admit) that Jesus was the Christ.

CHAPTER

VI

THE THEOLOGY OF THE APOSTLE PAUL THE CHARACTER OF PAULINE THOUGHT

I.

THE oldest systematic form we can

discern

is

of Christian thought which that which the Epistles of Paul

(whose composition took place approximately between find the years 50 and 62) makes known to us. at worked not if a out, therein theoretically theology

We

any rate of very coherent character. It is important to examine its character and see whether it may be considered as a development from Jewish and Greek premises, or

bring

in

if it

be necessary to

an historical factor

its

the

comprehension to and death of

life

Jesus.

The fragmentary developments which we

possess in essential the with deal the Epistles only points in the and system; the picture resulting from their assemblage combination should nevertheless with the exception

of some unimportant details give us a fairly accurate sketch of the general aspect that the apostle's teaching

must have presented. If Paul's was a powerful and systematic mind the Epistle to the

Romans

alone suffices to prove

and it

was not dominated by philosophic preoccuteach a Paul preached a gospel and did not pations. He was the bearer of a message of salvadoctrine. his teaching

desired to pluck men from perdition and of death, and assure their access to the Kingdom

tion.

He

35

JESUS

i36

THE NAZARENE

God, not to instruct them and reveal to them a history and an explanation of things. Religious affirmations these affirmations predominate in the Epistles. But includes presuppose a very general conception, which not only a history of humanity, but a theory of the world and a doctrine concerning God, celestial beings, and an explanation of the origin of evil, sin and death.

II.

GOD AND DEMONS

apostle's thought was rooted in the of Israel, his point of view as retradition religious from the radical gards divinity is sufficiently different and uncompromising monotheism which characterizes

Although the

certain declarations of the second Isaiah or of Jere-

miah:

"Then take

shall

thereof

man to (wood) and warm it

be for a

burn, for he will himself: yea, he

and baketh bread; yea, he maketh a god and worshipeth it, he maketh it a graven image and

kindleth

falleth

it

thereto. He burneth part thereof (tree) he eateth flesh; he roasteth roast and is 'Aha yea, he warmeth himself and saith,

down

in the fire; satisfied;

I

And the residue I have seen the fire.' his even a he maketh thereof graven image god, I

am warm.

1 '

15-17; cp. Jer. x. 3-11). be better styled point of view of Paul might "monotheism." "Although there "monolatry" than earth many are," he wrote, "either in heaven or on (Isa. xliv.

The

There are indeed . . . beings which are called gods. many gods and lords, yet is there for us but one God, the Father, from

whom

all

things proceed (and for

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL Him we

137

and one Lord, Jesus Christ" (i Cor. at least, for him who posPractically 5, 6). this formula amounts to that of sesses the gnosis live)

viii.

monotheism, since Paul offers it as a commentary upon the other formula which the Corinthian Gnostics employed: "We are aware that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one (i Cor. is that he Paul drawn The conclusion viii. 4). by who possesses the gnosis that is, he who knows the 1 '

demons can enter with impunity into them when consuming food offered to relation with He no longer pays them worship, and he no idols. more seeks their favor than he fears their enmity.

true nature of

But those who have not yet attained this degree of knowledge ought to fly from communion with idols 1 Paul distinctly which for them would be pollution. declares that an idol

is

to say, it is worship paid to an idol is not

nothing

that

is

not a divine being. The directed to God, but to demons, and has the effect of into direct relation with them, putting the worshiper and thereby exposing himself to divine anger. There the Unique Father exist, therefore, other gods than these are the demons who, under the guise of idols, are adored by pagans. Idolatry is an insult to God, who alone has the right to be adored. In the very fact that they have claimed worship, the demons have made themselves enemies of God. Although we do

not find in the Epistles explicit theories on this point, the it is very probable that Paul does not explain origin of

demons by a fundamental and

dualism, but by the theory of 1

irreducible

Satan, a celestial

being

Maurice Goguel, L'EuConcerning communion with demons, see

chart f tief p. 167.

JESUS

38

i

THE NAZARENE

rebelled against God. An allusion to this theory is found in the great Christological passage of the the attitude of the Epistle to the Philippians, where to that of another being preexisting Christ is opposed that is full divinity himself for to seize who

who

sought

to say, desired to impose himself upon man to be worof Satan, who seduced shiped* Through the rebellion in his train a faction of celestial beings, there

away was created in the face of God an army of demons hostile to Him. There are the enemies referred to in The last to be conquered and I Cor. xv. 25, 26. as destroyed will be Death, who is not to be imagined an abstract power, but as a personality, Thanatos, the Epistle probably identical with Satan himself. In

to the

Hebrews, whose thought upon many points

closely related to Paul's, the devil fied

with Thanatos

in the

is

is

directly identi-

formula, "he

who

has the

power of death that is to say, the devil" (Heb. The same identification is not found formally ii. 14). It appears, however, to be inferable from in Paul. u

god of world" (2 Cor. iv. 4) who is evidently the devil, and on the other hand he asserts the existing world is death owing to sin (Rom. subjected to the dominion of fairly precise indications.

Paul speaks of a

this

v.

12, vi. 23;

I

Cor. xv. 21

).

According to

I

Cor.

the abandonment of the incestuous to the power of Satan will have as its consequence the destruction that is, the death of the guilty one. of the flesh v. 5,

According to I Cor. x. 10, the rebellious Israelites in the desert were delivered over to the exterminator 2 It follows from these (Satan), who destroyed them. world" "Through the jealousy of the devil, death entered the first" the from a murderer was devil "The of Solomon). (Wisdom 2

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

139

passages that Satan and Thanatos are two equivalent terms, or, more precisely, Thanatos is Satan considered as exercising one of his essential functions. Satan before his rebellion was one of the beings of the army of heaven. The existence of a whole hier-

archy of beings inhabiting the heavens angels, archangels, thrones, dominions, principalities and powers to the Colossians particularly referred to in the Epistle has nothing in it which is contrary to the will (i. 16)

Evil comes uniquely from the action of these beings, who, instead of keeping the subordinate position appertaining to them, dared to

and design of God.

rise

and oppose themselves to God. Thus

is

explained

the fact that the Pauline theory not only insists upon a disorder introduced into humanity, but also of a

disorder within the cosmos, making necessary the redemption not of humanity alone, but of the entire creation

(Rom.

viii.

19-22)

in

other

God

reestablishing of the sovereignty of

words, (

i

Con

the xv.

24-26). III.

SIN

AND EVIL

If this notion of cosmic disorder

is

fundamental

in

the thought of Paul, and if the redemption of sinners in is with him but a portion of a more general work, and his Epistles it is the notion of human his

preaching redemption which occupies the premier place. Looked at from the point of view of humanity, evil takes the form of sin. It is a state of things whose "Satan, the Evil One, and 44). identical" (Rabbi Simon ben Lakisch).

(John are

viii.

the Angel of Death

i

4o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

essential characteristic

dishonors

His

will

God (Rom.

ignorance of God, estrangeSin (i Cor. xv. 34).

is

ment and opposition to

Him

ii.

23);

it

and His law (Rom. ii. 8, weakness (Rom.

also a state of

is

rebellion against

iii.

5, xi.

30, etc.)

v. 6, vi.

;

Paul

19) does not only conceive it as an act or series of acts, but as a state characterized by the subordination of it is

humanity to a power hostile to vi.

17-20,

resides the

God (Rom.

.

iii.

9, v. 19,

It is in the flesh that

20; Gal. iii. 22). power of sin, and through which

vii.

it is

ex-

Sin

is 3).* 5-14* the to universal. The whole beginning of the Epistle Romans is devoted to establishing this thesis, and paridea cherished by Judaticularly that (contrary to an

ercised

(Rom.

vi.

12,

vii.

viii.

them less ism) the sin of the Jews does not separate from God than the sin of the pagans (Rom. ii. 1-3, The law, indeed, is not a 1 8, xi. 32; Gal. iii. 21). means of escaping from the domination and conseis to reveal it (Rom. quences of sin. Its first task In a certain sense it gives sin manifestation iii. 20). transforming a tendency more or less unconscious

by

open rebellion (Rom. iv. 15, v. 13, vii. 7-13; Gal. and 22). In itself, however, the law is holy, just

into iii.

life good (Rom. vii. 12). It was designed to give in other obtain to life, or, in showing the path to follow God of the to access (Rom. vii. 10), Kingdom words, and rendered disarmed been has but it impotent by the

3). It is the disorder introduced into the world which has prevented the law producing the effects it should have done. flesh

*

to if

(Rom.

We may is

14,

viii.

leave aside the question, difficult enough to answer, as flesh is the cause or only the seat of the sin, and so by its very nature or as a result of a fall.

whether the it

vii.

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

141

This brings us to the question of capital importance the origin of sin. Faithful on this point to Jewish dogma, Paul seeks the origin of sin in the disobedience of Adam. His

in the interpretation of Paulinism

expressed in the parallel between Adam and of the Jesus Christ, which appears to have been one habitual themes of his preaching, and of which we possess two examples, both incomplete, in I Cor. xv. is

theory

45-47, and tion

is

Rom.

in

that

sin

disobedience of

v.

The

12-21.

entered

the

Adam (Rom.

central affirma-

world

through the 17-19). This dis-

v.

obedience has introduced a principle which produces consequences even where there are no acts of rebellion

Adam (v. 21). Paul conceived the disobedience of the first man to the narrative in Genesis (iii. 1-19), to alludes (2 Cor. xi. 3). But the disobedience of Adam is only an similar to that of

certainly

according

which he historical

and explanation of the origin of sin. It shows when, in what conditions, sin entered the world; it does not

The theory, therefore, only explain why it exists. not solve it. puts the problem further back; it does So Paul looks

at the

problem again and from another

for it is a question point of view, and he indicates of indications only and not of a theory systematically worked out how the seduction of Satan was exercised and what the relation is between the sin of man and It is in Rom. the rebellion of Satan against God. sole the i. 18-32, where is to bfc found passage that

might be called a philosophy of indications are

argument is

is

met

with.

The

an admission of

religion, that these

starting point of the

fact.

The wrath

of

God

manifested from heaven upon the injustice and im-

JESUS

I42

THE NAZARENE How

is it that men mankind (Rom. i. 18). to worrefused have and to truth so thus are opposed To this question which is, besides, not ship God? Paul replies by rejecting the expressly formulated a of idea complete ignorance of God on the part of man. God revealed Himself to men, but they fell into

piety of

of this attitude idolatry (i. 19-23). The punishment their to men abandoned is that God passions, which crime and imof caused them to fall into all kinds

24-32). In the beginning there was, therewhose fore, a kind of natural knowledge of God, invisible attributes, infinite power and divinity are revealed in creation (i. 19, 20). But man rejected

purity

this

(i.

knowledge of God offered to him

(i.

21); he

refused to give the worship due to God; his heart became hardened, and has lost itself in vain speculaThus came about the adoration of men and tions. animals, rendering to the creature the worship which Creator. Idolatry is the root rightly belonged to the

provoked abandoned man to his evil passions. These without doubt existed before this, but they were to some extent it was this control disciplined and kept under control; of

all sin.

The

divine wrath which

it

which was destroyed. Idolatry does not affect hua pervermanity alone. Paul does not conceive it as sion of the religious sense which substitutes imaginary adore demons beings for its real object. Idolaters that

is,

celestial spirits in rebellion against

God.

In

two orders of beings in idolatry we find in alliance rebellion against God Satan and his angels, who claim the worship which only belongs by right to God, and mankind, which consents to accord to them the wor:

ship which

it

refuses to

God.

The second

of these

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

143

In 2 Cor. xi. 3 it is a result of the first. of sin there was a seducthe at that shown beginning demons obtained act the the is tion by Satan it whereby the worship of mankind. Human sin is thus in direct facts

is

;

relation with the rebellion of Satan.

Sin

is

thus not

a cosmic fact; it is but one only a human fact; it of consequence of Satan's rebellion, one special case is

the disorder which was thus introduced into the universe. In fact, notwithstanding the extremely valuable indications which are given us in the passage in Rom. it is almost exclusively of the consequences viii.

19-22,

Sin involves for humanity of sin that Paul speaks. "The wages of sin is death" (Rom. vi. 23). death. But the mechanism of this consequence, if we may so

term

it,

aspects.

is presented by Paul under two Sometimes we meet with the idea of

and necessary relation takes place to some degree of

logical

God

out

breeds death.

This

own nature and

with-

sin its

intervening to exact any sanction.

what Paul viii.

:

calls

different

a kind of

"the law of sin

This

is

and death" (Rom.

2; cp. v. 12).

In consequence of sin man has fallen under the dominion of death, which must reign until at the moment at the end of time, when it will be destroyed beside this, we by Christ (i Cor. xv. 24, 25). But find almost at every page of the Pauline Epistles the

idea that death

is

the result of a judgment. The conand the return of the Lord who will

cept of judgment execute it has such precision in Paul's thought that, * is like I Cor. iv. 3, the word "day" in a

passage

meant

in the sense

Paul writes 4

Day

:

"We

of judicial authority of judgment. shall all appear before the judgment

of Lord's return

JESUS

144

THE NAZARENE

(Rom. xiv. 10; cp. with 2 Cor. v. 10). of With the idea judgment must be combined that of the divine wrath which at the end of time will fall upon the guilty (i Thess. i. 10, v. 9; Rom. i. 18, ii. 5, v. 9; scat of

God"

There are thus

Col. iiL 6).

in Paul's

thought two

God

appears as a Judge who executes upon sin the penalty it deserves according to the other, He is a witness, to some degree not at passive, or rather the penalty He imposes comes,

According to one,

conceptions.

;

the end of time, but at the very moment that sin in the fact appears in the world. It consists entirely that humanity is abandoned to the power of Satan.

probably because he found these two conceptions in the religious traditions of his nation that Paul allowed them to coexist in his mind, and that he It is

perhaps was unaware of the contradiction existing between them.

IV.

The human

THE REDEMPTION

disorder in the world and the corruption of nature demands a work of restoration, a re-

demption.

Paul

insists greatly

initiative

of this work

all this is

the

1

Man 8

work of God,' he wrote

here can boast of nothing.

There

is

on the idea that the God alone. "But

belongs to

(2 Cor. v. 18).

It is

God who

calls

a certain amount of incoherence in Paul's thought on

The Judge is sometimes God and sometimes Christ (2 Cor. The first is related to the ancient Hebrew tradition of v. 10). Yahwch (judge) the second is more Messianic Dialectically, the contradiction is resolved by the idea of God judging through Jesus this.

;

Christ (Rom. ii. 16). In a subordinate position is found in Paul the idea of judgment of the world by the saints (see i Cor. vi. a). In his struggle with Judeo-Christianity he insists much upon the

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

145

men to salvation 7 (i Thess. ii. 12, v. 9; I Cor. i. 9; Rom. viii. 28, ix. 24, xi. 32). Redemption appears at first as an effect of the love of God (Rom. v. 5, viii. of the grace of God. This 39). It is also an act notion of grace, which holds a central position in

Pauline thought, is, above all, a practical one. Grace, in the life of Paul, had been an experience before it became an object of his theological meditations. There a certain lack of homogeneity at least in expression redemption being attributed

is

noticeable in

him

sometimes to love, sometimes to compassion, sometimes to the grace of God. This would be difficult to if

explain

we were dealing with

a logically constructed

theory, but, on the contrary, it is very readily explained if experience of redemption had preceded dogmatic Paul feels that what he is as a Christian reflection. and an apostle is the work of the grace of God. "By the grace of God," he writes, "I am what I am." He

he had undergone, at the moment of his not conversion, a change which his former life had feels that

his routine exprepared; that he was thrown outside It was this same coerced. been had he istence that ;

force which was at

Cor. xv. 10 ; 2 Cor.

work

in his apostolic activity

(i

xii.

9). Paul in his own eyes is Just as the Christian life of an original creation and not the resultant of earlier of grace which factors, so also it is that the notion roots in Judaism. Indeed, in explains it has no deep the Septuagint the word "grace" means only the ideas for example, impotent to effect salvation. See, 16. ii Gal. Rom. ao; 13, all to 7 may leave aside the question whether He destines whether the fact that and mankind of a or only, part salvation, freedom. all are not saved is explicable by divine decree or by human

idea that the ii.

We

Law

"i.

is

JESUS

146

THE NAZARENE

of favor, benevolence, benediction, and pardon, and not that of a divine force which creates in man somebe looked for in Helthing new. Its origin cannot In Philo's writings grace means the lenism either. natural gifts which constitute man a reasonable being, but so far

away

is

Philo from Paul's characteristic

idea of aid accorded to a sinner, and precisely because he is a sinner, that the assertion is found of the eternal

when wickedness began springs of grace being dried up In the into enter the world (De opificio Mundi). bestowed a the term "grace" means by gift scriptions

the sovereign authority. In certain Pauline texts grace appears, without the being precisely defined, as the primary source

thought of salvation (2 Cor.

viii.

9, xiv.

9; Gal.

i.

In

16).

others it is a divine force which seizes man, calls him, in other words, makes transforms him, justifies him

of him

who was condemned

of God.

It is

a power which takes possession of

and permeates of

ransomed being, a

a

his entire life.

But

its

child

man

independence

does not exclude the moral character of

man

action in producing a renewal

the personality

(Rom.

iii.

24,

its

and a transformation of iv. 4, xi. 5,

6; Gal.

i.

15).

Sometimes grace is hypostatized; it seems as though for example, in the parallel it were a personal power between

Adam

but this

is

and Jesus Christ (Rom.

v.

nothing more than a 6gurative

15-21)

mode of

expression.

character of Pauline theology, its is to substioriginality in comparison with Judaism, of justice of for that of merit, notion tute the grace this point imputed for that of acts performed. Upon

The

Paul

is

essential

distinctly conscious

of separating himself from

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

147

the religion of his fathers. It is this opposition which explains the energy with which he insists upon the absolutely gratuitous and unearned character of salvation. However, the independence of grace has its the thesis he affirms with so much ferFrom limits. vor, Paul does not

draw what would seem

to be the

namely, that the unique and allis to be found in the paternal heart of God. The comparison between Pauline thought and the teaching of the Gospel is here very

logical deduction

sufficient cause of salvation

In the parable of the prodigal son pardon is not subordinated to the accomplishment of any other that is to condition than the repentance of the sinner

instructive.

depends upon no relations outside those between In Paul the offender and the one offended against. be would salvation For him same it is not the thing.

say,

it

the reason of impossible without the cross. What is It is not enough to say that as a this difference? Pharisee Paul was too much concerned to safeguard

God to accept the idea of a free pardon the holiness of God, Pharisaism besides for sin, for insisted also upon His omnipotence. The true reason Paul was obliged to explain the fact is elsewhere.

the holiness of

of the death of Christ, which thus appeared as one of From the most essential premises of his theology. the necessity of this explanation arose the Pauline doctrine of redemption. the pardon of God is not the effect In Paul's writings

iniof a free, spontaneous and immediately efficacious of It is subordinated to the accomplishment tiative.

a

work of redemption. For Paul salvation is not

only a "processus" within the divine, designed to conciliate love and justice. This

JESUS

i 48

THE NAZARENE

order of ideas which is represented in the Pauline It cordoctrine of redemption does not exhaust it. of a violation responds to the idea of sin conceived as the law of

But as rebellion against Him. fruitremain would man to granted

God and

the divine pardon

were not accompanied by a victory gained over the evil powers, who, owing to sin, exerGod has concised their dominion over humanity. ceived for the realization of salvation a plan which reveals a wisdom infinitely superior to that of the less if it

by God

the object of the I Cor. teaching imparted by the apostle to the perfect ( is rewhich the is This xi. ii. 6; Rom. mystery 33).

world.

This plan of redemption

is

vealed unto the elect (Col. i. 25, ii. 2). Redemption has a double object. Man must one day appear before the judgment seat of God, and if he be abandoned to himself he will not escape condemnation. Redemption has the effect of making him the object of a judgment of acquittal, and thus having part in the divine Kingdom. On the other hand, the sinner must be delivered from the evil powers who have dominion over him. To these two elements correspond

two

different

moments of

the

work of redemption

and redemption properly so

on one side on the other. On one side this distinction corbetween responds to that which Paul makes elsewhere of Christ, between the two parts of the redeeming work that accomplished by His death and resurrection and that which will be accomplished at the day of His justification

called

The work

glorious return at the end of the age. justification

redemption xv. 24).

is is

achieved

in

principle,

while that of

only hoped for (2 Thess.

However,

if

of

ii.

8;

I

Cor.

redemption depends upon the

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL victory that Christ

is

149

to gain at the end of the age

His enemies, His triumph is certain, for by His death and resurrection Jesus has conquered and that is, the spirdespoiled the powers and dominions

over

all

itual beings hostile to

God

to

whom

humanity is now which gives to the

This it is enslaved (Col. ii. 15). Christian hope of Paul so special a character. work of justification is described by Paul with

The much

This is not precision than that of redemption. historical plane, only because the first develops upon an end of the age, the at while the second will take place

more

and

will

character.

consequence possess an extrahistorical Paul's theoIf, in theory, redemption, on

in

logical system, possesses as

much importance

as justi-

not so from the practical point of view. The whole missionary effort of Paul and Paul was a the missionary before all else is concentrated upon This point acceptation of justification by the sinner. else followed, for, from the once gained, everything individual point of view, redemption appeared as a which the consequence of justification, and the spirit of it is the assurance (Rom. v. 10, justified one receives

fication, it is

viii.

23; Gal.

iv.

V.

6).

THE CHRIST AND His WORK

upon which the Pauline doctrine of justification rests is that of two worlds, one under succeeding the other. The present world, placed

The fundamental

idea

the dominion of evil powers, has for

20,

ii.

perish.

essential char-

death and impotence (Gal. i. 4; I Cor. It is destined to 6, iii. 18; 2 Cor. iv. 3). The world of the future is the Kingdom of

acteristics sin, i.

its

i

5o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

The time which passes between His return is an intermediate and Christ of the death we may so period, in which the two economies (if other. The old dispensation it) overlap each Christ and of God.

express

which (or economy) still subsists, since of the powers will perish ( I Cor. ii. reign over it, it is said that they it is never said they have perished; their 8, xv. 24) destruction is foretold for the end of time ( I Cor. xv. ;

26). facts Sin, present world is dominated by three introduced death and the consequence of Adam's fall, by it into the world; the promise given to Abraham,

The

:

which, amid the darkness of a world condemned, causes hope to shine; and finally the Law of Moses. For each of these points of view the cycle is completed

by the manifestation of Christ.

Through

to life quished, the faithful are restored to made the 22; Rom. v. 17), promise fulfilled

16), and

is

;

it

sin is

( I

van-

Cor. xv.

Abraham

is

finally Christ

(2 Cor. i. 20; Gal. iii. the end of the law ( Rom. x. 4 cp. Gal. iii. 2 1 iv. 5 ) . The redeeming work of Christ involves at once God

Because of

and man.

its

essentially

,

moral character,

it can only be accomplished by a being in close soliman. But as darity with humanity, therefore by a

radically impotent, and the initiative salvation belongs to God, it can only come through a

humanity

is

for

intimate union being who is not himself a sinner but in with God, therefore by a celestial being. Hence the double character of the Pauline Christ, a human perand at the same time superhuman, not God

sonality

but the "Son of (the term is not found in Paul), God" a contradiction that the apostle solves by the idea of the incarnation of the preexisting Christ

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL Christ belongs at once to the divine and the spheres; His personality has a double aspect

151

human (Rom.

But there is nothing in Paul to resemble that which later was to be the orthodox dogma, because his i.

4).

thought does not express itself in theological definitions, and also because he does not picture to himself a combination in the person of Christ of incongruous elements, but rather the succession of diverse phases.

The Pauline idea of God (2 Cor.

is

that of a divine Being, the image 4; Col. i. 15), a celestial man

iv.

the first-born of creation (Col. (i Cor. xv. 48, 49), bei. 15), who, laying aside His celestial attributes,

came man, and who, after His resurrection, received 11 the name of "Lord (Phil. ii. 5-1 1 ) .^

outside Everything which concerns preexistence is double a has and of experience, as Paul conceives it,

This proceeds from the theological system of Judaism, in which the notion of the Messiah was reflecvery developed, but also from the theological If Jesus, by His death and resurrection, had tion.

origin.

brought about that which He had, in fact, accomof Paul, it necesplished according to the experience His that personality must have been sarily follows unlike that of other men.

The name by which Paul most Christ

is

that of "Son of God."

for there

is

nothing

in the

resembles the idea to be

frequently designates This is but an image,

apostle's writings which later, of a Son be-

met with

suborgotten by God. The Christ remains distinctly dinate to the Father. He was created by the Father. This follows from the parallel drawn between Adam 1

and Him, but also from the term "image of God/ which recalls the narrative of the creation of the first

JESUS man

in the

term

image of

"first-born."

THE NAZARENE God The

(Gen.

i.

27) and also of the man or

idea of the celestial

the typical man of I Cor. xv. 48 is another form of the notion of preexistence which is affirmed in a series of explicit texts for instance, in the declaration of the Epistle to the

Romans

that

God had

sent

His Son

ii. 5). 3; cp. Gal. iv. 4; 2 Cor. viii. 9; Phil. the in Christ taken the from It follows also by part creation (i Con viii. 6; Col. i. 15-17)-

(Rom.

viii.

that is, at the moment chosen the end of time conceived by His wisdom (Gal. by God in the plan jv. 4) Jesus was born in the midst of the Jewish

At

people, a descendant of

Abraham and

of

David (Rom.

unto God (Rom. i. 3). He was in all points obedient v. 17-19; Phil. ii. 8) and had in no wise known sin a human appear(2 Cor. v. 21 ). The texts in which viii. ance of Christ is spoken of (Rom. 3; Phil. ii. 7)

must not be interpreted against the

reality of Jesus,

the for, as H. J. Holtzmann has very well observed, of notion to the Greek word employed is not opposed 8 That which exidentity, but to that of difference.

confirms this interpretation is the fact that Paul attributes to Christ flesh and blood (Rom. i. 3, iii. 25 ; I Cor. x. 16: Col. i. 20), while these are, in his view, elements which characterize human nature, and are

plicitly

8 It may appear, given the notion of the flesh, that there is a contradiction between the humanity of Christ and the fact that He it without sin. The solution of this is given by the parallelism drawn between Adam and Jesus Christ. Just as Adam, before the fall, wa at the same time man and without sin, so it is possible to conceive

for Christ what Adam had been at the be noted that Jewish thought does not rigorously affirm the universality of sin. Jewish Apocryphal book, fourth few are Esdras, says that nearly all men are sinners and that very not This offers some striking affinities with Paul's thought (vii. 139).

that

God had

creation.

realized

It is to

A

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

153

The foreign to the celestial life (i Cor. xv. 50). death His is Christ of essence of the work upon the cross. The cross is for Paul the power and the wisdom

God (i Cor. man can have to of

18, 23, 24), the sole reason that be assured of his salvation (Gal. vi. i.

called 14), and for this the enemies of the Gospel are iii. of Christ the cross of enemies the 18). If (Phil. Paul combated with the energy and perseverance known to us the idea of justification by the works of is in order particularly by circumcision, it that is, the efficacity of the cross that the offense

the

Law, and

may

not be diminished (Gal.

v.

II, vi.

12;

i

Cor.

with It is upon this idea that the 17) the greatest emphasis (Gal. i. 14; i Cor. xv. 3; Rom. Several concepts are introduced to iv. 25, v. 10). i.

apostle insists

.

explain

for instance, that of Christ as the paschal

it

lamb (i Cor. v. 7), that of Christ as propitiation as a levitical (that is, a means of salvation conceived that of the sacrisacrifice) (Rom. iii. 25), and also iii. Gal. vi. ransom fice by 13). But the 17; (Rom. of justifigoverning thought which explains the process cation is that of the condemnation of sin in the flesh of Christ (Gal. Hi. 13; 2 Cor. v. 21; Rom. viii. 3). treated by God Jesus, while being perfectly holy, was were sin personified and condemned. as though

He

not the idea of expiatory sacrifice incidentallyRom. iii. 25, for the victim of this sacrifice had to be of perfect purity, while the death of loaded Jesus on the cross was that of one condemned, with sin. Neither is it the equivalent of ransom, for

This

is

indicated in

the punishment of sin in the flesh of Jesus was a legal sanction and not a satisfaction accorded either to God or devil. Neither can it be said, as does M. Loisy,

JESUS

154

THE NAZARENE

assimilates the death of Christ to the sacrifice of

who

to Azazel, that Christ took upon Himself the sins of men. These sins, in fact, are not His death. They subsist after it, with all

the

ram dedicated

destroyed by

the consequences, and are only destroyed by union virtual death of the believer realized by mystical their

We

have in Paul an original conception with Christ. notions in which juridical play a much greater part than 9 in the Jewish conception of sacrifice. Christ without His resurrection would be without efficacy. The resurrection is not only for

The death of

Paul a reparation accorded to Christ, a recompense for His sacrifice still less is it a consequence of His divine nature. If Christ died without subsequent resurrection, His sacrifice was in vain (i Cor. xv. 14-17). ;

He

was raised again for our

When

25).

active voice

sentence.

always

God who

is

Christ did not return to

Him

the subject of the life

10 by Himself.

10; Gal. i. I Cor. vi. 14, xv. 15; 2 Cor. iv. 14; Roni. iv. 25). His resurrection Christ was restored to the

It is I

Paul

it is

iv.

justification (Rom. uses the verb "to rise again'' in the

God who

raised

(i Thess.

i.

;

Through

rank and to the possession of the attributes which He had in His preexistence, and He is even placed at a ii. 1 1 ) higher rank than that which He occupied (Phil. ,

The question whether Paul taught a doctrine of expiation has There are many texts which seem to hint been much discussed. at it; those on which it is said that Christ died "for us" or "for our sins," but it is not certain that "for us" means "in our place" and not "in our interest," and that "for our sins" may have the sense of "accepting responsibility for our sins," and not "because of our sins." It is rather the idea of solidarity which seems to adapt itself to

10

to

Paul's thought (2 Cor. v. 15). case of the Johannine conception, "I have power life and power to take it again" (John x. 18).

As in the lay down my

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL and

scats

Himself

essentially spirit

(

I

hand of God (Rom.

at the right

viii. 34; Col. iii. i). the divine glory. In

He His

155

enters into the possession of glorious existence Christ was

Cor. xv. 45 )

,

and even the

ll

Spirit

The phrase "Christ, (2 Cor. iii. 17; Rom. viii. 9, 10). of Him almost makes power of God" (i Cor. i. 24) "mode" of the

a

divine activity.

The death and resurrection of Christ also modify His position relatively to demoniacal beings. Henceforward, indeed, they have no power over those who belong to Christ (Rom. viii. 37). He has gained the and reestablished order in the cosmos (Col. victory

He

first place and brought other into subjection powers. Nevertheless, accordof Christ can only ing to I Cor. xv. 24, 25, the victory at the end of time. The reconciling of these take

i.

18-20).

has taken the

all

place

two

things,

in

appearance contradictory, seems

at-

tained by the idea that in the text of the Epistles to the Philippians, Romans and the Colossians they are considered as principles and in the absolute, while

Corinthians they are considIn the chronological development.

in the first Epistle to the

ered

in

their

Epistle to the

Romans

it

is

a question of a certain

not exclude a struggle. victory, but one which does The Satanic powers are not destroyed; they can still the last battle with Christ, but they will be unable

wage

In the Epistle to the Philippians (ii. to triumph. knee 9-11) Christ receives a name before which every

does not imply that they will not On the other hand, in the first attempt to rebel. to the Corinthians, if there is a battle, the

shall

bow, but

this

Epistle 11

Believers mystically in union with him ceased to be spirit (Gal. v. 24; Rom. vi. z).

become

flesh

to

i 56

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

The victory of Christ is 20 Christ gains the i. CoL to certain. According This may be victory by the blood upon the cross. with I Cor. ii. 8, where the statement is issue is fixed in advance.

compared

had known that is, understood His plans the wisdom of God the glorious Lord. Why crucified have not would they Because they would not have devoted their is this? efforts to the realization of a work which must have for them as consequence their overthrow and spoliation. The cross is thus the means by which the princes of this world are to be annihilated and despoiled. It

made

that if the archons of this world

the thought of impossible to interpret with precision Paul on this point, for it proceeds only by allusions

is

which are concerned either with the teaching he had himself given, or with the current ideas of his time for example, those developed in the Ascension of Isaiah, and which, to appeal directly to the intelligence

of his readers,

it

sufficed to evoke.

and complete victory of Christ over the be gained at the end of the age. spirits would only After His resurrection Christ is seated at the right hand of God (Rom. viii. 34; Col. iii. i). He will under His foot, reign until all enemies have been put

The

full

enemy of all death. Then He will surrender the Kingdom to His Father, and this will be and the

last

the end (i Cor. xv. 24, 26). It is is this Pauline Christology formed? often said that the apostle was the creator of Chris-

How

is only exact if the word "creain the sense ex nihilo, but in not tion" be understood,

tology.

This formula

the sense of a synthesis formed

from preexisting

ele-

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

15?

Pauline thought appears as an original solution of a problem which arose out of the circumstances themselves, for the Christological problem

ments.

existed

The

from the very moment that one

single

man

of the ignominy continued of His death. But the solutions or the outlines of them were swept aside by the powerful synthesis of Paul, to believe in Jesus in spite

Christian thought. Certain elements of the Christology of Paul have a speculative These are specially the notions of saintliness origin.

which dominated

all later

not the observation of a fact but and of preexistence. the affirmation of a principle of the The notion, too, Messiahship has a theoretical in so far as

it

is

and absolute character.

The drama proceeds we adopt the

ing to a necessary plan, while if

accordidea in

the parable of the vineyard, according to the thought of Jesus, we are led to the conception that the arrival of the Messiah was a last attempt at redemption, which

would not have taken place if the wickedness of mankind had not rendered fruitless the mission of the of the death prophets. The doctrine of the necessity of Christ marks, indeed, an essential point of difference between the thought of Paul and that of Jesus. For Jesus death is the supreme proof of love for His fellow men, which He will give them if it be necessary. It is like His entire ministry, but not separated from

an appeal addressed to sinners it is not what the very cause of the it is according to Paul's thought and Reflection God. speculation are dompardon of inant in Paul. As for the preponderance accorded to one might almost say the eclipsing of the cross it

;

it is

;

Christ's ministry in face of the unique and extraorit can only be explained dinary radiance of His cross

JESUS

I5 8

THE NAZARENE

into contact by the angle under which Paul entered

with the Gospel.

Paul an element whose origin is in the 12 Bruckner has shown that Jewish Messianic doctrine.

There

is

in

after eliminating

what

is

specifically Christian in the

found a system of coherent ideas which finds its place in the most natural manner in the development of the Jewish Messianic doctrine.

Pauline Christology there

This Christology existed conversion.

is

in

Paul's

mind before

his

Certain Hellenic elements are also to be those treating of the relations of Christ

recognized with the spirits

but they

may have

been incorporated

with Jewish ideas before Paul. Nothing, however, the Pauline consider to than would be more erroneous of Jewish or Christology as only a simple development

Judeo-Hellenic premises.

That which gives him

his

built up of these elements originality is the synthesis and the historical episode of the life and death of

Jesus. It is

not possible to reduce to a

common

element

the historical and dogmatic constituents of the Pauline This is Christology, as M. Couchoud would do. in Paul a proved by the fact that we do not find

homogeneous conception of the cause of as should be the case

if

Christ's death,

the entire history of Jesus, and

of His death in particular, had been the postulates of a dogmatic system. According to I Cor. ii. 8 Christ died crucified owing to the acts of the archons or rebellious angels against

God.

According to Rom.

vii.

3

Concerning the Jewish Messianic doctrine see Schurer (Gesch.), (Die Religion des Judentums), Baldensperger (Die Met" $ianischapokalyptuchen, etc), Brflckner (Die Entstehung der Paulischen Chrutohfie). 12

Boussct

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

159

He was not in person a sinner, but with humanity accepted by Him) through solidarity because God treated Him as though He were sin itself, He

died (although

and inflicted the chastisement which sinners deserve. These two conceptions are not dialectically irrecon-

One might imagine

cilable.

the archons as agents used

Doubtless the two conceptions the same compass or being on are far from having the same plane. The first is only indicated in a quite incidental manner, in a dissertation which treats, not

by God

to punish

sin.

of the death of Christ, but of the wisdom of God. The second is in direct relation with the doctrine of is at the heart of the apostle's justification, which

two explanations are not dealing with a readyfrom conception, nor with a system developed or doctrine, but from the interpretation by this

thought.

The

coexistence of these

proves, however, that

made myth

we

doctrine of an historical fact.

THE

VI.

JUSTIFICATION AND REDEMPTION OF THE

SINNER conclusion follows, with better evidence the study of the Pauline theory of the

The same still,

from

and redemption of the sinner. The death of Christ, as we have seen, abolishes the consequences of sin, and contains in germ the defeat of the demons

justification

humanity is subject and whose action produces sin and death. But, however efficacious it be, this death does not abolish the actual consequences of The theoretical destruction of its power does not sin.

to

whom

save mankind from continuing to bear as a fact the

JESUS

160

THE NAZARENE

if the demonconsequences of sins committed, and still undermankind in principle condemned, powers are the past. in them to goes the effects of its subjection Moreover, their power continues to be exercised up

their defeat will be fully

when

to the time

consum-

mated. accomplished by Christ in dying on the cross does not at once justify sinners ipso facto by

The work

one

to

act,

some extent magical; that

tification possible

before God's tribunal. liever access to the

it

merely makes

jus-

to say, the acquittal of man Justification opens to the be-

is

Heavenly Kingdom and gives him

assurance of his future redemption. Salvation can only be attained for the individual by a moral act. This plainly follows from the term of

employed by Paul. This term implies the change of the relation between persons. "We beseech you in the name of Christ," writes Paul, exerof reconciliation, cising thus what he calls the ministry reconciliation

"be ye reconciled with God" (2 Cor. v. 20). To the act of God giving His Son there must correspond an act of

man. God

calls the sinner; the latter

must

re-

the act of imputing to the sinner the justice attained by Christ, who, considered as sinHimself through His death right with the has

spond. Justification

is

put

ner,

Law, and who lives henceforth a life freed by the power of God from the dominion of sin and death.

The and

This term starting point of justification is faith. 1* in Paul. found often are it from derived words

Faith

is

tian life.

did his 19

phenomenon of the religious ChrisThe type of believer is Abraham. In what faith consist? In this, that God, having

the specific

About 280 times

in the

authentic Epiatles.

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

161

promised that he should be the father of a large posterin this promise at the time when ity, he had confidence his age and that of his wife rendered its realization improbable (Rom. iv. 17-21). Faith is therefore not

founded upon the evidence of a truth, but upon the confidence inspired by God and His omnipotence. According to i Cor. ii. 4, 5 faith has its origin in the power of God, and not in human reasoning. Faith is faith in God (i Thess. i. 8), but there is also faith in Christ (Gal. Christ that

16

Rom.

Hi.

22), because

it is

through keeps His promise. To believe in Christ is to believe in the promises of God it is therefore also to believe in God. Faith has for its origin ii.

;

God

;

the preaching of the Gospel by the apostles and the missionaries whom God has appointed for this object (Rom. x. 14) it includes an intellectual element, the ;

idea of

God who by His power

raised

up Jesus from

the dead. Paul mentions it between the gift of wisdom and that of knowledge (i Cor. xii. 8, 9). But faith is

not only knowledge and confidence; it is also (and this is the most original element in the Pauline conception) union. The believer united to Christ is made mystical a participator in everything touching

Him, and particresurrection. and According to I ularly in His death Thess. v. 10 Jesus died in order that believers, whether Him. This supposes sleeping or waking, may be with the establishing of an indissoluble bond between the believer and the Savior. In i Cor. i. 9 "communion" with the Son of God, the Lord, appears as an ideal held the Lord up to the faithful. He who is united with 14 with Him becomes a (i Cor. vi. 17). In Gal. spirit

of believers with the 14 In this passage the idea of the union Christ serves as the starting-point of the argument, which proves

1

JESUS

62

ii.

THE NAZARENE

20 Paul declares himself to be

19,

crucified

with

Christ that liveth in Christ: "It is for me," and this suppression of the individual life has differits consequence the suppression of all accidental

not I that live;

it is

ences of race, sex and social situation (Gal. iii. 27, Rom. viii. 29 the object of preetc.). According to destination is that believers may be made like unto the

be the image of the Son of God, so that Christ may

among many brethren (Rom. vi. 3-5, xiv. 9; 2 Cor. iv. 10, n, xi. 2). The explanation of this union is furnished by the

first-born

idea of the death of Christ in solidarity with humanone died for all, therefore all died and He ity. "As ;

died for all, so that the living should no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose for them" (2 Cor. v. 14, 15). The mystical union has for its effect the rupture of the bond uniting the man to the world. He asks again "Can it be that you do not :

who were

baptized into union with Christ Jesus in our earthly baptism shared His death? in our bapConsequently, through sharing His death Christ was as Him that just tism, we were buried with raised from the dead by a manifestion of the Father's

know

that

all

of us

If we have life. power, so we also may live a new act become united with Him by the symbolic of His death, surely we shall also become united with Him

by the act symbolic of His resurrection. We recognize the truth that our old self was crucified with Christ, order that the body, the stronghold of sin, might be rendered powerless, so that we should no longer be slaves to sin. For the man who has so died has been in

that

we

are concerned with one of the fundamental ideas of the which the faithful must have been very familiar.

apostle with

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

163

we pronounced righteous and released from sin. And shall we death Christ's shared have we as believe that We know that Christ, having also share His life. once risen from the dead, will not die again. Death has power over Him no longer. ... So let it be with for you regard yourselves as dead to sin, but as living God, through union with Christ Jesus" (Rom. vi. 218 There is here no image, but a precise formula 1 1 ) ;

,

to be taken literally. Christ is free in regard to sin because in dying He paid His debt. Sin, death and

which

is

the law have no

thing

is

Christ.

more dominion over Him. The same

also true of the believer mystically united with also is free with regard to sin, death and

He

the law.

In the last passage cited, what is said about baptism might be interpreted symbolically. But other passages show that this explanation does not suffice, and that to It effectively is more than a symbol. with Christ, believer the of the union about brings one "For we were all baptized to form body, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or freemen" (i Cor. xii. 12).

Paul, baptism

Faith and baptism are thus presented the two

means through which is "For

the believer with the Lord,

in Gal.

iii.

27 as

realized the union of all

of you

who were

baptized into union with Christ clothed yourselves 16 with Christ." That which is true of baptism is also true of the Eucharist. This, for Paul, is an act instituted by in commemoration of His sacrifice, and as a Jesus

Note. English version from Twentieth Century Testament, based upon Westcott and Hort's text. 16 This is confirmed by the practice of baptism for the dead to which Paul alludes in i Cor. xv. 29, without pronouncing any *B

Translator's

New

censure or making any reservation.

(Author's note.)

i6 4

JESUS

means of entering

THE NAZARENE

into relation with

Him in

with which the entire Church

In this act, the faithful are invited to

sit

down

is

His death. associated,

at the Lord's table

and receive His cup. The bread and the wine distributed to them are the flesh and blood of Christ. relation They put those who consume them in direct with Christ through His death. The fruit the believer obtains by his participation in the repast is the consciousness of being by its means intimately united to

the dying Christ (i. Cor.

x. 16,

17).

Baptism and communion, then, occupy in the Pauline Like it, they system exactly the same place as faith. is attained. union which are the means through mystical What relation exists between these two things ? Have if not contradictory, are their to as at any rate different origin and not reducible the idea of mystic union through faith to each other

we

here two notions which,

which represents Paul's thought, while the theory of the sacraments is only an interpretation of the rite seems to us practised in the Church? This solution sacraments the If difficulties. several to encounter it would be were in the background of Paul's thought of them comprehensible that he should have spoken be to abuse an was attacked, in i Cor. xi, where there but not that on a quite practical question (the consumption of meat sacrificed to idols) he should have relied upon the meaning of the communion as a decisive

argument. Neither would the texts relating to baptism be comprehensible. On the other hand, seeing that in so systematic a

mind

as the apostle's the simple juxta-

is very improbposition of two different conceptions the that mystical union able, one is forced to suppose

attained by faith and that attained through the sacra-

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL ments are only two aspects of the same link

uniting them

is

165

fact.

The

not the idea that the sacrament

is

The only a symbol of the faith alone efficacious. a attributes in harmful, real, fact, though apostle, action to the communion when observed without reverence, (i Cor. xi. 27-30). The sacrament acts of itself ex opre operate and without the intervention of faith, but faith that is, the conscious desire to become one

with Christ

necessary to direct

is

its

To

action.

understand this necessary to get rid of the modern ideas opposing symbol and reality to each other, and it is

to

remember that for the mind of

antiquity the symbol

for partook of the reality of that which it represents instance, a name was not a simple designation, but the very substance of the thing named. ;

for every believer mystical union accomplished that which had been accomplished for Christ by His death and His resurrection. This is implied in the

The

fundamental affirmation of Paulinism, "the believer is an inby faith." Certain texts seem to favor

justified

idea of effective justiterpretation imputing to Paul the that is, a transformation of the believer. In fication for instance, it is stated that God "conRom. via.

demned

4, sin in the earthly nature (of Christ) so that of the might be satisfied in us

the requirements

who

live

now

Law

in obedience,

not to our earthly nature, is a question here not of

but to the Spirit." But it but of sanctification, which while justification,

mately related

to, is still different

the exhortation to sin no

from

more which

is

inti-

Similarly

it.

addressed in

been justified by faith 17 to those who have were in Christ would have no meaning if justification

Gal.

ii.

identical with sanctification.

Justification

is

forensic:

66

1

JESUS act of God

THE NAZARENE 1

the Judge, who proclaims "just* as the (that is, acquitted) the sinner who appears Last the of is an anticipation accused before Him. It the

it is

Judgment. the believer mystical union in linking the fate of which the fetter to that of Christ breaks keeps man

The

In like manner as Christ, during His earthly ministry, has

the slave of sin and death.

who

lived in the flesh

become

the believer also

spirit,

is

no longer

flesh,

but

But if in theory the believer carnal life, in practice this the and has broken with show this rupture is not consummated. It suffices to spirit

(Rom.

vi.

12).

sin

to recall the

filled

important place

in

Pauline

the

Epistles by exhortations to sanctification (for instance,

never comwhich explains the somepletely realized, what special character which the Pauline morality 17 The fundamental idea upon which it rests assumes. In

Gal. v. 1-6, 10).

and

is

fact, sanctification is

it is

this

Law 18

that of the abolition of the

4, 5, v. 18;

Rom.

vi.

14, vii. 1-6).

Law," wrote Paul (Gal. a free

man

(Gal. v. i;

ii.

19).

Rom.

vi.

(Gal. iii. 24, iv, "I am dead unto

The

believer

18, 22;

I

is

then

Cor.

ix.

be spon1-19, etc.). His activity should, in principle, Since he belongs to God, he ought to live taneous. to God; since he is a spirit, he ought natuaccording *T

Upon

the Pauline

Siinde bn Paulus; Paulus.

also

morality see

Wernle, Der Christ und die Das Problem der Ethik bet

R. Bultmann,

the Law, i*By this is meant the abolition of the ritual part of not of its moral part. But the inadequacy of the terminology which does not allow the apostle to distinguish exactly between the two an exact statement, as is seen by the things prevents his reaching declares that he is not under the passage i Cor ix, 20, where Paul a law, since he is under the without be cannot he Law, although law of Christ

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL produce what Paul

rally to

Rom.

(Gal. v. 16;

viii.

calls the fruits

167

of the

spirit

12). in reality, and restored in fact.

Things are not, however, so simple

is obligation, abolished in principle, should be it as seems That which though

shown

as a

Man consequence is formulated as a postulate. should strive to realize the fruits of the spirit, which He ought to are in harmony with his new nature. struggle and labor to escape indeed the very law which 1*

theory no longer exists for him (Gal.

in

vi. 15, viii. 7,

The

v.

13;

Rom.

8).

morality of Paul answers to the dualism of the

and

fact of flesh

spirit

which subsists

in the believer

redemption is achieved; it possesses, therefore, a temporary value, and will be abolished when only 20 There believers shall fully live the life of the spirit. until

here a difference between theory and practice which must be explained. Paul has expressed in touching

lies

classic the sense of this imperfec-

words which remain

"For I am so far from habitually do that I find myself doing the to want doing what But when I do what I want not very thing I hate. This to do, I am admitting that the Law is right.

tion of sanctification

:

I

.

being sin in

.

no longer

so, the action is

which

me

.

I

is

within me.

mean

in

my

I

know

my

own, but that of

there

earthly nature.

is .

.

nothing good Miserable .

A

curious fact must be pointed out that in the exposition of the where the modus operandt of redemption is Epistle to the Romans an exhortation, "Being justified by analyzed the argument ends by Logical consistency seems so law, let us have peace with God." declaration that many manuscripts have substia to require plainly tuted "we have" for "let us have." 20 Concerning the Pauline morality should be noted among the motives by the apostle the place occupied by the idea of 10

proposed

the imitation of Jesus (i Thess.

i.

6;

i

Cor.

xi.

i; i Col.

iii.

13).

JESUS

168

man

that I

THE NAZARENE

am! who

me

will deliver

me from

death?"

the

body

(Rom. bringing Doubtless the apostle gives a cry of triumph 1 5-24 ). "Thanks be unto God through to follow this lament

that

is

to

this

vii.

21

but the motive of this cry Jesus Christ our Lord" The is the hope of being delivered in the future. liberation of those who are in Christ is therefore only a potential liberation.

This dualism which

exists in

man

after justification

is explained by the fact that the believer, although dead to the flesh, continues to live in the flesh. Neither his

in which he lives has been transhas formed. only received the promise of the which will be fully realized Spirit as surety of that Glory, the later (2 Cor. i. 22, v. 5; Rom. viii. 23). is the for reserved elect, celestial attribute only promised him (Rom. v. 2, viii. 18). Salvation is not fully

body nor the world

He

accomplished. "By our hope we were saved." Again he writes "Our salvation is nearer now than when we In the same Epistle first believed" (Rom. xiii. n). :

we were yet sinners Christ died for us, how much more now that we are justified by His blood shall we be saved by His life?" The further he writes

:

"If while

affirms that salvaEpistle to the Philippians similarly It is at the second tion is not yet attained (i. 6). it shall be fully realized that Lord the of coming

(Rom.

viii.

VII.

18-25).

THE

GENESIS OF THE PAULINE THEOLOGY

How are we

to explain this seeming contradiction in Paul's conception of the position of the justified man, Translator**

mod Horfi

text.

NQt*.Twntteth Century Nno

Ttttamint, Wcitcott

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

169

not in fact what in theory it ought to be ? For the faithful it is only at the end of time that will be consummated the thing which in principle follows from the new situation in which he finds himself through

which

is

mystical union with Christ.

This

is

one of the most

problems which the interpretation of Paulinism presents. It is by no hazard that it is difficult

so ; tion

and

delicate

the consequence, we would say without hesitais the penalty of the association in Paul's thought

it is it

of two incongruous elements. There is, indeed, somein which man thing more than the complex situation forces which alterstruggles between two antagonistic

The contradiction is nately attract and repel him. much deeper it lies at the very root of Pauline thought. Paul conceives it, the situation of man In the ;

way

between justification and redemption is of a proviPaul expects the resional and temporary character. to complete the date a at of Christ turn very early 22 work begun. Justification and redemption, although remain organically linked one to the other. separate, of the same drama. So inter-related acts two They are

and complementary are they that their separation can of the only be conceived by a complete dislocation Messianic of the redemption. There Jewish doctrine is no equivalent for this dislocation in the whole Jewish it is possible to Apocalypse. We do not think that the than following: The give any other explanation

is anterior to his conception of redemption, in Paul, Christian faith. As a Rabbi, he already expected the 22 In I Thess iv. 15 and I Cor xv. 51 Paul conceives that the return of Christ will take place during his life. He had announced had begun this to the Thessalonians in such a way that the latter to suppose that the faithful who died before the Savior's return would be excluded from salvation (i Thess. iv 13).

i7

o

JESUS

arrival of a Savior

THE NAZARENE who would

rescue

men from

the

dominion of sin and death to bring them into the Kingdom of the Spirit, whose advent would be marked by the triumph of the Messiah over the enemies of God. This faith was his at the time when Jesus in his

was only a justly condemned blasphemer. Then happened the mysterious event upon the Damascus road which gave him the conviction that Jesus was that what living and in glory. From this he concluded His disciples had said about Him was true that Jesus had been the holy Son of God, sent upon earth to an unaccomplish His work. Hence was established eyes

:

expected synthesis between the doctrine of redemption (already in his mind) and the story of the Nazarene from Jesus, crucified by Pontius Pilate, but raised again and friends His to Himself since He showed the dead the in to Paul himself, and henceforward was living spirit life.

of synthesis of these two elements (the story unwas Jesus and the doctrine of redemption) Paul able to effect completely at once. There were in the

The

mission of the Savior-Messiah certain elements which did not permit of their relation to Jesus of Nazareth. those which (to put it in one word) related to a triumphant Messiah, restorer of the sovdividereignty of God. Paul resolved the difficulty by

These were

all

and in ing the mission of the Messiah into two parts he reserving for the glorious return of Christ (which considered very near) everything it was impossible to discover as accomplished in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. The Pauline doctrine thus proceeds

from

a dislocation of the

work of redemption.

therefore has no single source;

it is

It

not born out of

THE THEOLOGY OF PAUL

171

the elaboration or the transformation of a myth, but fact proceeds from the interpretation of an historical constifact the by a doctrine already preexisting it: tuted by the life and the dealh of Jesus and by belief The theology of Paul assumes in His resurrection.

therefore a double starting point for its development. One is a doctrine of redemption whose origins must

be sought in Judaism; sode, the life of Jesus.

choud has

23

attempted,

the other It is

to

is

an historical

not possible, as attribute

to

it

epi-

M. Coua

more

homogeneous character, and by reducing one of these elements to the other to maintain that the history of Jesus was deduced from a drama of redemption. Indeed, it would not be possible to find in the history more or less syncretic an analogy of Jewish thought must be admitted in Paul; for to that the to process presume the existence of certain forms of Judaism

of the Diaspora sensibly differing from that of Palestine and which would not have been without a strong influence on rising Christianity would not be to state a true parallel.

We know

of nothing, in fact, in the Judaism of the Diaspora which offers any real analogies with the Pauline speculations on this point, and it would be historical unquestionably making use of an inadmissible to attempt the explanation of a given fact by it is not something which is only a conjecture. But

method

any parallel which forbids us Paulinism an exclusive product of specula-

entirely the absence of

to see in

also the existence of incoherences and internal If the contradictions which we have pointed out.

tion

;

it is

28 In a Judaism which, no doubt had not been entirely uninfluenced by foreign ideas, principally Greek and Persian.

172

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

had come forth in its entirety from the brain of Paul, as Minerva did from that of Jupiter, The a homogeneous character. it would present Christian doctrine

manifest traces of the sutures

we have

discovered

us in affirmplainly prove its double origin and justify and assumes of theology ing that the Pauline system certifies the historical tradition

about Jesus.

CHAPTER

VII

THE NONPAULINE EPISTLES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT I.

THEIR CHARACTER

THE

noninterpretation of the testimony which the the for calls Christ Pauline Epistles give concerning

same observations already made concerning those of Pauline origin. These documents are the Epistle to the Ephesians, attributed to Paul, but in which one is obliged to perceive a secondary imitation of the I and Epistle to the Colossians ; the pastoral Epistles ( 2 Tim. and Titus), in which there appear to have been inserted fragments of authentic Pauline letters;

Epistle of Peter, at the basis of which arc found the essential ideas of Paul; the Epistle to th* Hebrews, written by a man very familiar with the

the

first

Alexandrine philosophy and exegesis; the second related to Epistle of Peter and that of Jude, closely each other, and apparently of fairly recent period and who makes use of the lastly, the Epistle of James, traditional Jewish and Greek ethic, and shows very of analogies with the literature of the Wisdom ;

striking 1 the Old Testament.

the exception of the Epistle of James, all these works belong to the literary species which Paul created by his correspondence, and all betray the influence of his theology.

With

considered separately i The three Epistles of John, which cannot be from the fourth Gospel, are not mentioned here. 173

i

JESUS

74

THE NAZARENE

of these letters pretends to be a complete They are written to exposition of Christian faith.

None

and onjy expound the ideas and the beliefs 2 which they assume to be those of their readers.

believers,

Several

among them,

so far as their date can be fixed

with any preciseness, were written at the time when the Gospel literature began to be spread abroad. All these Epistles should be considered as the commentary tradiupon certain points of Christian doctrine and tion it is illegitimate to employ in what concerns them ;

that is, to suppose their the argument ex silentio authors were ignorant of certain ideas because they do not give them expression. Very frequently in the Deutero-Paufine literature

The idea could only have been a moral force for men who were acquainted with the human history of Jesus. The the idea of the imitation of Jesus

is

met with.

author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, after having proposed to his readers the imitation of the heroes of the faith spoken of in the Old Testament and Jewish tradition (xi. 1-40), concludes by exhorting them to fix their eyes upon Jesus, who "endured the

and despised the shame" (Heb. xii. I, 2). The way in which this exhortation is connected with the

cross

examples given

in the eleventh

hensible

also

if this

is

chapter is only comprereferred to an historical model.

The author also exhorts the faithful to suffer insult as of the Jesus Himself had done (xiii. 13). The writer first Epistle of Peter declares to his readers who are called

upon to

suffer persecution that they

ought to

2 This In the Johanninc is illustrated by a significant fact to the fourth Epistles, which, as all are aware, are closely related Gospel, there is no allusion to the facts about the life of Jesus.

THE NONPAULINE find consolation in the

fered in the flesh

(iv.

EPISTLES

175

thought that Christ also sufi), and has left to them an

example that they may follow in His footsteps. Thus he makes his thought precise "Reviled, He reviled not :

He

suffered, but again; entrusted His cause to 8

just"

(ii.

He Him

did not threaten;

He

whose judgments are

21-23).

of the Epistle to the Ephesians, exhorting the faithful to live in love for one another proposes that they should follow the example of Christ, "who

The author

loved us and gave Himself for us"

II.

THE PASTORAL

(

v. 2

)

.

EPISTLES

It is true that in the pastoral Epistles the

name of

with or Jesus is never found, but always "Jesus Christ," a without the epithet of the Lord, which is designation of the celestial Christ, not of Jesus in His earthly is no direct menministry. It is also true that there tion of His death in certain passages where an allusion

would seem natural

4

(i

Tim.

i.

14; 2 Tim.

i.

9, etc.;

4-7). The writer specially speaks of the manifestation of the glory of God in Jesus Christ 2 Tim. i. 9, etc. Titus iii. 4, etc.) and if ( i Tim. i. 15

Titus

iii.

he

insists

upon the human

;

;

;

character of this manifesta-

concrete detail, no tion, he does so without citing any the minds of his in were doubt because these details readers. Concerning this manifestation, he employs the

word

epifaneia (2 Tim.

i.

10; Titus

iii.

4), which

of Christ on Immediately after the author speaks of the death is an allusion there that evident is It ii. Peter 24). the cross (i here not to an Apocalyptic drama, but to the crucifixion. * But account must be taken of the effect upon the mind of his readers of the form of words used by the writer. *

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

176

the maniappears to put it in the same category with 5 Tim. vi. 14; return His at Christ of festation (i not be must it 2 Tim. iv. i, 8; Titus ii. 13), but the Christ expected forgotten that the identity of the of the with end at the Jesus who had already age

appeared

in history

had for the Christian

faith

much

importance. In the first Epistle to Timothy there is a definite allusion to a testimony given by Jesus in the presence of Pontius Pilate. The writer urges Timothy to fight the good fight of faith, to seize hold upon eternal life to which he

had been

called,

and of which he had made

confession in the presence of several witnesses. of all urge you as in the sight of God, the source

and of Christ

Jesus,

who

before Pontius Pilate

made

urge you to keep His or reproach until the Jesus Christ" (i Tim. vi.

the great profession of faith

commandments

"I life,

I

without stain

appearing of our Lord in 12-14). The mention of the Roman Procurator has and the same conditions, found in Ignatius Justin, in the first given rise to the suggestion that the phrase the article of first sketch be a Epistle to Timothy might

in the

creed

"He

suffered under Pontius Pilate."

6

M.

Kattenbusch thinks that the testimony of Timothy which is referred to is that given by him at the time

Concerning Jesus Christ, the phrase and "give testimony'* may have a double meaning, His to and relate both to the declarations of Jesus In the article of the creed the mention of sufferings.

of his baptism.

Pilate

Von

is

only a chronological indication.

Soden,

Dot

Interest* det

apostoltschen

It

Zeitalter*

is

too

an der

Evangelischen Geschichte (Freiburg im Br., 1892). * Von Soden, op. cit.; Kattenbusch, Das apostolischt Symbol.

THE NONPAULINE

EPISTLES

177

brief to have been introduced in an apologetic interest 7 to confirm the reality of the crucifixion. M. Kattenbusch believes that the phrase in the creed

from the transfer of a formula of exorcism, name of Jesus Christ, crucified by Pontius

arises

"In the

The

8

This theory gives rise to various objections. parallelism which exists between the confession of

Pilate."

Timothy and that of Jesus Christ compels us to give the term the same meaning in the two cases, and negatives the introduction (even in a subordinate

manner)'

into the confession of Jesus Christ of the notion of not apply for Timsuffering and death, which would

The

idea of the suffering of Christ is so ailhave important in Christian thought that it could not been merely suggested. This idea once excluded, there othy.

no longer any connection (according to M. Kattenbusch's view) between the passage of the first Epistle to Timothy and the article of the creed. Nevertheless, it is difficult to admit that the coincidence between the is

two phrases

The article

quite fortuitous. of the explanation offered by M. Kattenbusch is

of the creed

is

no more satisfactory.

If the

mention of Pontius Pilate possessed a chronological have been interest, an indication of this kind would of Jesus. The insertion into the creed of a formula of exorcism which does not seem to have had wide currency does not appear to be more natural either.

more

in place in reference to the birth

An

in the first Epistle interpretation of the passage to Timothy, infinitely more satisfactory than those t If

such were

This formula

its

10

character,

attested

by

the

Justin,

function

of Pilate

should be

by Ireneus and by Palladium

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

I78

hitherto proposed, has been offered by M. Baldensto have definitely explained perger, who seems to us the meaning and scope of the text simultaneously with its

relations to the article of the creed.

sum up which

in its

all

main features

the conclusions

9

We

shall

his illuminating study, of

(it

seems to us) must be

concerning the testimony of for its object to fix the time had have not Jesus could Neither Timothy nor the other in which He lived.

The phrase

accepted.

readers of the Epistle required enlightenment on this Besides, the writer has no care for history or point.

chronology.

on the past.

on the future and not Neither does he dream of affirming the

His eyes are

fixed

as the reality of the facts of evangelical history, or,

of making history out of a myth. mere mention of Pontius Pilate would, besides, inadequate to do that. One of the preoccu-

mythologists have

The

it,

be quite was the contest against pations dominating his thought have a practical attacks he which Those heresies. the Christians. of life character and a reference to the

What

is

known by

us about the author's thought perif he had found himself con-

mits us to affirm that

fronted by a negation respecting the reality of the life of Jesus, he would not have confined himself to a combat on a side issue by the phrase, "He rendered testia phrase which, besides, before Pontius Pilate" an to allusion was a simple episode known to his readers and in no wise in doubt among them. The mere mention of the fact permits the argument to be drawn

mony

from

it.

suffering;

was a question of testimony and not of there is therefore no reason to suppose an It

Baldenspergcr, // a rendu ttmoignage sous Ponce Pilate (Revue

179 antl-Docetist polemic as

It is

is

the case in other texts where

The

starting point of the arguis not the testimony of Jesus, but that of Timothy. only incidentally, and as an encouragement for

Pilate

ment

10

mentioned.

is

in his attitude, that the

Timothy to persevere

testimony not think does Baldensperger faith of which confession that it is Timothy's baptismal is referred to, but a testimony which Timothy had

of Jesus

is

recalled.

M.

given of his faith before the magistrates who had "One is justified interrogated him on the subject. in saying," writes

M.

Baldensperger, "that Timothy,

like Christ, had been summoned before the Roman confessed his magistrates and that he had publicly In this way the text of I Timothy is replaced faith. in the historical environment to which it belongs by

period of persecutions. The duty of the Church was clearly marked out; they of the leaders were obliged to insist that the disciples of Jesus should It is a

origin.

themselves publicly confess their faith without lending from themselves save to to more or less formal denials " n And M. Baldensperger points out persecution. a whole series of maxims found in that very appositely the

New

sion.

Jesus,

duty of public confes"Whosoever shall confess Me before men," said Father who is in "I will confess him before

heaven.

same

Testament

My Me

before men, the deny in heaven" deny before My Father who is

Whosoever

will I

(Matt.

recalls this

x. 32,

33).

shall

Doubtless

all

these declarations

did not have their first origin at the period of the in which they stand out in persecutions, but the way 10

For instance, Ignatius, ad Magn. t xi; ad Smyrn>

ix, i.

Baldensperger op.

at., p. 20, etc.

La;

ad. Tral.

I So

and clearly an undeniable solicitude their Christians to shows anxiety to outline clearly exhortation of the First duty, as is also done in his Lord in your hearts, the Epistle of Peter: "Sanctify

relief

reveals

whomsobeing always ready to give an account before " in is faith which of the you" ever may question you these circumstances, given the a model importance which the idea of the Christ as that the natural was it possessed in Christian thought,

(i

Pet

iii.

Under

15).

Pilate should episode of the interrogation of Jesus by to be insisted upon. In this was seen a living ex-

come

ample of the attitude incumbent upon the faithful when did interrogated by the judicial authorities. But why examthe to of the the writer Timothy Epistle propose had He when of testimony? given already Jesus ple The answer is the history of the persecutions of proves it that generally one single interrogation the Christians was not considered sufficient. In 2 Tim. iv. 1

6 there

is

a reference to a

first

appearance before

the magistrates, which implies necessarily that there will be a second, and Pliny expressly states that he was in the habit of interrogating accused persons two

or three times.

This

exhorted to persevere

is

the reason that

in his attitude.

Timothy was In the

critical

circumstances through which Christianity was passing, exhortation to fidelity in the confession of faith was the always a present need. It was therefore originally 12 Concerning the importance of testimony at the period of perseThe fact that the Christians of Pergamos cutions see Apoc. 11. 13. did not deny their faith at the time of the martyrdom of Antipas has caused the presence of Nicolaites among them to be considered

as having little importance, while the struggle against heresy was one of the dominating occupations of the author of the letters to the seven churches.

THE NONPAULINE

EPISTLES

181

idea of the "Christ as model" for the confessors of the faith which gave birth to a symbolical formula destined

to enter later into the Apostles' Creed.

There remains

to explain the transformation by which the phrase suffered under Pontius Pilate" was substituted for

M.

"He "He

Baldens-

gave testimony before Pontius Pilate." of the word perger supposes an error of interpretation and not of marteria, taken in the sense of martyrdom This explanation

confession.

is

perhaps not sufficient. of a phrase which

It is difficult to accept in respect

must have long had for Christians a great practical value. Perhaps it might be possible to think of another the creed which explanation. The various phrases of refer to Christ are so arranged as to constitute a

summary of His history, and

it

might be asked

if it

was

not through an assimilation with what is stated conthe general idea cerning the crucifixion and death that besides also included the notion of

martyrdom (which of testimony) has been substituted for the narrower one.

Whatever the explanation may passage

Tim.

I

exegesis of

M.

be, the scope of the

13 stands out clearly through the Baldensperger. It is no question of vi.

the evolution of history from a myth, as M. Couchoud thinks, nor of an effort to crystallize by a chronological

which might seem inconsistent, but the with an immediately practical aim in view,

detail a history utilization,

of a detail in the tradition a lesson

upon which

it

known

to every one, teaching

was necessary to

insist.

This conclusion illuminates this fact: that for the writer of the pastorals the Christian faith rested upon real history. This affirmation is found in such a form

1 82

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

that

it

of making proves the writer had no sentiment

an innovation.

THE

III.

EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS

Although the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews makes current use of the name of Jesus, and not only of of Jesus Jesus Christ or the Lord, the historical person in his does not thought possess very special importance. He who is designated by the name of Jesus is the glorified Lord who preexisted and who is now in heaven. Thus it has sometimes been thought that the Christ of the Epistle to the Hebrews was a purely mythical per14 has observed, this sonage," and, indeed, as Windisch not a man who had Jesus was a celestial Being, and made a impression upon those who had

profound

His history

known Him.

terms which almost

all

is

presented in abstract

apply to the traditional type

of the Messiah, borrowed from the Old Testament, and especially from the Psalms. What is said about His death is in some aspects lacking in everything of

The

historical character.

Hebrews

is

a

Jesus of the Epistle to the

who

Priest

High

n) He

offers

His own blood

not the condemned of the But these feaRomans." the Sanhedrin, executed by tures, which have considerable importance, are not the in sacrifice (ix.

;

is

If Christ preexisted, and if in celestial glory, the link which unites these

only ones to point out.

He

is

now

two periods of His history *

is

His

incarnation.

Herein,

Drews, Die Christusmythe ; Smith, Ecce Deus; Coucboud, Le

tire de Jttvs. i* Windisch, 11 Von

Dtr Htbrdrbrief.

Sodcn, op.

cit.,

p. 120.

THE NONPAULINE Von Soden

as

EPISTLES

has well observed,

is

a

183

conception

to the Philippians. closely related to that of the Epistle The idea of the human life of Jesus in the thought of our author does not play a purely minor it

part;

a

Jesus

the

redemption accomplished by redemption at the center of the author's

explains

thought.

emphasizes certain features which clearly show that a history of Jesus, and in particular of His death, was familiar to him, and forms the foundation of his of theology. He indicates that the manifestation

He

Christ took place at a recent date, in a period which The he considers the last in the world's history (i. 2) message had been brought to him by those who had .

heard the preaching of Jesus (ii. 3). He describes the sufferings and temptations of Jesus in words which would be with difficulty explicable as theoretical views, and he maintains that they should be a model and a

first

consolation to

men who

and persecution. being tempted,

also have to support suffering

"Because

He

is

He

Himself has

able to succor those

suffered,

who

are

of tempted" (ii. 18). "Although He was the Son and His from obedience learned He sufferings; God, all those who believe to He became made perfect, being the author of eternal salvation" (v. 8, 9). The lot of Christ is exactly the same as that of all men, who must die once, after which is the judgment in

Him

(ix.

27, 28).

The whole

constitutes a

summary of

Christ's sufferings ; there is no intention by the author to rewrite a history that in any case his readers know, but there is a certain care to depict in it a drama of

a practical lesson redemption and the desire to attach to

it.

1

JESUS

84

One

THE NAZARENE

the Passion single detail concerning

is

related

This is that Jesus died in the Epistle to the Hebrews. outside the city (xiii. 12), This detail is not found in of the Gospel narratives, but seems to be implied

any by John (xix. 20). This is, besides, extremely probable, and seems to be presumed in all the accounts. Because the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews brings

owing to the allegorical significance which he accords it, there is no legitimate reason this detail into relief

to suppose that he postulates it for ulterior conIn a speculative construction this detail venience. would not be thus isolated; it would form part of a

In the congeneral picture interpreted as an allegory. to be is it ditions in which it is found, explained only it is borrowed from a narrative of that by supposing the death of Jesus, from which it is detached because

of

allegorical interest.

its

IV.

THE

FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER, EPISTLE OF

JUDE, THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER AND THE

EPISTLE OF JAMES the concept Epistle of Peter, if we except of the Christ as the model of the faithful, does not allusion to the facts of the life and death contain

The

first

any

presented as the The holiness of realization of a prophetic program. in i Pet. ii. 22, and Isaiah (liii. 9) Jesus is based upon writer the to His sufferings, quotes the when of Jesus.

The Gospel

history

is

referring

same prophet (liii. 4-6). The first Epistle of Peter shows how the theological interpretation of the Gospel history,

already vaguely outlined in the preceding

THE NONPAULINE

EPISTLES

185

hisgeneration, tended to become substituted for the to authorbrief too is of Jude tory itself. The Epistle it is rash, seeing the the of expressions employed, to suppose as vagueness does Weinel, that verse 4 is a polemic against Docetism. Admitting the date of its composition as prob-

ize any conclusions whatever, for

ably fairly late, we might pass over the second Epistle 10 of Peter written at a time when the Epistles of Paul already formed a collection of recognized authority to say, when Christianity and its doctrines were settled in their essential features. The author alludes to the account of the transfiguration 15,

(iii.

1

that

6)

is

He

as related in the Synoptic Gospels (i. 16-18). the ground of the distinctly places himself on

very

his considerGospel tradition. This does not prevent a from uniquely doging the person and work of Jesus of view. Here is a manifest proof and it matic

point does not apply to the second Epistle of Peter alone that a theological conception of the Christ in no wise excludes the historic tradition. This is an idea which

must not be

lost sight of

when one begins an examina-

This has a peculiar tion of the Epistle of James. found in any other be to is not which

physiognomy book of the

Testament. No allusion is found to the history of Jesus, even when the line of thought would seem necessarily to require it, as in Chapter

New

v. 10.

Beyond the opening

salutation

(i.

i) the

name of

have unnecessary to say that our observation! would only if the authenticity of the Epistle be admitted, as is done and certain Protestant critics for instance, Catholic

16 It is

more by

Spitte

force

exegesis

(Der Zxvnlc Brief des Petrus) and Zahn (EinleUung

Neue Testament).

in

das

86

1

JESUS

Jesus Christ duced 1T in a

THE NAZARENE

only found once (ii. i), and it is introway that might suggest an interpolation.

is

the hypothesis which considers the Epistle to be a Jewish work in which the name of Jesus Christ has

Hence

been introduced

in

two

different places.

18

This hypoth-

esis does not appear admissible owing to the numerous reminiscences of Gospel phrases found in the Epistle

and because they are the Pauline formulas concerntransing justification by faith (somewhat inaccurately the in in mind has writer the which it is mitted, true) second chapter (ii. 14-26). The Epistle introduces us to an original type of Christianity conceived as a The rule of life and a source of moral inspiration. or the royal Gospel is the perfect law of liberty (i. 25)

These are

practical instructions given not does place them in any relation by the writer. with a drama of redemption, historical or mythical. It is evident that from such a work no conclusion as

law

(ii.

8).

He

to the character of the evangelical tradition can be drawn, the latter being ignored, or, to be more precise,

they are left aside.

V.

CONCLUSION

In their entirety the non-Pauline Epistles of the New Testament show us, then, the continuation of the dein the velopment which we have already recognized the as serves The Gospel history Pauline Epistles. *T

"Jesus Christ, our glorified Lord."

"Massebieau, L'Epitre de Jacques Spitte,

Dfr Brief de$ Jakobus,

Spitta

and Massebieau developed

each other.

etc.

die l'(Eui>re d'un Chritienf; is interesting to note that their theories independently of est

It

THE NONPAULINE

EPISTLES

187

base of the development of a doctrine of redemption, and the further we advance the more does the doctrine grow in importance and tend to substitute itself for the history of which originally tation.

it

was the

interpre-

19

continues in the writings of the Apostolic it shows less (Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Barnabas), but and less originality. It is unnecessary to examine this in detail, for these documents were written at a time when doctrine and tradi1

The same development

Fathers

tion

were fixed

in their essential elements.

THE I.

CHAPTER VIII CHRIST OF THE APOCALYPSE CHARACTER OF THE APOCALYPSE ("REVELATIONS")

Johannine Apocalypse, as we have it, dates from that is, from a the last decade of the first century

THE

period

when

at least in its a Gospel literature existed and the author of the Apocalypse

essential elements

appears to

know

it.

There

is

no direct reference to

the contents of this literature in his book, but the On the nature of the work sufficiently explains it.

other hand, one lights upon reminiscences which are clear enough to prove that the author knew the Gospel "Unless you are on the watch," says the tradition. like a Angel of the Church of Sardis, "I shall come comI am hour what at not know thief, and you will Matt. xxiv. This is almost a quotation from ing." "If the master of the 43, 44 and Luke xii. 39, 40: of the night" (Luke, watch what at known house had "at what hour") "the thief would come, he would have watched." "Be ye ready, for the Son of man will

an hour when ye think not." "He who overcometh," is read in the conclusion of the same letter, "will I confess before My Father and before tjis x. 32, Luke xii. 8 angels." This reminds us of Matt. Me before confess men, the same shall "Whosoever

come

at

:

will I confess before

(Luke has

it,

My

Father

who

is

in

Heaven"

"before the angels of God"). 188

The

THE CHRIST OF THE APOCALYPSE

189

phrase in the Apocalypse (xiii. 10), "Whoever shall kill with the sword, the same shall be killed with the sword," recalls Matt. xxvi. 52, "All they who take up the sword shall perish by the sword." Finally, the 17

too similar to what

is

Life in xxi. 6 and

Water of

illustration of the

is

found

in

John

iv.

xxii.

10,

a chance etc., 37, to permit the supposition of coincidence. The Apocalypse must not be taken alone. In order vii.

that all

it

may

the ideas and be taken must presumes

be correctly interpreted,

the knowledge which

it

all

into account.

The Christ of the Apocalypse, notwithstanding the name Jesus by which He is most frequently designated, He is the Lord in the heavens, is a celestial Being. iii. is awaited n), and whose return (i. 5-13 and 1 who occupies the testimony rendered to the Christ, so great a place in the book, is a testimony rendered to the Lord in the heavens, as may be inferred from Could it be otherwise in a book whose ii. 13. Chapter entire outlook

is

towards the future?

Nevertheless,

The this celestial Being has had a human history. he but prewriter makes no direct mention of this, sumes it in saying, for instance, that He died (i. 5, v.

(xi.

He

or that

9)

8), and

it

celestial dignity.

is

had been

crucified at

precisely this which

It is the

Jerusalem

explains his

lamb who was

slain

who

worthy to break the seals of the book

(v. 6). details of the figure characteristic most the Among of Christ is that which states that He died and returned

alone

to

is

life.

The

the frequent mention of the blood of

^Thc word Is found no less than nine times, without counting the noun "witness" (five times) and the verb "witness" (four times).

i9

o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

of purifying action presumes a doctrine Deuterothe and Paul of those like redemption, which, Pauline Epistles, is a theological interpretation of the drama of Calvary. There is not to be found in the

lamb and

its

Apocalypse any detail which

recalls

the Gospel ac-

counts of the Passion, but to appreciate this fact at its true significance allowance must be made for the allein the Apocalyptic writings. gorical character inherent The mere mention of the death of the lamb evokes for

the readers of the book the souvenir of the Passion

with

sufficient clearness.

on the other hand, in the Apocalypse certain pictures which have a distinctly mythical character. The Messiah there appears completely stripped

There

of

all

are,

human

features.

He

is

a Being entirely ideal.

ought these images to be interpreted? To reply to this question certain principles which are essential to the interpretation of the Apocalypse must be re-

How

The Johannine Apocalypse belongs to a membered. in the bulk is disgroup of books whose composition tributed over the two centuries which preceded and the two centuries which followed in the Christian era. 2

This species of literature possesses its rules, its habits, its methods, which are found almost identical in all the writings belonging to it Jewish as well as Christian. There is an Apocalyptic tradition' which explains the affinity obeserved between the various works. There are always the same images and symbols to be found, the same activities at work. But this is not all. The writers of this Apocalyptic literature must not be considered as visionaries notwithstanding the im2

Consult on this subject the introduction to the various commenof Boussct, Charles, and Loisy.

taries, particularly those

THE CHRIST OF THE APOCALYPSE

191

Christian proportant part played by inspiration in the not as but "rabbis," ductions ignorant of the works

of their predecessors. On the contrary, they carefully studied them, discovered their prophecies, corrected,

modernized, and adapted them to new surroundings. Often they introduced in the works they composed borrowed from descriptions more or less elaborate, the canonical of author The an older Apocalypse.

Thus are this procedure. the repethe the doublets, incoherences, to be explained of which and his work, titions so frequently found in book has not departed from

an instance the juxtaposition the at of the scene breaking of the seven seals (v. 1-8) and that of the seven trumpet blasts (viii. 2-11), to

it

will suffice to give as

which

may be

also

added that of the seven bowls

(xv. 1-16). Hence a double duty the interpreter of the Apocalypse.

is

incumbent upon

The

from being a mere compiler he does not ;

writer

is

restrict

far

him-

self to sewing together and framing the fragments of of already existprevious works. If he has made use

that literary ing material, in adding thereto portions to express in order is it analysis cannot fail to identify, his

ideas and personal sentiments, and to press into the service of the object he aimed at. Above

own

them

all it is

and the

necessary to disentangle his personal thought drew. Bousset, signification of the picture he

has done more than any one to influence the study of the Apocalypse by the analysis of its sources, has

who

He this point. strongly and judiciously insisted upon the Apocwrote that "the main task is to understand and original work possessing its alypse as a personal be a grave error to attribute would It unity."

literary

directly to the author of the

Apocalypse

all

the ideas

I 92

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

in the documents he used without taking into account the corrections in detail he made, and, above all, the indications which follow

and sentiments found

from the main plan of his work and of the part played in its development by fragments borrowed from earlier documents. Certain of these fragments express ideas and sentiments they were not in their origin destined to convey, and among those which the writer has adopted to an idea which dominated his mind are to be express

found others which are not

his at all,

only penetrated into the book

and which have

in its actual

form owing

to their solidarity with others belonging to the primitive

document.

THE

II.

8

VISION OF THE

WOMAN AND THE DRAGON

This rule of interpretation should particularly be 4 M. Stahl and M. Couapplied to Chapter xii, in which choud, independently of each other, have thought they

found the concept of a Christ purely ideal. The vision of Chapter xii forms a whole complete in relation either itself, and which possesses no organic It is it. follows what or with with what precedes it in itself. permissible therefore to consider 6 The seer says that a great portent shows itself in the heavens: 8

The

studies

failure to recognize these principles vitiates radically the Stahl and Couchoud; Stahl, Le Document 70;

of

MM.

Couchoud, Le Mystere de Jesus. 4 Upon this chapter see Wellhausen (Analyse der Offenbarvng Johannu) Stahl, Couchoud. e Wellhausen and Stahl think that the first scene takes place ID in the heaven a sign which reality en the earth, and there is only announces it. It would be difficult, according to them, to conceive an

THE CHRIST OF THE APOCALYPSE

193

A woman appears, clothed with the sun; she has

the

moon under her feet, and upon her head is a crown of twelve stars she is with child, and upon the point of also appears in giving birth to it. Another portent ;

the heavens.

dragon with seven His tail swept away and

It is a great fiery

heads with seven crowns. hurled down to the earth the third of the stars of heaven. The dragon stood before the woman about to birth to the child and prepared to devour her give

child as soon as

it

was born.

The woman gave

birth

to a son destined to rule the nations with a rod of The child is carried away to the presence of iron.

God

before His throne.

The woman

flees

away

into

the wilderness, where for a period of 1,260 days she 6 Then ensues a battle in is nourished and tended. his the heavens. Michael and angels fight against the

enemies dragon and gain the victory they drive their found be to not are from the heavens. They again. The accouchement in the very heavens, and besides, the child, as soon as he is born, is caught up into the heavens, and finally it is said that the woman fled into the desert, which is opposed not to the heavens, but to another place in the earth. None of these three arguments can be admitted. One cannot insist that an Apocalyptic scene should be probable. The theory of superposed heavens allows us to conthat the child born in one of the lower heavens, or ceive

readily rather (seeing that stars are mentioned) in the firmament, is immeheaven He is, in fact, placed diately after carried away to a higher before the throne of God. This is not the place of his birth. Finally, the fact that the return of the woman on the earth is not expressly mentioned is nothing more than a piece of negligence in the form of the account. that is, 3^/2 years, the half of time for Apocalyptic calculations l Wellhausen and Stahl consider these $ /2 years to be since Daniel Alfaric as M. but remarks, with the duration of the Jewish war, And fit this period imperfectly. very the only years 3^2 reason, In is traditional in the Apocalypse. besides, the figure of 3^ yars his work of 1907 Wcllhausen has not reproduced the interpretation 6

These 1,260 days represent 42 months

of a

week of

years, the

which he gave in 1899.

unh

JESUS

i 94

THE NAZARENE

he who is called the great dragon, the old serpent, the inhabitants of deceives he who devil and Satan, the earth, is hurled to the earth, and his angels share In heaven a voice is heard celebrating the his fate.

Now

the day of salvation and power and dominion of our God, and the rule of His Christ, for

victory.

is

the accuser of our Brethren had been hurled down, he who ceased not, night and day, to accuse them before

our God.

Their victory was through the blood of the

lamb and by the word of

their testimony.

In their

they shrank not from death. Woe and ye who inhabit them rejoice, ye heavens, descended has devil the for the unto the earth and sea, in fury, knowing that his days are counted. unto love of

Therefore

life

!

you

saw he was conquered he pursued the woman who had given birth to the male child. But to the woman were given the wings of the great eagle, so that she might fly to the wilderness, where she is nourished for one year, for two years, and for half a 7 Then the dragon poured water from his mouth

When

the dragon

year.

might be drowned. But the Earth came to her help and opened its mouth and drank up the river which the dragon had poured from his mouth. Then the dragon went away to make war like a river so that she

upon the

commandments of God

mony shore.

they who observe the and are faithful to the testi-

rest of her children

of Jesus

and he took

his stand

upon the

sea-

8

This passage tion of a

more

is

not a free creation, but the adaptarecent Apocalyptic fragment.

The

That is to say, f/2 years, "for a time, and times, and half a time." This last part of the sentence serves to connect with the picture which follows. *

8

THE CHRIST OF THE APOCALYPSE interest

which

is

195

centered at the beginning on the

Messiah's birth turns in the divine canticle and its conclusion upon the destiny of believers. In the verses

7-9 the victory over the dragon is gained by Michael and his angels. According to verse n, on the conthe blood of trary, it is by the martyrs, who through their of faithfulness the and lamb the testimony by have overthrown their accuser. There is another incoherence not less significant between the picture given The in verses 1-9 and that outlined in verses 13-18.

two

flights

which

in

of the

woman

both passages

is

into the desert, the refuge

represented as prepared for

her, the duration of this retreat, all manifestly

form

But while in the first passage the woman the mother of the Messiah, and may, therefore, be

a doublet. is

identified as the people of Israel,

she

is

the

mother of believers

9

in the

that

second passage 10 the Church.

is,

of the battle against the dragon is not one and the same throughout the chapter either. In the first passage the Messiah plays no part; He is only

The image

extremely probable, as M. Loisy has shown, that the woman this is a portion of an originally an astral personage and that But for the writer the entire interest of the astrological myth. the fight with the dragon picture is centered in lOWellhausen (Analyse), followed by Stahl, considers the woman The other to be Zion and the first child to be the Jewish Messiah * It is

was

children would therefore be Jews who had fled from Jerusalem because they did not rely upon arms, like the Zealots, but only on Under these conditions it is God, to reestablish the Theocracy. is made of the first group of the children mention no that strange of Zion. It would thus be necessary to suppose much mutilation of the source of the passage, not only at the end but in the middle, which would seem improbable. It is for this reason that we prefer to consider the verses 13-17, which follow a portion due to Christian

over the theme (developed inspiration (verses 10-12), as a glossing in the Jewish fragment found at the beginning of the chapter) by the Christian editor.

JESUS

i 96

THE NAZARENE

the king destined to reign with power when order is restored in the world. It may perhaps be imagined that He will be called upon to play a part in the last the supreme moment phase of the struggle, but up to in shelter before and heaven in reserve in He is held the throne of God, the victory being gained by Michael and his angels. In the celestial hymn, on the contrary, that is thanks to the blood of the lamb it is

through

that the martyrs gain the victory. It may be added that no organic relation is perbetween the statement (in the first portion of

the Messiah's

work

ceptible

the Chap, xii) of Satan being hurled to earth, and mention of the same thing in Chapters xix, xx chapters which, in their essentials at least, there

is

good

reason to attribute to the writer of the Johannine

Apocalypse.

As

for the character of the fragment utilized at the of Chapter xii, it does not seem possible to

beginning

The

quite secondary part that it must be indicates Messiah the by played 11 In whatever way the Jewish and not Christian. be conceived, how primitive origin of Christianity may can it be supposed that at the end of the first century

hesitate in recognizing

it.

in it

a Christian could have imagined Christ as rapt up to the heavens immediately after His birth, while completely suppressing

redemption

His

historical

ministry and the

drama?"

"Weilhausen (Analyse), while admitting

that this

Messiah rapt up to the heavens immediately after

idea of the

his birth

is

not

it a Judaism, maintains that it is possible to see in compromise between two Messianic conceptions the Messiah coming from the people of Israel and the Messiah of Daniel coming from (Cp. Israel heaven. This idea is found in the rabbinical tradition. Levi, Le ravisttment du Messie enfant )

attested

12

in

Wellhausen, Analyse, p.

20.

THE CHRIST OF THE APOCALYPSE

197

Jewish fragment, the Christian author has made additions to it which entirely

While borrowing

change

its

this

character.

The

defeat of the dragon, for

the sake of which he collected this fragment, must in the original have been final; in his

work

it is

no more

than a stage of the great struggle and the guarantee The writer makes use of it to of future victory. adexpress one of the ideas to which he was most dicted, which in his readers' eyes had the greatest practical value

and

reality

the idea that the very rage

of the devil against the Christians, as manifested in was the consequence of his first dethe persecutions,

feat,

and that

this

rage would continue to be power-

remained faithful provided only that the Christians and were able to bear their sufferings without yielding

less

to weakness.

We

are unable, then, to discern in the idea of the born Messiah, immediately caught up to the

newly heavens and transported before the throne of God, form of Christian Christology; it is an the primitive

element borrowed, and which does not express the If at the thought of the author of the Apocalypse. indeed the idea of a beginning of the chapter there is and not a Chrisa purely mythical Messiah, it is Jewish be legits tian idea. xii, therefore, cannot

Chapter nonhistorical mately invoked by the supporters of the character of Jesus, and the considerations above offered to support the thesis that the Apocalypse assumes the Gospel tradition maintain their force.

CHAPTER IX

THE THEORY OF THE PROPHETIC ORIGIN OF THE GOSPEL TRADITION THE FUNCTION

I.

OF THE PROPHETIC ARGUMENT

IN PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANITY

THE

led us to the conclusion preceding chapters have that the theology found in the Epistles of the New

Testament and

in

the Apocalypse necessarily presume

the existence of the Gospel tradition. tradition that we have now to deal.

It is

with this

But before be-

of it, we shall find it conginning the direct study venient to examine a theory which, if well founded, would offer in favor of the thesis of the mythologists

an argument of great weight this is the theory which or at least the most holds that the Gospel narratives from themes important among them are developed supplied by the Old Testament. :

Already had Schelling,

in a

course of lectures upon

the philosophy of art given at the beginning of the last century, observed that the history of Jesus was.

whose creation and completely enveloped in fables in the development had been suggested by prophecies 1 Old Testament. After him Strauss sought to find in the

Old Testament one of the sources of the Gospel

myths.

After

this critics occupied

with the history of

the Gospel tradition recognized the profound influence exercised upon it by the Old Testament. i

Schelling,

Sammliche W*rke,

1856,

198

Stuttgart.

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

199

Returning to their observations, M. Salomon Reinach has stated in very harsh terms the problem which this contact poses. The solution which he gives of it is the historical character of the distinctly unfavorable to events related in the Gospels. His observations are confined to one particular point, the history of the crucifixion of Jesus. Indeed, here is the knot of

the problem, for according as one admits or denies the character of the reality of the cross, the historical of Jesus will be substantiated or will fall to

person the ground.

We

may, therefore, confine our observa-

tions to this point of capital importance: Is the account of the crucifixion of Jesus the relation of a real

derived from the supposed fulfillment of certain prophecies previously read in the Old Testafact,

or

is it

ment? Reinach's opinion, and M. Couchoud entirely 8 shares his point of view, the problem presented is a are in face of a dilemma. Given very simple one.

In

2

M.

We

and agreement between a prophecy and a narrative, the Either are two explanations only possible: to be by orthodox prophecy is, in fact, what it is taken traditional theology

that

is,

it

rests

upon a super-

or the natural and anticipated knowledge of events narrative has been suggested, and, so to speak, enand ought to be considered gendered, by the prophecy, as totally without value. To admit the first hypothesis priori and conseconditions of histhe outside oneself quently to place torical research.

would be to accept a dogmatic a

i *t

Salomon Reinach, Orpheus; Le Venet 17 du Psaume xxii; Bossutt V argument det propheties, etc. Couchoud, Le Myttir* de Shut, p. 49. tc.

200

JESUS

Arc we,

THE NAZARENE

therefore, forced to accept the second alter-

native, and to conclude that all the portions of Gospel fulfillment of history in which the recognition of the

charprophecies is possible are of a purely mythical tradithe in those which Gospel acter, even including tion itself has recognized them? First of all must be in which the prophetic argument 4 and first appeared developed in early Christianity. Before everything else there existed an apologetic

noted the conditions

method of which the Christian missionaries made

use.

The history of Jesus bewildered the Jews, so contrary was it to the way in which they conceived the Messiah. The cross of Jesus had been to Paul the object which Christians said about prevented his belief in what the Him. That which was true of Paul was certainly also true of

all

those

who had

received a similar education.

prepared to yield to Justin's argument claiming to prove by scriptural demonstration 5 that the Messiah is called upon to suffer, but he abso-

The Jew Tryphon

is

admit that the Christ had perished In his eyes, by the infamous punishment of the cross. the of Paul, as in those formerly phrase of Deuremains an invincible obstacle: "Cursed be lutely refuses to

teronomy he who is hung on a tree"

(xxi.

23).

was withSays Tryphon: "Your pretended Christ out honor and without glory, to such a degree that He was under the most extreme malediction of the See concerning this subject the interesting studies of Weidel, also of Feigel; also compare with Nicolardot, Let Procedts dt rtdaction de$ trots premiers evangelistes. not confine him* (Dialogues Ixxvi. 6 and Ixxxix. 2). Justin does

death of invoking the Scriptures to fix the meaning of the use of them, also the very fact of the death (tee of Psa. xxii. Apol., i. 35), where he invokes the testimony self to

Jesus.

He makes

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN Law

He

was

aoi

(Dialogues, xxxii. 3). are aware, accepting the arguAgain he writes: "We ment of Justin, that the Christ must suffer . . . but that

He

crucified!"

had to be

crucified, that

He

had to

die a death

a death of such a degree of shame and dishonor cursed by the Law prove this to us, for we are totally

unable to conceive

it" (xc. I, Ixxxix. 2, xciii.

4).

Tryphon was no exception. He represented a point of view which had already evolved towards the idea 8 of a suffering Messiah. Before his time the passage in Isaiah (Chap, liii) had not yet been connected with 7

It is impossible to say precisely if Christian ideas did not influence Judaism on this point. At

the Messiah.

all events,

what

is

found

in the pre-Christian

concerning the efficacy of suffering 8 the germ of later development.

is

at the

The

period

most merely

idea of the re-

of suffering concerning the martyrs of the time of Antiochus Epiphanius is found in the second book of the Maccabees, especially in the celebrated episode of the death of the mother and of her u seven sons: As for me, said the last of them, like

deeming

utility

6 Schurer writes that it is "impossible to deny that in the second with the century of our era certain Jewish circles were familiar idea of a Messiah suffering to expiate the sins of men." in the period * Referring to the idea of the Messiah's sufferings See also Volz, Judische Eschatologie von following, see Dalman. Daniel bit Aklba. It should be noted, however, that even at the Messiah is commonly met period where the idea of the suffering with in Judaism, interpretations are given to Isaiah (Chap, liii) which do not relate to the Messiah. Origen, for example, cites, in the his work Contra Cehvm, the opinion of a Jew who referred

and be dispersed in prophecy to the Jewish people, obliged to suffer, the world so that many proselytes might be won over. 8 We do not attach much importance to the idea found in a passage of the fourth book of Esdras, where it is stated that the Messiah must die after reigning 400 years. There is no question there of expiation.

202

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

my brothers, I give my body and my life for the laws of my fathers, praying to God to show mercy quickly to my people. May the anger of the Most High, justly incited by our race, be ended at my and my brother's death" (2 Mace. in the fourth

found 37, 38). The same idea is from dates of the Maccabees, which

vii.

book

century of our era. At the point of expiring, the martyr Eleazar addresses this prayer to God: "Have compassion upon my people; for their sake be

the

first

Make of my blood a punishment and means of purification, accept my life for their ransom" (4 Mace. vi. 29). Notwithstanding the interest and importance of the satisfied

with

my

I

indications to be gleaned in these it is only possible to recognize in

have been utilized

and some other

texts,

them materials which

later in the elaboration of a doctrine

of the Messianic sufferings. But this doctrine did not exist in the Judaism of the first century, and it is this fact

which made the task of the Christian apologists

and missionaries a

difficult

one.

presented to Justin was presented confrom the first days of the life of the Church. siderable effort must have been made to discover in

The problem

A

the Scriptures a demonstration of the necessity of the Messianic sufferings. To find this must have required a with the prophecies. The quite special acquaintance

not find in apostle Paul explains that if the Jews did the Scriptures the same thing as the Christians, it was because, while reading Moses, they had a veil over their intelligence (2 Cor.

iii.

15, 16).

When

the dis-

met with Jesus on the road to Emmaus, it was necessary for Him to "open up to them the Scriptures" (Luke xxiv. 32). While commencing with Moses, He ciples

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN expounded to them everything

203

in the prophetic writ-

ings concerning Himself, as well as the necessity for the Christ to suffer to enter into His glory (xxiv. 26,

27). The concept of the sufferings and the death of the Messiah, which the Christians had so great a need to discover in the Old Testament, was therefore, by their own admission, only contained there in such an obscure manner that a special capacity was required to This renders the hypothesis that the Scripfind it. tures suggested the idea of the crucifixion of the

Messiah one of very small a

II.

priori probability.

THE RELATIONS OF PROPHECY AND THE GOSPEL HISTORY the relations between prophecy and history is not so simple as the dilemma

The problem of the Gospel

is

M. Salomon

Reinach would suppose. It convenient, we think, to distinguish between several

formulated by cases.

I.

There

Creations due to Prophetic Exegesis is

first

of

all

among

these a series which

These are the episodes support M. Reinach's theory. or details which for the main part are only found in the youngest Gospel narratives. If the influence of them completely, it prophecy does not suffice to explain certainly appears to genesis. It will suffice

have taken some part in their to mention here some examples:

JESUS

204

THE NAZARENE

ancient tradition seem to have considered

The most

9 Jesus the son of Joseph. The idea of the supernatural birth, as it is found developed in Matthew (i. 18),

from the

arises partly

her application to Mary and Isaiah (vii. 14), prophet

Son of the passage thus phrased in the Septuagint version: "A virgin shall a prophecy whose realizaconceive and bear a son" 10 in the Matthew tion is (i. 22, etc.) by in the

emphasized

narrative of the birth of Jesus. as a Similarly, primitive tradition represented Jesus a as prophecy of Galilean, born at Nazareth; but

had announced that the Messiah would be born in Judea, it was found necessary to put hisand Luke have done tory in harmony with it. Matthew

Micah

)

different ways, which, besides, are not to 11 states that reconciled with each other. Matthew

this in

be

(v. I

two

His birth the parents of Jesus went to reside at Nazareth to flee from the wrath of Herod and his heirs (ii* 19-23). Luke affirms that the parents of resided at Nazareth, but that Jesus was born at after

Jesus

This idea is presumed, in their primitive form, by the genealogies the Syraic version of Sinai given by Matthew and Luke. Compare of Matt.

i.

1-16:

will beget a son

"

"Joseph, to

whom

This reading

is

the Virgin Mary was betrothed, supported by certain manuscripts

of the old Latin version. Neither John nor Paul make the slightest reference to a supernatural birth. (See M. Goguel, Infrod. au N.T., I, P-

469.)

text has a word which signifies "young woman and not "virgin." It has no relation whatever to the Messiah. The prophecy of Isaiah relates to the deliverance of Jerusalem, besieged will by the king of Syria. A sign is given to Achai a young woman became enceinte, and (it is announced to the king) before the child is born and "knows how to reject evil and choose the good" (that is to sty, in a very short time) "the country whose two kings thou 10

The Hebrew

fearest shall be abandoned." 11 By the way, he finds in die arrival of Jesus at Nazareth the fulfillment of a

prophecy

(ii.

23).

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

205

Bethlehem, where His parents had come upon the occasion of the census taken by Quirinius (ii. 1-39)In the gospel of the infancy it is also possible to instance the flight into Egypt as having a prophetic the words of origin (Matt. ii. 13-15), fulfilling

Hosea, which in the original text related to the people of Israel and not to the Messiah: "Out of Egypt have I called My Son." There is also to be noted in this connection the massacre of the innocents (Matt ii. 16of the 18), in which the evangelist saw the fulfillment words of Jeremiah (xxxi. 15).

2.

Modifications

Due

to Prophetic Exegesis

Sometimes prophetic exegesis has only caused the modification or the addition of one detail. Thus

Matthew

(xxi.

14-16) records that after

He

had

driven the dealers out of the Temple, Jesus was the of the children. This object of an ovation on the part detail

Psalm

was

by the words of the "Out of the mouths of babes and

certainly suggested

(viii.

3)

:

hast called forth praise." Certain desucklings tails of the history of the Passion must have the same Mark n) and Luke (xxii. 5) relate that

Thou

origin.

(xiv.

the chief priests promised Judas a sum of money if he would deliver Jesus to them. Matthew (xxvi. 15) was thirty pieces of silver, and specifies that the sum relates that Judas, seeing how to the chief priests and returns events had happened, the elders to say, "I have sinned in delivering up the blood of the innocent," and he then flings the thirty

he later

(xxvii.

3-10)

and goes out to hang pieces on the floor of the Temple himself. The priests decide that this money, being the

206

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

be paid into the treasury, so price of blood, cannot it in the purchase of a plot of ground bethey employ for forlonging to a potter, to be a burial ground Matthew himself reveals the origin of this eigners. the prophecy of story by saying: 'Thus was fulfilled the of silver Jeremiah: they took the thirty pieces who was valued by the people of Israel price of them for the potter's field as the Lord had and

Him

gave

commanded me."

Mark

relates

12

how,

at the

moment when

Jesus

is

to

be crucified, He is offered aromatic vinegar to drink. The women of Jerusalem were in the habit of giving to

condemned persons 13

a stupefying drink to attenuate

Matthew

their sufferings. (xxvii. 34), remembering doubtless a passage in the Psalms, "they made me to

22), has substituted "gall" for the aromatic drink, and has thus changed the significance of the detail. In Luke (xxiii. 6-16) the episode of the appeareat gall"

(Ixix.

an episode whose hisance of Jesus before Herod l4 probtorical character cannot possibly be admitted the of the to not memory only ably owes its origin

which Herod had shown to Jesus in Galilee 31-33)7 but also to the words of the psalm(Luke "The kings of the earth and the great ones have ist hostility

xiii.

:

This passage is not found in Jeremiah. It is borrowed from Zechariah (xi. 12) with the addition of some details taken from 12

Jeremiah

(xviii. 2,

xxxii.

6).

custom, attested by the Talmud (Wunschc), may originate in a passage in Proverbs: "Give strong liquors to him who perishes and wine to him who has bitterness of soul Let him drink and for-

"This

let him no more remember his pain" (Wunsche, Neue Beitrage nur Erlantenung der Evangelien, etc.).

get his poverty and

Indeed, one cannot imagine how the Procurator, so jealous of have recognized, even as an exceptional thing, any right of jurisdiction to Herod at Jerusalem. 14

his authority, could

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

207

assembled together against the Lord and against His Anointed" (Psa. ii. 2), the great ones being represented by the Jewish authorities and Pilate. Herod has been added to them to fulfill more completely the do prophecy. Two of the phrases on the cross which

not belong to the most ancient tradition (since Luke is the only one to record them) have their origin in the Eternal, prophecy. It is said of the Servant of interceded for the guilty" (Isa. liii. 12). Luke attributes to the crucified Jesus this prayer: "Father, do" " forgive them, for they know not what they

"He

(xxiii.

24)

;

and

at the

moment where Mark

(xv.

37)

and Matthew

in (xxvii. 50) relate that Jesus expired the senmouth His giving a loud cry, Luke puts into tence, inspired direct from the Psalms (xxxi. 6) :

"Father, (xxiii.

into

Thy hands

I

My

commend

spirit"

46).

In John's Gospel the episode of the spear-thrust which the Law prescribed re(xix. 31-37) fulfills that not be garding the paschal lamb, whose bones must

broken

(Exod.

xii.

10-46;

Num.

ix.

12; cp.

Psa.

xxxiv. 21 ). evangelist remarks: "This was done A bone in order that the Scripture should be fulfilled of His shall not be broken" (xix. 36, 37). This influence of prophecy may have also reacted upon certain

The

:

narratives of the

common (Mark

tradition.

The

forty days'

13; Matt. iv. 2; Luke iv. circum2) suggest, notwithstanding the different the before stances, the forty days which Moses passed

fast in the desert

i.

There is, furthermore, reason to doubt the primitive character of this sentence in Luke. The verse 34 of Chapter zxiii is lacking, in Codex Cantabrifact, in certain good texts (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, be seen to explain its supcan reason no and and others), giensis, pression.

208

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

xxiv. 18 and xxxiv. 28), or the forty the Israelites ate manna in the which years during 16 The idea of the Spirit dedesert (Exod. xvi. 35). scending upon Jesus at the moment of baptism (Mark i. 10; Matt. iii. 16; Luke iii. 22; cp. John L 32, 33) "The might have as its origin the passage in Isaiah.

Lord (Exod.

Spirit of

God

impossible

(Mark (liii.

shall rest

xv. 27)

12),

upon Him"

(xi.

that the crucifixion of the

may have been

2), It

is

not

two robbers

suggested by Isaiah

"He was numbered among

the transgres-

With the cases which we have been citing may sors." be compared those where some distortion or adaptation of certain narratives has taken place under the 17

influence of a prophecy.

In the account of the entry into Jerusalem the four to Jesus in the evangelists represent the ovation made cxviii. 25, in Psa. form of the messianic acclamation 26).

The announcement of the to have been made during a in Psa. xli. 16

The

io

18

treachery of Judas seems repast, because a passage

has been taken literally:

accounts of the temptation in

with citations from the Old Testament

"He who

Matthew and Luke abound It

n

not,

however, certain

They must evidently that they are creations of prophetic exegesis be taken for symbolical narratives, which leads one to consider what the influence of the Old Testament could have been upon Jesut Himself. but not directly * 7 Luke (xxii. 37) certainly quote* this passage, account we menconcerning the crucifixion of the two thieves. The tioo has been considered from antiquity as proved, that in certain the manuscripts of Mark there is to be read: "Thus was fulfilled word of the Scripture: He was numbered among the transgressors" a version which it is impossible to consider as primitive (Mark xv. 28). 18 R. Bultmann seems to us to go too far in explaining the formation of the accounts concerning Judas to the influence of this psalm. The would not hare tradition, which plainly tends to glorify the apostles,

has

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN eaten My bread has raised his heel against

Mark states that Jesus of you

will betray

into the dish."

Me

209

Me. 11 "One

during the meal declared : he who dips his hand with

Matthew

Me

relates this, presenting the

Me

episode in the form "he who dips his hand with into the dish" as an act actually performed at that moment, introducing in this way into the account

very

the designation of the traitor. Luke also refers to a not involve the gesture; his account, however, does traitor. the of John has combined personal designation the two traditions, placing side by side a public an-

nouncement of the treachery (xiii. 18-22) with a aside designation of the traitor Judas in words spoken Satan whom into (verses 23-26). After this Judas, had entered, rises from the table according to the reto do quickly that quest which Jesus had made to him which he had to do (verses 27-30). The Synoptic was Gospels, which all agree in presuming that Judas not state do the evening, present at the beginning of that he left Jesus and His companions. Nevertheless, at the Mount of Olives he is at the head of those who

too important 19 In it to pass without a word. not have could tradition the preits primitive form sumed the presence of Judas, and it is perhaps the fact of his absence at this time which gave substance to the

come

to arrest Jesus. for tradition to allow

His departure

is

have had, and which resuspicions that Jesus must vealed to Him the knowledge that the circle of His enemies was closing up around Him, and that

He

of Jesus (Geschichte der imagined the betrayal by one of them

oclischen Tradition). i9 John is so much

wan-

aware of this importance that he expressly mentions the departure of Judas, and takes the trouble to explain why this departure did not surprise the other disciples (xiii. 27-30).

210

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

would no longer be able to escape them. It is because the expression borrowed from the psalmist had been taken literally that the presence of Judas at the last repast has been presumed. account of the insults which the passers-by

The

threw at Jesus when

(see Mark, Matthew 20 the the use of certain words

crucified

and Luke) betrays by

and Matthew has emphasized this by introducing the words which recall verse 9 of the same psalm: "He trusted in God; let God deliver Him now if He will have Him" (xxvii. 43). Neverinfluence of Psa. xxii. 8

;

theless the entire scene cannot

have

its

sole origin in

the psalm.

The episode of the vinegar given to Jesus at the moment He was about to expire is important to con-

Mark

sider.

"Eloi

Eloi

I

!

recounts that after Jesus had cried out, Lama sabachtanei ?" certain among those

"He is calling upon Elias"; another, a sponge with vinegar and offering it to Him, soaking said: "Let be; let us see if Elias will deliver Him." This scene is enigmatical in that it attributes contrapresent

said,

the derision dictory sentiments to those standing by and the pity which implied in the sneer about Elias offered the sponge. one who the of the gesture inspired the soldiers, and of Vinegar was the usual beverage

in order to procure Him Jesus was only offered some of the second intervention The relief. some slight

soldier tends to hinder the compassionate gesture of

47~49) has hcre slightly modified the account of Mark, and in so doing he has the

first.

Matthew

(xxvii.

transformed the significance of the scene. It is one of those who had uttered the sarcasm who offers the 20 See

Mark

XT. 29;

Matt

xxvii. 39;

Luke

zxiii. 35.

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

211

of vinegar to Jesus. His action thus becomes a gesture had Matthew because that is and derision, probably been influenced by the passage in Psa. Ixix. 22: "To 21 assuage my thirst, they make me drink vinegar." In John's Gospel (xix. 28, 29) the episode formed under the influence of the prophecy.

He

is

trans-

At

the

to expire, Jesus said, in order 22 it is ; that the Scripture might be fulfilled, "I thirst" is offered a sponge soaked in vinegar. then that

moment

was about

He

Let us point out another

Mark and crucifixion the women away. To the women

detail.

Both

Matthew state that during the stood looking on some distance Luke adds the friends of Jesus, possibly to avoid the in the appearance of the disciples being disinterested fate of their Master, but doubtless also

under the u

in-

two passages in the Psalms: My and my acquaintances forsake me ... my kindred remain apart" (xxxviii. 12) and "Thou hast removed my 23 friends far from me" (Ixxx. 9). fluence of

friends

the just cited bring into prominence least at or influenced, fact that prophecy suggested,

The examples

21 In the Gospel of Peter (xvi) it is evidently with the object of magnifying the sufferings of Jesus that He is made to drink vinegar mixed with gall. 22 The xxii. 16; evangelist seems to think of this passage in Psa. "My strength is dried up like clay and my tongue cleaves to the

palate." 28 Perhaps it is convenient to mention, to complete these remarks, certain rather superficial resemblances which the evangelists do not at the trial appear to haA-e noticed for example, the false witnesses This is a detail which of Jesus (Psa xxvn 12, xxxv 11, cix 2) of an innaturally had its place in the narrative of the sufferings nocent person. may also mention the silence of Jesus before His judges (cp. Isa lui. 7; Psa. xxxviii. 14, 15). Besides, the silence of Jesus is not complete Even the Gospel of Peter, which expressly of Jesus spoken on the cross lays emphasis on it, relates one remark

We

212

JESUS

THE NAZARENE We

must now consider ancertain Gospel narratives. influence of prophecy the in which facts of series other does not seem to us in any

way

to exclude historical

veracity.

INFLUENCE OF PROPHECY ON THE FACTS

III.

In certain instances the influence of the Old Testament has been exercised, not on the narratives, but on the facts themselves, by inspiring certain actions, sentiments, or sayings of Jesus. His thought and His pity

were nourished by the Old Testament, particularly by the prophecies and the Psalms. He was constantly into fulfilling the spired by them, and devoted Himself the program which He there found traced out. In that in the oldest account of the baptism of Jesus of Gospel of Mark there is a reference to a vision

of being the Son Jesus when He acquires the belief 24 clouds the sees It is Jesus who of God. opening and who hears the celestial words. It is not astonishing that the experience then realized by Him was exof pressed in a phrase inspired by various passages the Old Testament, particularly by the verse of Psa. ii.

7:

Thee. *4

"Thou 11

art

My

Son; this day have

I

begotten

25

In Matthew and Luke the vision becomes an objective revela-

tion for the people. Its evolution in John is still more advanced when the scene of the baptism is replaced by a sign given to John the Baptist,

who

states

who

it is

whose coining he had announced without

recognition.

and for * In passing may be noted the influence of a Sam. vii. 14, the explanation of the term "well beloved" that of Isa. xlv. 4. What is said concerning the baptism may be repeated in regard to the ix. 7, etc.), phrase which accompanies the Transfiguration (Mark xlv. Isa. and xviiL Deut of influence 4 may be the 15 where partial

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

213

In several episodes, as in the preaching of Jesus at Nazareth (Luke iv. 16-30) and the reply to the messengers of John the Baptist (Matt vii. 18-23), the ministry of Jesus

xi.

2-6 and Luke

is

expressly porMessianic of the the as proaccomplishment trayed Ixi. i, 2,). If it be Iviii. Isaiah in 6, (xxxv. 5, gram

called by granted that Jesus was persuaded He was God to carry on His work and to be His Messiah then (with which important point we shall deal later),

these episodes explain themselves, and there is no to necessity at all to attribute a purely literary origin

narrative of the entry of Jesus into Jeruthe staging of the prophecy of Zechariah:

them.

The

salem

is

daughter of Zion! Shout for joy, O Behold thy King cometh unto daughter of Jerusalem thee, just and victorious. He is humble and rideth upon

"Be

joyful,

O

I

an ass ix.

upon an

ass

and the foal of an ass" (Zech.

9).

Doubtless

Matthew has exaggerated

(xxi.

8)

in

speaking of a great multitude who acclaimed Jesus. Mark has the Greek word which may signify "some,"

and

it is

probable that

it

was

solely

from the

little

band

who accompanied Jesus that the ovation came. The incident must have passed almost unobserved, and to

this

it

it is

which explains the absence of any allusion of Jesus with the Scribes the account of His trial. Jesus

either in the contests

and Pharisees or

in

was inspired by the idea of the humble and gentle Messiah which He found in Zechariah, and so He observed. It should, however, be noted that the history of the Transto be the end of a fairly comfiguration, as we possess it, appears

plex evolution.

JESUS

214

THE NAZARENE

to make of it organized His entry into the Holy City words. the of the fulfillment prophet's The purification of the Temple, as recounted in Mark, rests upon the contrast of two prophetic texts

which portrays the Temple as a house of prayer for all nations, and that of Jer. vii. 1 1, which accused the Jews of having made of it a den of thieves. To grant that Jesus was more impressed words in by these two texts, and forced to act by the the Psalm (Ixix. 10), 'The zeal for Thine house hath that of Isa.

Ivi.

7,

me

up," which the fourth Gospel (ii. 17) quotes in reference, is more natural than to suppose that these eaten

texts

have only been remarked and

illustrated

by

tra-

The reply of Jesus to the adjuration of the dition. at the high priest, "Ye shall see the Son of man seated hand of power and coming upon the clouds of 26

right

heaven" xxii.

62; cp. Matt. xxvi. 64 and Luke inspired directly from Daniel (vii. 13). no creation of tradition, but an authentic

(Mark

69),

is

This reply

is

xiv.

declaration of Jesus, for the idea of resurrection upon the third, or after three days (current in primitive is found is the Christianity), is not found in it. What an idea idea of the return upon the clouds of heaven

doubtless often met with in the most ancient Church, but which was never separated from faith in the resurrection.

Finally

we

shall cite a last

example characteristic

* It cannot be objected against the historical veracity of the incident of the purification of the Temple that the intervention of Jesus had oo direct serious consequences for Him, while, nevertheless, it

was a provocation

offered to the Jewish authorities

The

latter,

in-

was a proof of zeal for the deed, could not reprove Jesus for what Temple. Indirectly, however, the censure of the authorities implied in the action of Jesus must have had its influence upon the measures taken against

Him

later.

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

215

of the influence of the Old Testament on Jesus Himself. At the moment He was about to expire upon the expression to the despair filling His soul from Psa. xxii. "My God! by the sentence borrowed God! why hast Thou forsaken Me?" and the cross

He gave

My

words were spoken in Aramean (Mark xv. 34 and Matt. xxvi. 40) Although it is not possible to know of Jesus from given the absence of friends or disciples how the memory of these words the foot of the cross .

could have been preserved, we are unable to see in them a creation of Christian tradition. Indeed, they (that of Jesus abandoned by God) which is quite opposed to the way the ancient Church conceived the relations between Jesus and God. Trasuch a phrase, but it is imhave dition

express an idea

may

preserved

possible to imagine that

it

invented

it.

John has not

this exrepeated it, and Luke himself has replaced of declaration a clamation of despair by perfect and filial abandonment to the divine hand: "Father, into

Thy hands IV.

I

commend

My

spirit" (xxiii.

46).

FULFILLMENT OF PROPHECIES DISCOVERED AFTER THE EVENT

There is still a third series of facts to examine. These are the facts in which the correspondence of the Gospel record with the Old Testament has only been noticed "a posteriori" during a secondary stage of the Gospel tradition. Its discovery took place during the course of the search for proofs drawn from the Old Testament, which the necessities of apologetic defense at an early date imposed upon the preachers of

the Gospel. In these cases also the concordance of his-

216

JESUS

tory with prophecy ical

character.

THE NAZARENE is

not a proof of their nonhistor-

The agreement,

most freand possesses

besides,

quently only extends to general features, nothing very characteristic. Matthew is particularly given to recognizing the fulfillment of prophecies in the Gospel history. In the cures finds

made by

Jesus at

Capernaum

(viii.

of the words

the

16, 17)

of

he

Isaiah

accomplishment took upon Himself our infirmities and (liii. 4) of our diseases." (In the way Matthew burden the bore cites this passage of Isaiah there is no trace of expiacures of the tory or substitutionary suffering.) The The Isaiah fulfill also demoniacs theory of (xlii. 1-4):

"He

27

parables Ixxviii. 2

based upon Isa. vi. 9, 10 and upon Psa. texts which are not cited by Mark in this

is

connection.

Sometimes it is at a period prior to the composition of Mark's Gospel that the interpretation of history is made. This is the case, for instance, in

by prophecy

the application of the prophecy of Isaiah (xl. 3) to John the Baptist (see Mark i. 3 Matt. iii. 3; Luke iii. ;

23), or that of Malachi (iii. i) (see Mark 2; Matt. xi. 10 Luke vii. 27). It is naturally to the history of the Passion (the first

4; John i.

i.

;

have been compart of the Gospel history which may had the greatest impiled, and that which manifestly portance for Christians) that

it

was

specially sought to

apply prophetic interpretation. 27 The idea that the parable was a method in use by Jesus to disas a creation guise His thought from noninitiates must be regarded its origin to owes This Mark or tradition 12). theory 11, (iv. by by the idea that if Jesus was not understood it is because He did not desire to be understood. In reality the parable was a method of exposition adapted to the popular audiences to whom Jesus appealed*

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN It frequently

217

happens that a text from the prophets

or the Psalms describes a situation of a fairly general for instance, that of the righteous man surcharacter

rounded by enemies who puts

We

his trust in

God and

is

should not be able, however,

cruelly maltreated. to conclude from the comparisons made by the primitive Church between these facts and the sufferings of

was found Jesus that the idea itself of these sufferings in the Psalms or the prophets. The passage is familiar in which Plato paints the lot of the persecuted upright man, maltreated and

finally nailed to the cross (Plato,

of deriving Republic). No one, however, would dream of the Retext the from Passion the of the history Testament Old read the public. The Christians who

with the conviction that the history of Jesus was foreshadowed there did not fail to note that what was said of the persecuted righteous man applied admirably to drawn to Jesus. Their attention had been particularly of which Jesus upon the cross had cited a verse. They did not fail to emphasize in the records which they gave of the Passion the similitudes in

Psa.

xxii.,

which they discovered therein. their eyes providential very simple criterion enables us to recognize these

A

harmonies established a posteriori and to distinguish them from those which are explicable as history In the latter the conevolved from a prophecy. cordance is perfect, starting from the oldest accounts, and it is emphasized by a quotation. On the generally

other hand, when the harmony between the prophecy and the story has only been recognized after the fact, as a rule it is only by degrees that it has gained pre-

progress of the assimilation by comparing the various forms of the tracision.

It is possible to follow the

2i8

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

dition with each other.

One example

will illustrate

had the out carried had been crucified the soldiers who sentence shared His garments among them, drawing

Mark

our point.

lots for

(xv. 24) states that after Jesus

them. 28 In ancient times the clothing of the 29

is, there; there victims belonged to the executioners fore, in the detail given nothing out of the ordinary, and the first narrators who related it merely desired to

illustrate their story

by a concrete

Later on

detail.

was observed that in Psa. xxii. the righteous man persecuted had said: "They parted my garments among them and drew lots for my vesture" and thus had a detail of the story of the Passion been prophesied by the psalmist. Matthew, who, as we have realizarecalled, attached so much importance to the not had the in of the tion Gospel story, prophecies no makes he since remarked this concordance, it

;

yet 80 The fourth evangelist has reference to the psalm. and noticed not only emphasized the words of the but what is more, referring the two parallel psalmist,

expressions of the psalm to

two

different actions, he

has made a distinction between the drawing of lots 81 and the sharing of the garments, justifor the robe the robe of Jesus fying the procedure by the fact that Matthew (xxvii. 35) and Luke (xxiii 34) say the same thing. Fulda, Das Kreuz und die Kreutigung. **One is unable, indeed, to consider as authentic the received text

*9

which adds at the end of Matthew's account, "In order that it might be fulfilled as spoken by the prophet, they parted my garments among them and drew lots for my robe." This reading is only attested by certain Western manuscripts based upon certain forms of the Latin, Syrian and Armenian versions. It is an addition which comes from John

six. 24.

"Just

as

Matthew

resents Jesus as riding

(Zech.

ix. 9).

(xxi. 7), interpreting

upon an ass and on

Zechariah its

literally,

foal as the

rep-

same time

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

219

*2 was without any seam (John xix. 23-24). Complete the prophecy only exists here at the end harmony with of the development of the record. It would have been from entirely different if the episode had been inspired

the

words

in the

psalm.

The problem

of the relation

between prophecy and the Gospel history thus appears, when we attempt to get close to the subject, vastly more complex than the dilemma formulated by M. Reinach would assume. V.

THE

CRUCIFIXION

Let us now leave aside the problem of the general relation between history and prophecy in order to ex88 and amine the essential thesis stated by M. Reinach 84 in is that Their thesis endorsed by M. Couchoud. Psa. xxii the idea of the crucifixion is found, and parversion: ticularly in verse 17, as given in the Septuagint

"A crowd

of dogs encircled me; a band of malefactors

surrounded me. feet."

They

pierced

my

hands

and

my

S5

32

Similar to the robe of the high priests (Josephus, Antiquities, The seamless robe of the high priest may have its origin in the the fourth evangelist may interpretation of Leviticus. It is possible hint here at speculations analogous to those made by Philo concernassimilated to the Logos (De f r m ing the sacerdotal robe which is

iii).

fugiis, 20).

Salomon Reinach, Le Verse 17 du Psaume xxii. Couchoud does not seem to Couchoud, Le Mysore de Jesus. know M. Reinach's works, since he does not quote them. 88 The Hebrew text, very probably corrupted, runs: "A band of around me, as a lion to seize my hands and my scoundrels 33

M

4

prowls

Bible du Centenaire gives up the translation of the and has the following note: "The text runs: Mike a lion my hand and my feet/ which yields no acceptable meaning The ancient versions run: they have pierced (Greek), or they have bound (Hebraic Psalmbook of Jerome), or they have insulted (second version, feet."

last line

The

220

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

If this passage of the psalmist were really the source of the belief in the crucifixion of the Messiah, it is surcited in connection with prising that it has not been 88 But this the event before the time of Justin Martyr. If we look is not all, nor is it even the essential point.

at the totality of the tradition we find that the Psa. xxii was first applied to Jesus in an Aramean context,

34) and Matthew

46) relate that it was in Aramean that Jesus when on the cross that cried aloud: "Eloi! Eloi! Lama Sabachthanei"

since

is.

Mark

(xv.

hast thou

forsaken

text of the

psalm no

"My God! My God! why

Me?"

8T

Now,

in the

Hebraic

allusion to the crucifixion

is

(xxvii.

to be discovered.

The

Palestinian tradition know of no interpretation which referred to it, since Aquila, Symmachus and Jerome have translated by "they have bound" the words which 8S

the Septuagint has rendered by "they have pierced." It was, therefore, only at a secondary stage of the

cover in this psalm ment of the cross.

was

possible to disa passage relating to the punish-

evolution of the tradition that

it

These read therefore Aquila, Midrasch) my hands and my feet* ThU verb in any case can'ka'rou,' instead of 'ka'an' (like a lion). not mean 'they have pierced' as the current version has it" first author who has applied Justin Martyr (I Apol, 35) is the In the New Testament are Psa. xxii. 17 to the story of the Passion to be found several citations or reminiscences of this psalm; none relates either directly or indirectly to the story of the Passion. have already pointed out the influence exerted by the psalm on certain details of the story of the crucifixion. 7 It is not of the narrator possible to explain this fact as an effort to give his account an archaic color, since the use of the Aramaic had language is confirmed by the fact that the soldiers believed Jesut

We

invoked Elijah. as see Loisy, Revue d'histoire

ft

dt

litleraturt riliguusei, 1913.

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

221

if it had not been must have been there that the crucifixion had not been is, if the very idea of MM. anterior to the interpretation of the psalm? The readof it. no doubt have and Couchoud Reinach

Would it have been known in advance that

discovered

it

confirm their ing of the psalm does not appear to In its entirety Psa. xxii is the cry of anguish opinion. from a man surrounded by enemies and threatened

from every

quarter.

His

but notwithstanding he

God.

fidence in

He

situation seems desperate,

still

hopes and places

recalls the deliverance

his con-

formerly

accorded by Jehovah: "Thou dost inhabit the sancIn thee did our tuary. Thou art the glory of Israel.

They had confidence and Thou didst deliver them. They cried unto Thee and were saved. They put their trust in Thee and were not deceived fathers trust.

1'

(verses 4-6).

wretched man

In the verses which follow (7-9) the describes his misery, and then gives his

reasons to hope: "Yea, it is Thou who hast brought me forth from the womb of my mother. ... Go not far from me, for I am in tribulation. Come nigh unto 39 (See verses me, for there is none to help me."

10-12.) After the verses 13-19, which describe the situation of the afflicted one, there comes an invocation to from me Jehovah: "But Thou, Jehovah, be not far Deliver me to my Thou art help strength; hasten I

my

life

!

from the sword.

"That

is to

say,

My

only Good,

40

"Thou has adopted me from my

(deliver birth."

me)

He who

received the new-born child on his knees (whether natural or adopted own by that fact (sec Gen, 1. father) recognized the child as his xlviii. 12 and Job iii. 12). 40 Poetical expression signifying the life, the soul

23; cp. Gen. 17).

(sec Psa,

222

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

41 Save me from the jaw of the from the dog.

1'

lion.

(See verses 20-22). The psalm ends in the praise of Jehovah, who has delivered the one who called upon Him "I will pro:

claim Thy name unto my brethren, and will praise Thee in the midst of the congregation. Ye who fear Jehovah Let all the race of Israel tremble praise Him. has not spurned nor rejected the He For before Him. turned away His prayer of the afflicted neither has He face from him" (verses 23-25). If the desire had been to interpret in one narrative the subject matter of the psalm, one would have spoken .

.

.

;

of an

afflicted

man threatened by his

enemies, but

whom

marvelously protects from their assaults. Without doubt it may be understood that the deliverance means the resurrection, and this is what Messianic has done. But would this interpretation be

God

exegesis was begun with given unless the reading of this psalm the related was the conviction that in it story of the

death and resurrection of Jesus? Besides, do the words "they have pierced

my

hands and

my

feet" constitute

a very distinct allusion to the crucifixion? When the cross is referred to, there are brought into prominence the two notions of hanging and exposure on the cross.

hands and feet by means of nails did not it was only an accessory to the itself cause death punishment. Furthermore, it is by no means certain

The

fixing of

that the hands of the victim were always fixed by nails ; as for the feet, it is more doubtful still. The archaeologist, 41

Victor Schultze, writes:

it

the

hand of the dog." (This note and the two are borrowed from the Bible du Cenienaire.)

Literally, "against the

preceding

"As regards

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

223

means employed (the cross properly so called), stake or gibbet, and for the method of attaching the victim thereto, the executioners seem to have had the greatest and liberty allowed. Ropes alone were used, or ropes In these latter cases sometimes the hands only, 4a and sometimes hands and feet, were fixed by nails." Dom Leclercq, whom no one will suspect of treating

nails.

tradition with lack of respect, writes : "The condemned approached the gibbet, to which he was bound, his

hands on the crosspiece and

upon a

his feet placed

small board." As for nails, the learned Benedictine 48 In fact, the most andoes not even mention them. no mention of nails. makes tradition cient Gospel

There

is

a reference to

them for the

first

time in the 44

Thomas Johannine account of the Resurrected One, 45 marks the hands His in I see having said: "Unless of the nails, and unless I put my hand into His side, I will not believe."

Jesus invites him to put his finger

His hands and

into

xx.

hand into His (Jesus') side The wounds in the hands appear his

25-27). same phase of the tradition as the wound in other words, as one of the latest elethe side

(John

then, at the in

46 ments of the Johannine narrative.

Schultze,

article

"Kreuz,

There

Kreuzigung,"

is

Real

also a

Encyclop.

Protestantische TMologie. article "Croix," Diet, d' Archtologie Chriliennc, In the article "Clous," of the same dictionary, Dom

Dora Leclercq, Paris,

1914.

of the cross either. Leclercq makes no reference to nails "In Luke xxiv. 39 the Resurrected One says to the disciples, are in presence of a frightened of His apparition, thinking they feet. It is Ifeel Me and see. hands and ghost: "See blood as ye see I have" It is not a question spirit has not flesh and it it a of the of Jesus as the crucified, but to notice that recognition real being before them. 45 This text does not speak of the feet.

My

A

My

Maurice Goguel, Introd. au N.T.,

ii,

p. 33*.

JESUS

224

THE NAZARENE

reference to nails in the hands found in the Gospel of but no mention of nails in the feet is found Peter (xxi)

47

before Justin Martyr (ApoL, i. 35 ). If the history of the Passion had as its principal source a passage where it is a question of pierced hands and feet, it would be very strange, it must be admitted, that no mention of nails in the hands

before the fourth evangelist before Justin Martyr.

From

48

nor of nails

is

found

in the feet

49 .

these considerations

it

cannot be admitted

that the story of the crucifixion has been drawn from verse 17 of Psa. xxii. It is only after the event that this text was related to the story of the cross. As for

the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah, which has so greatly influenced Christian thought and piety, it cannot either be considered as one of the sources of the idea of the

death of the Messiah and of the accounts dealing with it. Let us first of all remember what has already been of the pointed out, that it was only after the beginning Christian era, and under conditions which do not per-

mit us to exclude a priori the possibility of the ence of Christian ideas, that this chapter was

influ-

inter-

47 Fickcr believes he finds in a passage of the A eta Petn cum Simone, (in a reference to a young man, nude and bound) an allusion to the crucifixion without nails. W. Bauer remarks that the ropes do not necessarily exclude nails, and thus the importance (already

dubious enough) of the passage in the

A eta

Petn cum Simon f

is

still

further diminished. "Not in reference to the crucifixion, but in an account of the It is known that these have been most influenced by resurrection. apologetics. In the account of Jesus' burial, Mark Matthew is taken down from the cross.

from the removed

cross.

(xxi).

The Gospel

and Luke say that the body and John say it is taken

of Peter alone says that the naili are

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

225

Messiah. In several passages prcted as relating to the it of the New Testament inspired the interpretation either by supplying the given of the death of Christ, ii. Pet. I in as terms employed 22-25, or in Acts viii.

by Philip to the Ethiopian queen's eunuch take the form of a commenthis text has tary upon Isa. liii. 7, 8, or, again, where formulas the employed inspired in a more general way in John 5. 29-36, Rom. iv. 25, and i Cor. xv. 3. In all 32,

etc.,

where the

instructions given

these passages, of which several are of a fairly recent date, it is not a question of the fact of the death of Christ, but of

its significance.

In Paul's

own

writings

Isa. liii. I is only expressly cited in Rom. x. 16, not in reference to the death of Christ, but to the op80

Elsewhere it position against Christian preaching. the ideas of that has been remarked (by Schweitzer) Paul cannot be explained as due to the influence of the because this passage defifty-third chapter of Isaiah, of the velops the idea of the value of the sufferings servant of Jehovah, while Paul attributes a redeeming character not to the sufferings, but to the death of Christ.

With regard upon

to the influence of this chapter of Isaiah we have seen that

the narratives of the Passion,

very limited. before His arrest

the declaration of Jesus This that is written must yet be

It inspired

it is

u :

Me. And He was reckoned among accomplished the transgressors" (Luke xxii. 37), and also in Luke in

the intercession of Jesus for His executioners (xxiii.

34;

cp.

with Isa.

The same

text

IB

liii.

12).

also cited in

John

xii.

38, in

a passage which

not put into the mouth of Jesus, but which contains the reflections of the evangelist about the failure of the ministry of Jesus.

is

226

JESUS VI.

THE NAZARENE

CHRIST THE PASCHAL LAMB thinks, indeed, that the idea of the exercised a profound influence on the

M. Couchoud

paschal lamb the death of Jesus. genesis of the tradition concerning the with The identification of Jesus paschal lamb is, in fact, current in ancient

since

it is

already found

Christianity.

It

is

very old,

in the first Epistle to the Corin-

The

apostle addresses the faithful, exhorting them to be pure, and in referring to those guilty of incest he points out the danger to which the Church will expose herself by allowing the leaven of wickedthians.

within her. ness, liable to corrupt the whole, to subsist It is therefore necessary,

oughly the old leaven,

51

he says, to purge out thor-

M and to celebrate the feast

in

u

Christ our passover is sacripurity and in truth. For v. ficed for us" (i Cor. 7). Let us first observe that if the assimilation of the

death of Christ to the sacrifice of the lamb was already and how could it have been otherwise if it current was the primary nucleus of tradition? it would not be easy to understand the precision of the explanation that the lamb was Christ. The Corinthians would have tell them whom he was of lamb expressly who this paschal wished to speak. The whole passage is figurative; it contains nothing to show that Paul conceived the

well known, without Paul being obliged to

"As

was done

in

Jewish homes on the nth day of Nisan, the

day of the preparation of the Passover There if no reference here to a private feast, of which there it no trace in primitive Christianity, but of the Christian life, in its It therefore seems to entirety, inaugurated by the death of Christ.

M

us very conjectural to suppose, with Johannes Weiss and others, that image had been suggested to Paul by the fact that he was writ* iog about the time of the Passover Feast

this

THEORY OF PROPHETIC ORIGIN

227

death of Christ under the category of the paschal lamb or of any other Levitical sacrifice other than as a sim58 It is merely an elucidation, for it is ple illustration. but as a juridical condemnation, that death of Christ in his doctrine of the Paul interprets

not as a

sacrifice,

redemption. assimilation of Christ to the paschal lamb is also found, but in conditions which indicate the influ-

The

ence of yet other ideas, in the Johannine formula "the 1 lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world'

(John But

i.

29-36).

it is

in the tradition

concerning the Lord's Sup-

per that the idea of a Christian passover

is

specially

and developed. The comparison was very natural, of Jesus. suggested by the date itself of the death of critics number an reason There is increasing (as admit) to fix this, as indicated by the fourth Gospel, 64 that is, upon the at the fourteenth day of Nisan in sacrifice. offered was lamb the paschal very day when conditions in which the idea of Christ the paschal

The

lamb was developed are characteristic, and clearly show that we are in presence of an assimilation made u

In the Synoptic Gospels the idea is of Jesus the developed by attributing to the last repast to have had seem not paschal character which it does a posteriori."

in

the primitive tradition

65 ;

in the

fourth Gospel

56

83 In Rom. iii. 24 it is, on the contrary, to the sacrifice of the feast This duality of expiation that Paul compares the death of Christ would be difficult to understand if the crucifixion had been deduced from the Jewish doctrine of sacrifice. It is, on the other hand, quite if the assimilation had been made "a posteriori." Maurice Goguel, Les Sources du recit Johanmqut de la Passion,

natural 19x0.

**Id. t L'Eucharistie. Introd. au N.T., .,

ii.

JESUS

228

THE NAZARENE

the development of the idea is indicated in a portion it is stated belonging to the most recent stratum, where the case in as not were of broken, the that Jesus legs

of the thieves, thus

Law

fulfilling the prescriptions

concerning the paschal lamb.

We

of the

57

do not speak here of Psa. xxiv, of which Paul cites a verse r 26) where there is no question at all of the believes that primitive Christianity had M. Couchoud Gospel history. found in this psalm "the lament of the Son of God, fallen into the hands of cruel archons." What we have said above concerning the the significance passage of x Cor. ii. 8 proves that this text has not 57

in a passage (i Cor.

which M. Couchoud attaches

to

it.

CHAPTER X

THE GOSPEL TRADITION COMPOSITION OF THE GOSPELS

I.

Gospel tradition is presented in the form of four 1 narratives, whose parentage is certain and whose three first members are even parallel for a considerable part of their content. Before it is possible to come to any

THE

conclusion concerning this tradition there is a questhat of the relation of literary history to be solved 2

which these narratives have to each other. It is necessary to examine the group of the first three the fourth Gospels, known as the Synoptics, and

tions

8

separately.

The most Mark.

It

ancient of the Synoptics

is

the Gospel of

perhaps at later than A.D. 70. Its author

must have been composed

Rome

at a date a little have been of Palestine origin, perhaps the to seems John Mark of whom the book of Acts speaks (Acts

*Wc may neglect the Apocryphal Gospels, for in what has been impreserved to us there is nothing which is not of secondary portance when compared with the Canonical Gospels 2 For the defense in detail of the theory which we here present in summary we refer readers to our Introduction to the New TestaI and II. Without dwelling on the

ment, Parts

call its call the

fact that the attribution of the second proved, we shall

Mark cannot be regarded as rigorously author Mark for the sake of convenience,

Gospel to

just

as

we

shall

authors of the three others respectively Matthew, Luke and

John, while the attribution debatable, and that of the it certainly not established,

of the first

third

Gospel to Luke

and fourth 229

to

is

very

Matthew and John

JESUS

230 xii.

25 ). It

is

a

THE NAZARENE

work of some

complexity, whose author

has utilized traditions of different sources, doubtless inserting

framework created by him. these sources the two best are a collection

them

Among

into the

of narratives going back to the apostle Peter, which were the echo of his missionary preaching, and a selection of discourses, the Logia, whose first origin seems very ancient, but of which Mark has borrowed relatively

little,

doubtless because he

hands of readers for

whom

his

knew it was in the work was designed.

ten years or so after composition the Gossome revision pel of Mark seems to have undergone its modified which has not perceptibly general aspect.

Some

its

The Logia with which Mark was

acquainted, and

which he used with discretion, should in our opinion be considered rather as a collection than as a literary work well put together and arranged according to a rational plan.

This collection became richer as

it

grew, and by that very fact more varied in because, as would be natural, each person inserted of which to attributed and discourses it Jesus in character,

sayings

he knew, but which had been neglected or ignored by the first editors. It is still possible to distinguish with sufficient precision three stages

of the collection.

The

which no doubt is not the primitive form but only the most ancient within our reach is made up of elements of the collection which Matthew and Luke have first,

borrowed and which appear in their versions in the same order. It is one form of this primitive stage that Mark seems to have known and made use of. The two other stages are those which Matthew on one side and Luke on the other had at their disposal. To each must be attributed not only those portions which

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

231

Matthew and Luke possess in common, and are wantare only ing in Mark, but also other portions which one of them, but belong to the same type 4 as the portion common to both, or which are in close 5 Some are found in the first relationship with them.

found

in

and in the third Gospels in forms which differ too much from each other to permit of their belonging to the 6 same source. The Gospels of Matthew and of Luke are, to put it

simply,

two attempts,

parallel but independent of

each other, to concentrate the Gospel tradition.

Their

authors (who appear to have worked, Luke somewhere between the years 75 and 85 and Matthew between 80 and 90) desired to write in one single work ;

the two principal documents existing in their time upon the Gospel history: the narrative of Mark and the Furthermore, both gleaned from various sub-

Logia.

Luke's aim, moreover, was to give a His coherent account, complete and well arranged. which narratives include work thus shows an attempt to edification into the literary originally were works of domain proper. Notwithstanding this, the Gospel of Luke is of the same type as those of Mark and sidiary sources.

Matthew. fourth Gospel must have been composed between the years 90 and no. Although it is, like the

The

4 This is the case, for instance, for a certain number of parables which are only found in Matthew or only in Luke. and which 5 For instance, the curses only found in Luke (vi. 24-26) which Beatitudes the with 20-23), (vi. in are relationship

organic

latter are also

found

in

Matthew

(v.

3-10).

For example, the Beatitudes in Matthew (v. 3-10) from each 30-23) are in forms too widely different of the differences being explained by editorial work, at however, too similar to permit us to consider them

and Luke

(vi.

other to allow but which arc,

independent.

JESUS

232

THE NAZARENE

and missionary and not Synoptic Gospels, an apologetic it an historical work, possesses certain features which are peculiar to it. It assumes that its readers not only are familiar with the Gospel tradition, but also that hands (most probthey have certain narratives in their to which it frequently ably our Synoptic Gospels) some alludes, either by explicitly correcting them on to its readers certain known as in or supposing points facts to which it makes no allusion itself, but which arc recorded therein. The fourth evangelist did not claim to substitute his

work for

that of his predecessors;

would not be clearly intellion the basis they gible without them he only desired, offered him, to develop a certain number of meditato a fairly large extent

it

;

tions

upon themes of the Gospel history which he has

(a fact betraying the influence of the type created by the Synoptics) between a narrative about the opening of the ministry of Jesus and one concerninserted

ing the Passion.

The

objective of the fourth evangelist

essentially

being admitted, a very delitheological and religious cate problem is encountered concerning the methods T Some critics, like Jean Reville and him. used

by

8 Loisy, consider that all the deviations from the three first Gospels which are found in the fourth are and symbolism others, explicable in terms of allegory

M.

;

like

10 Godet,' and Zahn, and

Reville,

tongue. Alfred

Le quatrieme

in a less absolute

manner

faangile, ton engine, sa valeur hit-

Le quatriemt faangile. In hii second edition modified certain points of the theory defended in the

Loisy,

M. Loisy has first

Frederic Godet, Commentairc tur I'Evangile dt Saint Jean.

"Theodor Zahn, Das Evanaelium da Johanntt

THE GOSPEL TRADITION the Father Calmes,

11

233

think that John, in order to cor-

rect the narratives of his predecessors,

was guided by

To

a certain extent,

None

of these theories

and personal experience. however, the conservative critics agree that the souvenirs of the old apostle were somewhat vague, and that he did not distinguish with clearness between the Jesus he had followed in Galilee and Judea and the ideal direct

Christ

who

lived in his heart.

seems to us to take complete account of

what complex

all

the some-

We believe

factors of the problem.

that

may not have attached great importance to historical necessities, the fourth evangelist was acoral traditions quainted with data and written and although he

which it is impossible to reconstruct with precision, nor even to describe or date with certainty, but several of which show themselves to be excellent in comparison with the Synoptic tradition. Without having any intention to utilize historically the sources at his disposal,

John had borrowed data from them sometimes even in it has happened that he has inserted some fragments ;

We should,

for instance, be inclined to recognize some of these sources as evidence for the narratives which portray Jesus baptizing by the side of John (iii. 22), or coming to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles (vii. i, etc.), or as being arrested by

his

own

narrative.

These the cohort led by the tribune (xviii. 3-12). data are only preserved in the fourth Gospel in a

we is characteristic sporadic manner, and this fact shows It would be prepared even to say symbolical. that the Gospel literature was not primarily interested It only prein the history of the ministry of Jesus. served the

memory

because of

its religious --_.._..

Calmei, L'Evanoile ftIon Saint Jean.

value.

JESUS

234

THE NAZARENE THE GOSPEL IDEA

II.

Luke, at the beginning of his book, tells Theophilus, whom he dedicates it, that he had undertaken to write it to convince his friend of the certainty of the to

i. 4). things in which he had been instructed (Luke that conclusion in his also wrought Jesus says John

many

miracles besides those which he has recorded,

and he continues

words: 'These have been

in these

written in order that you

may

Son of God, and,

Christ, the

believe that Jesus

believing,

may

have

is

the

life in

A

everything

gospel, therefore, is before (xx. 31). of else, not a book of history, but a book

edification

and

His name"

is

"gospel"

teaching.

History

is

the

not an object in itself. the examination of the word also shown by In the Greek Bible, if the word itself.

method of This

religious

instruction

12

;

it is

only found in the material sense of 18 good news, the verb of the same root, euaggdizein, and particularly in the second is sometimes met with book of Isaiah having a sense which announces and euanggelia

Only

is

in the feminine

terminology.

The

neuter

and not

in the neuter, as in the Christian for the first time in Greek.

word appears

found in the plural in an inscription of Priene dating from 9 B.C. Researches sul le Grec du N.T. (text and translation in J. Rouffiac, In this inscription concerning the d'apres let inscriptions de Priene). It is

introduction of the Julian calendar into Asia, Augustus is hailed as the "Saviour" of the world, and it is stated that "the day of the was for the world the beginning of the good news birth of the

god which he brought/' It must be noted that this inscription establishes no relation between the term signifying "good news" and the qualification of Saviour given to Augustus. The use of the plural shows that what is expected from the emperor are material advantages, not spiritual wealth* 13 For instance, 2 Kings xviii. 20, 22, 27; 4 Kings

vii,

9.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

235 14

for the Christian idea of the gospel. Testament thus contains (at least implicitly)

prepares the

The Old

way

the idea of a gospel as the proclamation of a divine That which invests this fact with its deliverance. full significance is that the evangelists expressly porfulfillment of these tray the ministry of Jesus as the 15

prophecies. Upon Christian ground, it is with the apostle Paul time that, so far as we know, there appears for the first as limitation without sometimes word the "gospel," of the as "the gospel," sometimes specialized "gospel The Christ." of or the "gospel God," "my gospel,"

"gospel" in

its

unlimited sense

is

the doctrine preached redemption of sinful

by Paul, the mystery of the humanity ransomed by the death and resurrection of the gospel Jesus Christ ( I Cor. xv. I ) in this sense From this fundais the power of God (Rom. i. 16). that of the is derived another, mental signification ,

The preaching of redemption (Phil. i. 7 and ii. 22). comes from God, gospel of God is the gospel which been has which the apostle charged by Him to preach As for the phrase "gospel etc.). not to be understood in the sense of the teaching given by Jesus, but in that of the teach16 (i Cor. ix. 12, ing of which Christ is the essence meant the Paul to The therefore, (Rom.

i.

i,

xv.

of Christ," this

etc.).

1 6,

is

gospel,

preaching whose

This is element may have

deemer.

i* Ixi.

Re-

subject or content was Christ the not a history, although the historical

For instance, Psa.

its xl

place and be at

10 and xxvi. 2

ha.

xl, 9,

base. lii.

7 !*

It is $

and

i.

"Matt.

xi. 5; Luke iv. 21, vii. For the justification of this Introd. au. N. T. t I. pp. 25-18.

16

;

its

22.

statement

see

Maurice Goguel,

JESUS

236

THE NAZARENE

tfcetfcme conception also found in all the other books of Testament outside the Gospels. The books the

New

because relating the history of Jesus are called Gospels

they were composed, not in an historical or biographThey are books of ical, but in a missionary interest. the Chrisexposition of apostolic doctrine, preaching 11 tian faith. "Gospel of Jesus Christ in Mark i. I does a gospel preached by Jesus Christ, but a docThe trine whose essence and content is Jesus Christ. the docof the is the of author interpreter only Gospel

not

mean

of salvation. This it is which explains the obof this kind are called jectivity with which works "the Gospel," and the modesty with categorically trine

which their presumed authors are referred to

is

shown

11

It was only at to. word the that a relatively late period "gospel" was interpreted in the sense which subsequently prevailed

by the simple phrase "according

book which narrated the history of Jesus. used the word "gosJesus does not appear to have 17 It is only put into His mouth by pel" Himself. 18 and Matthew Mark, each upon two occasions (Mark xiiL 10 Matt. xxiv. 14; Markxiv. 9; Matt. xxvi. 13). In each passage the "gospel" means not the teaching that

is,

a

;

of Jesus, but the future preaching of the apostles. In each it is more than doubtful whether the word Himself. In the first case, "gospel" comes from Jesus the editors have used the word which meant in the time they wrote "Christian teaching."

As

for the second,

of course, necessary to eliminate passages where the word used by the narrator (Mark i. i, 14; Matt iv. 23, is. "gospel" into the mouth of Jesus by 25) and thote where it is plainly put Mark (i. 15, viii. 35, x. 29), but is not found in the parallel texts * 7 It it,

is

of

Matthew and Luke.

"Luke

hat no parallel to these passages.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION there are

237

good reasons for thinking that the portion

found (the episode of the ointment at Bethany) did not form part of the most primitive and in the solemn deposit of the Gospel tradition,

in

which

it is

affirmation that the act of the

woman would

be nar-

rated wherever the Gospel would be preached, there the period when certainly seems to be a reminiscence of 19 of the Gospel. this portion did not yet form part the Apostolic Fathers and the Apologists is seen the rise of the idea of the gospel as narrative or document alongside the idea of the gospel as a doctrine.

With

That which we have seen concerning the meaning of the word "gospel" in the first Christian generations shows that it was not in an historical interest that the traditions concerning the life and teachings of Jesus were

collected, preserved,

and committed to writing.

of the early Christians was entirely turned and not to the past. They expected future the toward the early return of Christ, whose task was to comand all plete the work of redemption already begun,

The thought

was completely foreign to their minds. In so far as they had need of an authority, and in the perthey found it in the Old Testament and been guided by the suasion that they had inspired those who had Still, it was impossible that interest in organization

Spirit.

lived in the companionship of Jesus should not carehad been, of the memory of what fully preserve

He

what were

He

had said and done.

For them these things

a source of inspiration and an example. When upon the morrow of the Passion a Christian of the distheology began to form, the meditations Maurice Gogucl, UEvanaile de Marc dans set rapports avtc ceux d< Matthieu ft de Luc, Paris, 1909; Introd., i. p. 298.

JESUS

238

THE NAZARENE

were centered around an historic fact, This death contradicted the life and teaching, since impression produced by His it represented Him as if abandoned and even cursed by God. The necessity of solving this contradiction was ciples of Jesus

the death of the Lord.

for Christian thought the most powerful of stimulants. had lived with Him, had been Jesus, for those who the incarnation of the highest moral authority. They had formed the habit of looking to Him, of expectHis example. ing His counsel, of being inspired by moral the authority of His He, disappeared,

having

it became transformed personality did not disappear; the to itself attached and memory of His acts and His

words.

A

assured the preservatriple interest, therefore,

memoirs of the Gospel history a sentimental Those who had been in contact interest first of all. with Jesus could not let His memory fade away in their minds and hearts; in the next place there was a moral interest, the words and actions of Jesus being tion of

considered as offering or inspiring the solution of the moral and practical problems which they found facing them; finally there was a theological interest, for it

was impossible to ignore what they considered the human episode of the grand drama of redemption. At the beginning, at least, no special value was attached to the tradition preserving a coherent history of the life of Jesus. From the speculative point of view, the sole thing of importance was the simple

His death; from the moral point of view, the important things were the words, the acts, the attitudes in which the soul of Jesus was manifested. Thus from the beginning the Church had need of trafact of

THE GOSPEL TRADITION His

ditions concerning

were,

amply

life,

sufficient for

239

but fragmentary memoirs

her needs.

of Paul, for as have we seen, which, presume instance, correspond, the of details of the knowledge Gospel history many and the memory of many of the Master's words, but It is to this situation that the Epistles

not a coherent, organic and systematic tradition about

His

Without doubt

life.

that the

first

it

was

in a less definite

form

evangelists found the substance of their

narratives.

III.

Two at once

THE ABSENCE

OF CHRONOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

thus understood which strike one the Gospel tradition and the conditions

facts are

when

which it is presented are studied. The first is that we have neither in the canonical tradition nor in that which is extracanonical any precise indication concerntook ing the times in which the facts of Gospel history this which the that is second plan upon place; the in

history

is

arranged

in the Synoptics

20

is

artificial.

It

by the first evangelist to group furnished him as together memoirs which tradition

was

arbitrarily created

isolated units.

be convenient to examine these two consideraAs regards the appearance of tions in succession. that God had sent Jesus in history, Paul merely says It will

since from what has only speak of the first three evangelists, an it follows that it is not admissible to speak of said been just 20

We

The historical or geographical framework of the fourth evangelist is caused by the evangelist juxtaposing appearance of a framework scenes and by making use, as transitions between them, of episodes

feasts at reasons for the journeys of Jesus to Jerusalem.

2 4o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

of time (Gal iv. 4)- This is a needs to be kept in mind as which dogmatic concept the history of meaning that it was in the last period of the world (that world to which Paul had the sentiment

Him

in the fullness

of belonging) that the Gospel history is to be assigned. This at once shows that the absence of all chronological details in PauPs writings must not be interpreted as a proof that in his thought the drama of redemption was devoid of all contact with historical reality. The close relationship which he establishes between the death of Christ and His return, which he believed to be imminent, also proves that it could only have been at a quite recent period that the Gospel

drama had

taken place. It should be added that Paul had no reason to repeat in his Epistles what he doubtless on frequent occasions had expounded in his oral teachings concerning the death of Jesus. of Mark, Matthew and John the In the

Gospels date of the death of Jesus is (indirectly, at any rate) indicated by the mention of Pilate, although the narrators did not mention

him

to give any chronological

had played in the writer in whose work

indication, but because of the part he 21

The first history of Jesus. there appears a real chronological sense is Luke, indicates by a series of synchronisms (iii. I, 2)

who the

period at which the ministry of John the Baptist began. The value of the data which he gives is a question of The interesting thing is that he had small importance. considered it necessary to give them."

The time it the cafe with the pa if age in i Tim. vi. 13. "Their value hat recently been defended by Ed. Meyer and by C. Ctchoriut. The great uncertainty which prevent* our dependence

THE GOSPEL TRADITION The chronology

of the

life

241

of Jesus presents in later for Certain authors

tradition a singular vacillation.

M. Salomon

instance,

Reinach

have drawn from

this

an argument against the historical character of the traLet us see how matters stand. dition. Irenasus (Har., ii. 22-25) declares, basing his statement on the fourth Gospel and on the presbyters who that is to say upon the work of had known

John

as admitted by all critics, that Jesus died Papias, 24 not at the age of thirty, but at the age of fifty, and it is certainly Irenaeus who is the authority for writers 26 Irenaeus is familiar with attesting the same belief. 28

on these statements is that we know nothing of their origin. They cannot originate in Christian tradition, which, as we have seen, was

not at the beginning interested in these questions. The fact that has preJewish tradition, such as we know is through Josephus, served the memory of John the Baptist permits one to suppose, as does Meyer, that it is from a Jewish source that Luke has borrowed

them. 28 born doubtless Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, was about AD. 85. He composed, about AD. 140, a work in five books entitled Explanations of the Sayings of the Lord, of which Eusebius has preserved some fragments, and from which seem to proceed all the information which Irenaeus states he held from the presbyters. Eusebius states that Papias was a man of small mind, and indeed

certain stories

credulous

man

which he

relates

show

that he

must have been a very

(Ere. History, in). idea is found in another treatise

24 The same of Irenaeus, Th* Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching. 26 Traces of an analogous conception are found in other texts, for the example in the letter from Pilate to Claudius which constitutes most ancient portion of the "Acta Pilati," in the commentary of also cites the fact that Hippolytus on Dan. iv. 23, etc. M. S. Reinach "in a whole collection of Christian works of art, sarcophagi, carvings, mosaics, some of which go back to the fourth century, John baptizing as a man of about fifty years old at least, while is

presented Jesus old. Now, according to Jesus is a child of ten to twelve years A.D. 36. If he baptized before several died the years Baptist Josephus, in the year 30, Jesus would have been born at the earliest in the he would hare underyears 18 or 20, and dying at the age of thirty under the Emperor the towards Passion (still the 50 year gone

JESUS

242

THE NAZARENE

the canon of the four Gospels, and attributes to it an absolute value, leaving no place for the Apocryphal therefore, highly improbable that he was inspired by a tradition differing from theirs. His ideas originate in a particular interpretation of the in the very Gospel data. Corssen has observed that of which we are speaking Irenaeus declares 26

Gospels,

It

is,

passage

that after

His baptism Jesus came three times to Jeru-

salem for the Passover. In this statement he is in Two indications flagrant contradiction with himself. which Irenaeus in found have been put us upon the In the first place, track of the explanation sought for. in the

same passage where he gives

his opinion as to

He

the age of Jesus at death, Irenaeus says that have sanctified by His death all the periods of

must

human

This is a dogmatic observation (Har., xxii). in with the authority of the Gospel which scarcely fits In the second place, traditions which he recognizes. Irena-us (ii. 22-25) relies on the authority of the life

fourth Gospel and the tradition of the presbyters who had known John that is, upon Papias. It is possible to trace the exegetical process by which the idea of

has been extracted Jesus dying at the age of fifty years from the fourth Gospel. In John viii. 57 the Jews say to Jesus, "Thou art not yet fifty years old." There is the real age of Jesus evidently here no indication as to Claudius)

"

This cannot be put

in accord

with the tradition attested

not at the Irenaeus, since the latter states that Jesus died, all these which from At the at but period years. fifty thirty,

by

age of

works

of art date the authority of the canonical Gospels was uncontested. They should be explained by the liberty which these works of art demanded, which it is not allowable to consider as documents capable

of an absolutely rigorous interpretation. 26 Concerning the opinions of I r emeus about the Gospel canon, refer to Ztha, Gfichichtt 4ft Ntvtutamtntlicht* Kamons.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

243

and no doubt the presbyters of representing Jesus as desirous before him, being that a man sanctifying the age at which it was supposed at the time, but Irenaeus,

attained the plenitude of his powers, have understood this passage to suggest that Jesus was nearly fifty years 27 One other text of the Gospel may have sugold.

In the episode gested or confirmed this interpretation. the the of of the purification Jews asked Jesus Temple to justify by a miracle the authority which He had claimed in expelling the traders.

He

replied:

"De-

in three days" stroy this temple, and I will rebuild it observes the evangelist, did not (ii. 19), which remark, refer to the Temple of Jerusalem, but to the body of Jesus (ii. 21 ). The Jews retorted: "Forty-six years was this Temple in building, and Thou wilt rebuild it

daysl" (ii. 20). It only required to apply the same symbolism to this reply of the Jews as to the declaration of Jesus to arrive at the same idea that of the incident Jesus was forty-six years old at the time in three

of the purification of the Temple. There is, therefore, in the work of Irenaeus no tradition on behalf of which it is possible to criticize that

There are only speculations inspired by allegorical principles and dogmatic considerations. The opinion of Irenaeus and of those who followed

of the Gospels.

him cannot be interpreted as the proof of the

existence

of doubts and hesitations concerning the current tradition.

And

it

is

deducing from very inconsistent pre-

mises conclusions singularly unwarranted to suppose, with M. Salomon Reinach, that a tradition which in the reign of Claudius represented Jesus as dying could not originally have menthat is, after A.D. 41 *7

Hippocrates, according to Philo,

D<

opificto

mundi, 105.

JESUS

*44

THE NAZARENE

tioncd Pontius Pilate, who was disgraced in A.D. 36, for this presumes that the most ancient narrative of the Passion must have contained no mention of the the Roman Procurator. The point it is necesabout traditions like those of Ireto remember sary naeus is that during a long period the indifference was maintained which the first generation had shown to

name of

everything

concerning Jesus

which

only

possessed

biographical interest.

IV.

The same

THE PLAN

OF THE GOSPELS

conclusion follows also

from the

fact that

of Jesus interduring the generation after the death without isolated in souvenirs, est was centered only coherent a into them any conscious attempt to form of facts. group, in harmony with the real development the of character the shown is setting It is this which by

of the Synoptic Gospels. The Gospel of Mark is composed of an introduction and of four portions of which the first may be subdi-

vided into eight sections.

The

introduction consists of three brief accounts the Baptist, the baptism, and the temptation

of John of Jesus

1-13). The first part (i. 14 to viii. 26) Galilean ministry of Jesus and gives a picture of the of His preaching of the Gospel to the multitudes. The (i.

return to Galilee, the calling of the first disciples, the and the journey to Capernaum, the itinerant preaching first section which healing of the lepers, make up a welcomed by the as of Jesus portrays the activity crowd (u 14-45). Then comes a series of conflicts

THE GOSPEL TRADITION which take place between Jesus and the Pharisees, Herodians ending in a cabal between these and the who wish to destroy Him (Chap, iii) It is the second .

section

which immediately after the opening success

portrays the

drama. The not allowing

ever increasing, until the final third section is a kind of interlude, Jesus Himself to be discouraged by the opposi-

difficulties,

He

encounters, but continuing His ministry of instituhealing while He prepares the future by the With the fourth tion of the apostolate (iii. 7-19)-

tion

20-35) the conflict becomes more acute. Even the kinsmen of Jesus accuse Him of being out of His senses, and the Pharisees declare that He is pos-

section

(iii.

sessed by Beelzebub. The fifth section gives a specimen of the teaching of Jesus, consisting of three and theoretical parables, accompanied by explanations In this section the evangelist explains the reflections.

announced in preceding sections. Being unwilling to admit that this was not intentional, he develops the theory of the hardening of men's hearts consciously provoked, Jesus using parables designed to conceal His real thought from those

failure of Jesus already

who were

not initiates

A sixth section

(iv.

(iv.

35 to

1-34)vi.

6) shows Jesus quitting

the Galilean territory to begin His action on pagan soil at

Gerasa.

He

is

not, to speak exactly,

ill

received,

but the time for acting upon the non-Jews has not yet come. The episode of Gerasa must be looked on as Christian mission. Having reprefigurative of the turned again to Galilee, Jesus heals the daughter of the issue of blood, then Jairus and the woman with He is repulsed by His where returns to Nazareth,

compatriots.

JESUS

246

THE NAZARENE

the second Just as after the conflicts narrated in future the for had section Jesus by the instiprepared

His rejection at Nazareth He sends forth the apostles on a mission. To this episode there is attached in a somewhat artitution of the apostolate, so after

the narrative about the perplexity of Herod and retrospectively that of the death of John the narratives Baptist (seventh section, vi. 6-30). The first the which follow up to the close of part of the Gospel (eighth section, vi. 31 to viii. 26) show a very The same episode (the characteristic arrangement. of loaves) multiplication, or rather the distribution, ficial

is

way

related twice under

two forms

sufficiently like

one

another to prevent any hesitation in recognizing in them two variants of the same theme, and it appears that the events which follow the second multiplication of loaves (the crossing of the lake, the discussion with

the Jews, and the healing) correspond fairly closely with those accompanying the first. This doublet shows the importance which this part of the narrative had for tradition.

distribution of loaves has been considered to be the anticipation of the Lord's Supper, as a supreme

The

who had attempt made by Jesus to win over the people not been gained to His cause either by appeals or by 28 The failure is manifested by the Jewish healing. raises after the first distribution the opposition, which discussion concerning the pure and the impure, and after the second demands from Jesus a sign from

Henceforward the fate of the public ministry failure was complete and irreof Jesus was sealed mediable. Jesus to some extent resigns Himself to the heaven.

"Maurice Goguel,

L'Eucharutit, p. 51.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

247

and renounces all public teaching designed the to win people's support. In the second part of the Gospel (viii. 27 to x. 52) it is solely to His disciples that Jesus addresses Himinevitable,

self.

29

At the same time His teaching is about to assume a new character. It is no longer the Gospel of the Kingdom but that of the Messiah. Jesus reveals to His disciples the fate which awaits Him in Judea, and announces His resurrection to them, but they do After each of three not understand His teaching. prophecies of sufferings which form, so to speak, the framework of this part of the Gospel (viii. 31, 32, is placed a narrative in ix. 30-32 and x. 32-34) which the

disciples* lack

of intelligence

is startlingly as manifested. regards the arpeculiar importance rangement of the Gospel of Mark belongs to the first

A

passage of this second part, where the author narrates the confession of Peter near Caesarea Philippi (viii. Starting from this passage, the notion of

27-30).

the Messiahship dominates the narrative and forms the central subject of the teaching given to the apostles. The third part of the Gospel begins with the entry

of Jesus into Jerusalem, and ends at the time

Jews are preparing

to

form

a plot against

when the

Him

(xi.

an account of the I-I3? 37)- This portion contains the discussions between Jesus and Jews and the teach-

The narratives are arranged ing given to the disciples. After Jesus, by His in well-marked progression. 29 The few narratives in which other personages intervene have attaches their center of gravity in the special teachings that Jesus r tby arc in * to them for His disciples (for example in x. X7-30> located icrted in the place in which we read them because tradition

them

in

Judea (example,

x.

46*52).

248

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

solemn entry into Jerusalem (xi. i-ii) and by the so to speak, taken purification of the Temple, has, of discussions

up His position, there is placed a series which accentuate the conflict and make it a definite This is shown by the invectives against the thing. Pharisees, which are the last words of Jesus pronounced in public (xii. 38-40). After this the evanthe teachings given gelist narrates disciples touching final things (xiii.

by Jesus to His 1-37). This is a

One kind of testament which He bequeaths them. the of Gospel presents single episode of this portion a character different from the others it is that of the :

widow's mite (xii. 41-44), which the evangelist has in the Temple, placed here because the act, taking place could not be well put elsewhere. The narratives of the Passion, which form the last are so intimately portion of the Gospel (xiv. 1-16), inter-related that it is unnecessary to show that they form one complete group. They are linked with each

other in a necessary way, beginning with the plot of the Jews up to the arrival of the women at the sepulcher,

which they

find

80

empty. The plan upon which the Gospel of Mark is arsince ranged has a triple character: it is psychological, it rests upon the idea of the development of the Jewish of intelligence; it is opposition and the disciples' lack

and chronological, since it shows in the events the reaction after the welcome given to Jesus; it is

logical

80 The Gospel of Mark gives no accounts of apparitions of the Resurrected One, its end having disappeared at an early date. Those which are read in the received text have been added afterwards by a man acquainted with the other Gospels. According to a statement made by the Armenian work of Edsduniadzin, this person was the

presbyter Aristion.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION geographical, since three great periods

249

divides the history of Jesus into Galilean ministry, itinerant minis-

it :

try, and Jerusalem ministry. It is on the plan adopted by Mark that the narratives of Matthew and Luke also rest, and nothing perof haps shows better than this fact the dependence the first and third evangelists upon the second. Both, however, have been obliged to modify to a certain

extent the arrangement adopted by Mark so as to enable them to introduce into their narratives the ele-

ments they wished to add to those given by him. In the immense majority of cases the portions borrowed by Matthew from Mark are found in his work into

same order. As in Mark, the account is divided two portions by the episode of Csesarea Philippi.

But

in the first portion

in the

Matthew has not reproduced composition which we find in

somewhat elaborate Mark. This is not because he has represented the order of events differently, but the ordering of Mark's work was much too compact to permit the insertion of elements which Matthew desired to add. The Gospel of Matthew opens by an introduction ii ) which, in addition to what is given in (i. i to iv.

the

the Gospel of Mark, contains the gospel of the infancy, but in a somewhat detailed way as regards John the Baptist and the temptation. The account of the Galilean ministry (iv. 2 to xvi. The first (iv. 2 to ix. is divided into four sections.

12)

formed, after a short preamble, by two pictures: the preaching by words (v. i to vii. 29) and the which illustrate preaching by deeds (viii. i to ix. 34), and the two terms, "preaching healing," employed in The Seriv. 23 to characterize the activity of Jesus.

34)

is

JESUS

250

THE NAZARENE

inserted (v. I to vii. 29) has been at the of the of place in as a specimen Jesus teaching the time first teaching Mark's Gospel where for the

mon on

the

Mount

(Mark i. 21, 22). The picof turc of the activity Jesus consists of a series of portions borrowed either from Mark or from other had been referred to

sources

;

it is

arranged

81

in

such a

way

as to illustrate the

of the Baptist: "The reply of Jesus to the question blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the

deaf hear, the dead are raised" (xi. 5). This picture is drawn with a certain objectivity in the sense that the evangelist does not relate the impression which the acts of Jesus produced. It is in the second section

welcome given to Jesus

is

(ix.

shown

42) that the In the first relief.

35 to in

x.

on the order followed by Mark, place, by anticipation we have the sending forth of the disciples on a mission, and reproduced according to the Logia and not according to

the discourse which accompanies their It is specially the idea of the difficulties

Mark,

departure. that the missionaries will encounter and the hostility which will assail them which is developed (ix. 35 to x.

42); then comes, after a note about the

itinerant

the messengers sent preaching (xi. i), the question of by John the Baptist to Jesus, followed by the testimony

of Jesus to John, the phrase about the Kingdom of God suffering violence, and the parable of the children These portions show the forerunner him(xi. 2-19). self losing faith.

The words

concerning John the

81 The correspondence is made evident by the fact that the impression produced by the Sermon on the Mount is characterized by Matthew in exactly the same terms that Mark had employed in reference to the teaching in the Capernaum synagogue.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

25*

Baptist are immediately followed by the malediction pronounced upon the unbelieving Galilean towns, and, whether it be that the evangelist did not wish (xi.

20-24) to terminate this portion by a note exclusively negative, or whether he merely copied the arrangement of his source, there comes next the doxology upon the revelation made unto infants (xi. 25-27) and the call

weary and heavy laden (xi. 28-30). In Chapter xii Matthew takes up again the thread of the narrative of Mark with the two accounts about the disputes concerning the Sabbath (xii. 1-14) and a general notice about the healings accomplished by Jesus and of to the

the crowds

who came

to

Him

(xii.

15-21).

Still fol-

of posseslowing Mark, he relates next the accusation sion by evil spirits and the reply of Jesus (xii. 22-50), but in a more developed form. Then comes the chap-

1-52), which, although in a manner less obvious than in Mark, has also the character of a theoretical reflection upon the failure of 82 The rejection of Jesus at Nazareth brings us Jesus. ter of parables

(xiii.

53-5 8 )- For the third section (perplexity of Herod and death of John the for the fourth (the group of Baptist, xiv. 1-13) and to the

end of

this section (xiii.

the multiplication of loaves, xiv. 13 to xvi. 12) the narrative of Matthew is exactly parallel to that of

Mark. 88 others which 82 The parables given by Mark are completed by come from the Logia. The dependence of Matthew upon Mark it evidenced by the fact that the explanation of the parable of the in Mark, is put after the conclusion tares, which has no equivalent

natural of the teaching in parables, and separated in a not very essentials it appcart In itself the (xiii. 24-30). from parable way to correspond with the parable of the sower in Mark.^ of tome 88 Exception is made of the addition and suppression

unimportant

details.

JfiSUS

2S2

THE NAZARENE

In the second part of the Gospel, extending from Peter's confession to the healing of the blind men at Matthew follows very Jericho (xvi. 13 to xx. 34), In no detail has he the narrative of Mark. closely any different order.

He

confines himself to omitting

two short passages (Mark ix. 38-41 and 49, 50) and 84 to adding some others. The relationship of Matthew's narrative with that of

Mark

in the third part,

which deals with the Jeru-

One in the second. salem ministry, of that single passage has not been introduced, namely On the other the widow's mite (Mark xii. 41-44). In the some added has portions. hand, Matthew conwhich account of the Passion and the resurrection, is

the

same as

and last part of the Gospel (xxvi. is neither omission nor transthere I to xxviii. 7), addition of certain position to be noted, but only the elements of clearly secondary importance. Matthew continues his narrative beyond the stitutes the fourth

Finally, point at which

(for us) Mark stops; he finishes his work by the narrative of the apparition in Galilee and of the mission given by Jesus to His disciples (xxviii. It is thus only in the first part of his narrative 8-20) .

Matthew diverges sensibly from the arrangement adopted by Mark. This he does for two reasons to

that

incorporate in his narrative the substance of the Logia and to group in compact groups the similar elements

furnished by either of the two sources at his disposal. The introduction of new matter has not led in Luke's Gospel, as in that of Matthew, to a transforma84

narratives derived from Mark (xvi. and others are inserted between the narborrowed from Mark (xvii. 24-27, yiii. io-35 ** 1-16).

Some

are

combined

17-19, xvii. 20, xviii. 4), rativet

of

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

253

The new tion or retouching of the primitive plan. strucin the intercalated matter is, generally speaking, ture of the second Gospel. Luke opens his work with a dedication to Theophilus, in which he explains the object he has in view (i. 1-4). Then comes the introduction (i. 5 to iv. 13), consisting of two elements, a gospel of the infancy differing from that of Matthew

52) and the narratives concerning John the of Jesus, this last Baptist, the baptism and temptation a narrative being preceded by genealogy (iii. i to iv. of Luke contains 13). The first part of the Gospel (i.

5 to

ii.

the account of the Galilean ministry of Jesus (iv. 14 to ix. 17), arranged somewhat differently from the account in the second Gospel. After a short reference to the itinerant preaching (iv. 14, 15), there comes the scene of the preaching of Jesus at Nazareth (iv. Mark gives a 16-30), which anticipates a story that a Luke has here made little later. displacement, for

the episode at Nazareth supposes continuous and oras ganized activity of Jesus at Capernaum (iv. 23), to The displacement gives will be recorded in iv. 31. of the ministry of Jesus a dramatic charthe

opening

two dominating ideas, the first of being that the Gospel was the accomplishment prophecy; the second that it was not welcomed. acter,

and

illustrates

After the scene of Nazareth, Luke gives the narratives about Jesus at Capernaum (iv. 3i-4 I )> the flight

of Jesus to a desert place

(iv.

42-43), the

itin-

told more briefly erant preaching in Galilee (iv. 44) account being his of elements certain in than Mark, the and healing of the lepers taken from elsewhere

12-16). These incidents follow

(v.

in the

same order as

in

Mark,

JESUS

254

THE NAZARENE

but before the last of the series Luke inserts the episode of the miraculous draft of fishes (v. i-n), which replaces the more simple narrative of the vocafound in Mark. The picture of the tion of the disciples

early activity of Jesus

is

followed, as in

Mark, by

a

second section, wherein a series of conflicts already announces the failure of the preaching of Jesus (v. (apostleship and the arrangement healing, vi. 12-19) again reproduces of Mark. In what follows there is found, on the conwhich corresponds to the fourth section

17 to

vi.

The

n).

third section

trary, nothing

8*

(accusation of madness and possession). On the other hand, Luke inserts here two sections which are peculiar to him; the fourth consists of a

of

Mark

discourse on the plain (vi. 20-49), which

the equivof the alent, although in a less well-developed form, fifth The Matthew. Sermon on the Mount given by is

section consists of a series of passages lacking in

Mark,

and of which a portion only is found, again in Matthew dis(Luke vii. I to viii. 3). These portions are fairly inserted similar, and it is difficult to see why they were at this place. seems to make

It it

may

be supposed that Luke,

who

a point to interrupt as rarely as pos-

thread of Mark's narrative, has made use of what he had left out to place at the end of the discourses of Jesus a series of fresh narratives. The sixth section of Luke (viii. 4~ l8 ) corresponds sible the

to the section of parables in Mark, but with certain In the seventh (viii. 19-56) and simplifications.

eighth sections

(ix.

1-9)

Luke only diverges from

38 The episode of Beelzebub is found again in a more developed It it in a different form, and does not seem to be from Mark. The remark of Jesus about His real parents is context (xi. 14).

given elsewhere

(viii.

19-21).

THE GOSPEL TRADITION Mark upon tion of the

255

secondary points. The ninth and last secfirst part shows, when compared with

Mark's narrative, considerable

simplification.

It only

contains the narrative of the return of the disciples and multiplication of loaves (ix. 10-17). In the second part of the Gospel, which opens with the Mes-

the

first

Luke begins by following as far as the episode of narration very closely Mark's 80 the miracles worked in the name of Jesus (ix. 18ix. 50 as far as xviii. 14 he abandons from Then 50). sianic confession of Peter,

'the narrative of

Mark in

order to record a whole series

of episodes peculiar to himself, and which constitute a third part of his Gospel. Jesus appears in this to

be constantly on the road and although the geographical development is not distinctly marked, He appears ;

Analysis shows that this account (which is frequently called, by the way by no means too correctly, the narrative of the journey or

to be going towards Jerusalem.

87

Whether ministry in Perea) is not homogeneous. the subject under consideration be the questioners of the circumstances supposed attending each epiJesus,

sode, or the transitions between them, one becomes convinced that the successive narrations forming this part

of the Gospel have no real unity, but that they have been borrowed from various sources and grouped to-

appears as though Luke had at a point chosen in interrupted the narrative of Mark

gether

artificially.

It

It is 86 One is not reproduced by Luke single passage of Mark the the conversation of Jesus with His disciples after descending Mount of Transfiguration (Mark ix. 9-13). This passage may have been omitted because it discussed a question of Jewish dogma, which had no interest for readers of Luke.

*T

See on

thii

point

Maurice

Goguel, Introd,

au

N.T.,

u pp.

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

256

an arbitrary manner in order to insert a series of but which he passages which he did not wish to lose, did not know where to place. In xviii. 15 he resumes the thread of Mark's narrative exactly at the point where he had left it, and the fourth part of his narra27) corresponds almost exactly with Mark to the end of the second part of the latter.** The account of the Jerusalem ministry, which forms tive (xviii. 15 to xix.

the fifth part of the Gospel (xx. 28 to xxi. 38) is also Luke omits the curse fairly similar to that of Mark.

and gives no division into days, stating only at the end of his narrative that Jesus taught during the daytime in the Temple and at night he

upon the

fig tree,

Mount

retired to the

80 of Olives.

sixth part, consisting of the account of the Passion and resurrection (xxii. I to xxiv. 53), is in its sufficiently close to the cor-

The

arrangement

general

but from many responding part of Mark's narration, rather a it special physiognomy presents points of view of certain of the form the or the to disposition owing

more important narratives of which

it consists.

There

is here presented a problem peculiar to the point of view of the sources which Luke has followed in his narrative of the Passion. The account of the resur-

rection consists, after the discovery of the empty tomb, of the apparitions to the two disciples upon the road

to

Emmaus and to the

This

last

(xxiv.

account

1-53).

apostles assembled at Jerusalem. followed by that of the Ascension

is

It

should be noted that Luke knows

only of Judaic apparitions. *

Omission of

Mark

*'Luke omits Mark x. 25-28.

He

add*

(x. xii.

It follows

from the pre-

35~45) J addition of Luke (xix. 1-27)28-34, of which he gives an equivalent in

xix. 39-44*

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

257

ceding analysis that the plan of Luke's work has no independent value of its own. It is a mere enlarge-

ment of that of Mark.

The

fact that neither

Matthew nor Luke have

at-

tempted to arrange their narrative of the life of Jesus otherwise than Mark had done, and that they confined themselves to retouching the arrangement adopted by their predecessor, where it was necessary to permit the introduction of new matter, is in itself significative. It

proves that

Matthew and Luke, who had

at their

had not, disposal sources of information which Mark found nothing therein which supplied them with information concerning the arrangement and the order of the facts. This premier observation is already unfavorable to the hypothesis according to which the to the development of Mark's narrative corresponded real course of events.

only be solved by direct shall confine ourexamination of Mark's plan. not pretend to do which remarks to some here selves

The problem, however, can

We

exhaust the problem of the life of Jesus, but which should at least serve to explain the character of Mark's The first remark will bear on the notion of the

plan.

Messianic secret.

The

episode of Caesarea Philippi

which Peter recognizes Jesus as the (viii. 27-30), Christ, and the story of the Transfiguration (ix. 2-8), in

which serves as celestial confirmation for him, form the pivot around which is articulated the entire construction of the Gospel.

From

this time

onward the

esoteric prepared to receive this quasi the understand them make teaching, Jesus attempts to and death of the Messiah. necessity of the sufferings Mark answer to the real of Does this construction

disciples being

JESUS

258

THE NAZARENE

development of the facts? There is reason to doubt There are found in the first part of the Gospel it. passages which clearly present Jesus, not, doubtless, as the Messiah in the traditional sense, but at least that is, as One sent from God, as the Son of man

some one charged by God

We

to accomplish the work of shall not, to establish this, refer

redemption. to the account of the baptism (i. 9-1 1 ) where there is an express Messianic declaration, since it seems that a vision of Jesus and not a originally it was related as ,

revelation accorded to the people

or to the

disci-

40

ples.

must be asked if episodes such as the calling of the disciples (i. 16-20), the institution of the and the sending forth of the apostleship (iii. 13-19) on mission (vi. 6-13) do not assume that the

But

it

disciples

narrator had the idea that He who acted with such revealed who authority must, to be thus obeyed, have forth ? Cersent and chose He whom those to He was tain narratives, such as the healing of the paralytic (ii.

1-12), with the declaration that the Son of

man

has the power on earth to forgive sins (ii. 10), would have no sense if Jesus had presented Himself only as a doctor or even as a prophet. The healings of the demoniacs, and the discussion about Beelzebub connected with them, are in this connection particularly The expulsions of demons are not, in characteristic. the evangelist's eyes (and they were not for Jesus) acts essensimple acts of power and mercy they were a in Messianic. They assume, fact, victory gained tially

40 It may nevertheless be asked if Mark has perfectly preserved the primitive character of the narrative and if he does not represent the people as at Itast the witnesses of the vision of Jesus,

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

259

over Satan, the prince of demons in other words, the realization in power of the very work which was exof pected from the Messiah, or at least an anticipation this victory. This is shown by the reply of Jesus when

him of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub, the prince of demons (Mark iii. 22). Jesus replies first by reducing the argument If Satan makes war upon himself, to an absurdity. he will not be able to stand his kingdom will come to

the Pharisees accuse

;

an end

(iii.

23-26).

Then He

of these expulsions, and

this

gives the explanation does in the parable

He

man "No one can enter into a strong and house man's spoil his goods except he will first bind the strong man" (iii. 27). The strong man here is Satan, the prince of demons. Jesus is unable to of the strong

:

goods" that is, snatch from him those whom he holds dominion over if He has not first of This victory gained over demons all conquered him. Messianic a is essentially act, and the assertion of "spoil his

of a Messianic Jesus has for the evangelist the quality declaration. This is shown by the text of Luke, which adds this declaration: "But if I, with the finger of

God, cast out devils, no doubt the Kingdom of God is One other fact proves come upon you" (Luke xi. 20) that the Messianic proclamation of Mark viii. 27 ,

could not possess the importance (if the data of Mark are adhered to) which the evangelist himself attributes to it, and marks the appearance in the Gospel tradition of a new idea, and this is the recognition of Jesus as the

God by the demoniacs. 41 "The unclean Mark writes, "when they perceived Him, fell

Son of

spirits,"

For the evangelist demons are supernatural beings, who see and understand things which escape the knowledge of mankind.

z6o

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

4* Son of God." Doubtless Mark adds that Jesus commanded them to hold their peace (iii. 12 and v. 7), but it is impossible that these declarations which the evangelist represents as frequently occurring could have passed unperceived by the disciples, and that when hearing them that they should not have understood or suspected the Thus Messiah. the was testimony of by Jesus Mark himself the episode of Cassarea Philippi had not

His

at

feet

and

in reality the

to

It

it.

is

cried,

Thou

art the

importance which the evangelist attributes the pivot upon which the narrative is

articulated, but not that of the

Gospel history

itself.

In taking up another point of view, the same con' clusion is reached. "Behold, we go up to Jerusalem, said Jesus to His disciples, "and the Son of man shall 1

be delivered unto the chief priests and unto the scribes,

and they

Him

shall

condemn

to the Gentiles

Him to

1 '

death, and shall deliver It is in the interest (x. 33).

"The is shown leaving Galilee. be and suffer must Son of man rejected many things, of the elders, and of the chief priests and scribes, and The arbe killed, and after three days rise again. of

dogma

that Jesus

11

rival of Jesus at

march

presented by Mark as a the Messianic proclamation

Jerusalem

to execution.

It

is

is

of Peter which sets in motion the drama. After Jesus has been rejected by the Galilean people, He reveals Himself to His disciples as the Messiah, and goes up to Jerusalem to die there, in accordance with the plan Did Jesus really of His own free of

redemption.

indicates) go up to Jerusalem, and His departure from Galilee there? go in order to die than those mentioned appears to have had other causes initiative (as

"Unclean

Mark

spirits

that

is,

those possessed.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION by Mark.

At

261

the close of the series of conflicts

we

read: "And the Pharisees went forth, and straightway took counsel with the Herodians against Him, how

In Mark this they might destroy Him" (iii. 6). been so in the have statement is isolated; it could not fact. primitive tradition from which he borrowed this No mention could have been made of a plot formed

from against Jesus without having stated what resulted The primitive tradition has not been preserved in it. been integrity because a dogmatic construction has substituted for the account of the real development of its

primitive tradition another fragment is perhaps preserved, in a form, by the way, modified. This is in the episode concerning Herod

the story of Jesus.

Of this

about Jesus (Mark vi. 14-16). In the way in which we read it, this account is outside the work; it plays no part in the development of facts. It

and

is

his perplexity

the debris of a tradition in which

an active part

in the story

Luke

to play

Wellhausen has the place where we read

of Jesus.

ingeniously conjectured that in in

Herod had

"Herod sought to see Him," the phrase, "Herod sought to

ix. 9,

there

was

Him

put Besides the passage in Mark (iii. 6), the warning given in viii. 15 ("Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of Herod")

primitively to death."

is

a trace of this hostility.

There is found in a passage peculiar to the Gospel of Luke an extremely valuable indication with the same At the close of Jesus' stay in Galilee significance. certain Pharisees came and said to Him: "Get Thee kill Thee" (Luke out, and depart hence, for Herod will xiii.

31).

This tradition must be

historical,

for

it

contradicts the general conception of the evangelists,

2 6z

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

which always represents the Pharisees as resolutely Otherwise how can it be supposed hostile to Jesus. that a human motive should have been subsequently substituted for a dogmatic motive for the departure of 48

Jesus for Jerusalem ? to die there. Jesus did not come to Jerusalem only His stay appears to have had a longer duration than the Synoptics indicate, otherwise the passage such as xiii. 34), (xxiii. 37) and (Luke T>e comnot would the from them Logia, preserved by

that given by

Matthew

U Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest prehensible the prophets and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children to:

O

her chickens under her gether, even as a hen gathereth 44 wings, and ye would not." not easy to understand also how within a few drama of the days of which the Synoptics speak, the to time had the have would Passion begin and develop. It

is

So far was Jesus from coming to Jerusalem to die there that He carefully organized His entry into the Holy City to impress the spectators, and by His action

and His public teaching He did His best to rally the crowd to His cause. Doubtless He must have perceived how dangerous was the part which He played. If He failed, His death was certain, for His enemies would This (xiii.

3*,

is

so true that in the reply of Jesus Luke has added a phrase which explains the departure of Jesus for Jerusalem

33)

than by the necessity that the Messiah must not die anywhere other He has thus in his text a doublet which is not in the Holy City. There is, perhaps, also a souvenir of Herod's hostility natural. xxiii 6-16. against Jesus in the nonhistorical account of Luke 44 John presents Jesus as coming to Jerusalem at the time of the hava Feast of Tabernacles that it, the beginning of October. a tradiattempted to show that the Johannine narrative rests here on

We

tion of great value (Introd.

an N.T.,

ii,

p. 411).

THE GOSPEE TRADITION He

not disarm. time, but

263

He

did not retreat while there was yet accepted in advance the sacrifice which

45 might be demanded from Him.

Nevertheless, so little was His death a dogmatic He took of necessity for Jesus that in the precaution Jerusalem every evening, He attempted to quitting

had it not been escape from His enemies and perhaps have succeeded. He would of for the treachery Judas

The Gethsemane

episode

(Mark

xiv.

32-42)

is

in this

respect very characteristic. At the last moment, in Jesus sees the circle of His enemies closing

Him, He

is

appalled.

The

when upon

scene in its essential details

with certainly historic; it is too much in contradiction almost with the idea of the Christ accepting serenity,

is

4e

to with impassivity, the necessity of His sufferings tradition. it created was that belief warrant the by At the time of the composition of the oldest of our Gospels a dogmatic system had already been substi-

tuted for the historic treatment of events, and this had happened under conditions such that those who comtraditions piled the Gospels found only fragmentary the story that seen is before them. Nevertheless, it had a quite different character at its origin. of

Jesus the mythologists say, the Gospel tradition was of history of a myth only the projection upon the plane or of an ideal drama of redemption, the Gospel hisIf, as

It would have been tory would be homogeneous. to dogmatic prininstantly manipulated according

By attaching to it a redeeming value, not in virtue of a dogmatic that if God allowed Him to perish it theory, but in the sentiment be because His death was necessary to the accomplishcould only

ment of His work. such as is found, for instance, in the ing and death. 6

triple

prophecy of suffer-

JESUS

264

THE NAZARENE

be possible to find in it, as is the ciplcs; it would not case in our actually existing Gospels, this lack of adaptation which arises

from the

fact that the tradition

was

frame into which inadequate or difficult to fit into the of Mark's character The it was desired to force it. narration is only explicable if matter and frame have two different origins. The latter has been elaborated 4T by dogmatic reflection the elements of the narrative have not been created as a function of this frame, but borrowed from tradition to fill it. ;

CONCERNING CERTAIN FACTORS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GOSPEL TRADITION

V.

To

remains for us to exhas sometimes been amine various theories by which desired to explain in whole or in part the origin of the confirm our conclusions

it

it

Gospel narratives.

48

One observation concerning method must be laid down first of all. The Gospel history is not a homothe form we geneous block which suddenly appeared in are familiar with. The observations which authorize us to establish the* coexistence of three parallel records and that indeed prove that the tradition has evolved,

from the period which preceded the compiling of Mark's Gospel, doubtless since the primitive times of the

life

of the Church.

Concerning

this evolution,

we

can partly recognize and partly conjecture the causes, but it is illegitimate to think that the factors which 47 In their the solution totality, of course, and without prejudicing of the critical problem which each one presents. 48 e do not revert here to the function of the prophetic exegesis

w

which was

dealt* with in the preceding chapter.

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

265

determined the evolution of the Gospel tradition, its transformations and adaptations, were the same which gave birth to it. Transformation and creation are two very different things, and those factors which explain the first do not suffice to explain the second. This is some of the causes which easily perceived in examining

have influenced the evolution of the tradition and by which certain persons have sometimes tried to explain its

birth.

I.

Folklore

In the Gospels there are elements analogous to certain themes developed in the folklore of different 49 races which must have the same origin, but one can only explain by this fact certain details of secondary with the importance having no organic relationships most which and essentials of the narratives, frequently are only met with in the youngest forms of the tradiConclusions which hold good for these details cannot properly be extended to the whole body of Critics have long since observed literature.

tion.

Gospel

that the darkness which covered the whole earth at

of the death of Jesus (Mark xv. 33 Luke xxiii. 44; Matt, xxvii. 45), the earthquakes and the resurrections spoken of by Matthew (xxvii. 52, 53), are occurrences which are met with outside the Gospels, the

moment

;

50

but it the most widely different circumstances; fact this from conclude to would be no more legitimate that the death of Jesus is a myth than it would be to existed presume that Julius Caesar had never really in

49 P. Saintyves, Essais tb.

de folk-lore btbligue, Paris.

266

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

because numerous writers have related that his death 51 was accompanied by signs not less extraordinary. races legends analogous to the Gospel narratives of the walking upon the waters Matt. xiv. 22-23), or of the multivi.

There are among various

(Mark

45-52;

Matt xjv I 3plication of loaves (Mark vi. 31-43? 21 Luke ix. 10-17; John vi. 1-13)) and the parallels -

-

;

established by

M.

Saintyves are as interesting as they Their relations with the Gospel epi-

are instructive.

than those presented by certain Old Testament texts, and, above all, they only bear upon certain subordinate details. In the narra-

sode are, however,

less direct

tives of the multiplication of loaves the miracle is not the essential thing. The entire interest is concentrated

on the meal of Jesus and His disciples, in which the crowd took part. As for the episode of the walking on the waters, nothing proves that it is (at any rate in the form in which we have it) a primary element of the tradition. Doubtless Mark and Matthew in relatmiracle. The ing it considered they were narrating a last account this when But same maybe said of John. (especially)

(which might

is

there remains an impression have seemed to be extraordinary) had made the journey on foot, had read,

at first

that Jesus who reached the Capernaum shore of the lake before the

who had

crossed

in the boat.

It

is

possible to conceive a quite natural explanation of this fact. The mythical and supernatural element appears to have intervened, not at the origin of the tradition, but disciples,

in the course

"Such

of

it

82

its

literary development.

What

Ovid

(Mtta*

here said concerning the walking on the waters

may be

as Plutarch

(C**ar), Virgil

(Georges

I),

morphoict).

What

it

is

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

267

there surprising in the fact that the editors of the Gosconsider Jesus an ordinary man, pels, who did not should have attributed a supernatural power to Him,

over the elements? presence in the Gospel narratives of certain themes borrowed from myth or folklore is evidence of the already complex degree of evolution shown in

The

the tradition as

we have

the entire tradition

it,

but

had from

it

its

does not prove that beginnings an exclu-

sively mythical character.

2.

Inspiration and Visions

considers that one of the principal sources of the Gospel history is inspiration, and that in In the first place the oracles of ina double sense.

M. Couchoud

communications spired persons, considered as direct to Jesus in attributed been have from Christ Himself, a so-called historical ministry; then certain acts, parcertain cures, performed by the Christians

ticularly

and explained by the power of the Christ who guided them, came to be considered as having been accomthe cures wrought by plished by Jesus Himself. Thus Peter in the name of Christ, the teaching imparted by the words pronounced in ecstasy by Stephen under the influence of the spiritual Christ, came to be

Him,

considered as the acts and speeches of a Jesus whose from biography was thus constituted by a transference the history of the early Christians. of the tempest, which repeated regarding the account of the stilling Matt Tiii. appears to be only a variant of it (see Mark iv. 35-41 ;

23-27; Luke

viii.

22).

268

JESUS

The theory is many of the

THE NAZARENE

it may appear seductive, of Jesus are portrayed as teachings the situation existing to but related, not to His time, in the early Church when the Gospels were compiled. The fourth Gospel commits an evident anachronism in

ingenious;

for

as a penalty speaking of exclusion from the synagogue with which those who in the lifetime of Jesus recognized His Messiahship were threatened (ix. 22, xii.

42), and the anachronism

is

none the

less

evident

where Jesus is reputed to have spoken of the appearance of His disciples "before governors 53 and kings" (Matt. x. 18; Mark xiii. 9; Luke xxi. been no creation here, but merely the has There 12).

in the Synoptics,

the needs of those for adaptation of the tradition to whom the Gospels were written. It is not surprising

that the authors of popular books have not carefully of Jesus and its distinguished between the teaching application.

We

case of the apostle Paul that in the primitive Church a very clear

have shown,

(Chap. V), distinction

in the

was drawn between the word of the Lord

and the revelations of inspired persons. In these conditions it is not conceivable that the two things could have been confounded. There is no reason to suppose that the distinction established

in

the primitive period,

which was the greatest flowering time of

spiritual gifts,

when

the intensity of the spiritual life became less vigorous. It is not of the Gospel narratives possible to explain the origin The do. by visions, as M. Couchoud would like to u For I have received of the Lord," which phrase,

became

"The

less clear later on, at a time

term

used

by the

Gospeli

may

also

be translated

by

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

26$

Paul uses in I Cor. xi. 23, has not the meaning which he attributes to it, as we have seen, but it implies the existence and utilization of an earlier tradition. beginning of the narrative a vision that accompanying the baptism of Jesus is found but it is expressly presented by Mark (i. 9-11) as a It is true at the

vision of Jesus

and from the

;

might have had

He

64

visions,

was never an

One other

it

fact that Jesus, like Paul,

by no means follows that

historical personage.

the Transfiguration (Mark ix. 2-8), plays a part in the second portion of the evanin any case is only a subordinate one, gelist, but this vision,

the Transfiguration being only the celestial confirmation of Peter's confession. This it is which is the true it is immediately after pivot of the Gospel history, since 1 art the Christ/ "Thou Peter has declared to Jesus, that the story takes a new orientation with the first announcement of the sufferings and death of the Messiah.

The

Transfiguration, in fact,

is

ill-placed in the

an account story of Jesus. It must have been originally not been has which Risen the of One, of the apparition it implied a preserved in its primitive form because the faith of the conception of the Messiahship which

Church had outgrown." a very small Visions, however, occupy in the life of Jesus only of the Baptism and Transfiguration, account the of Outside place of the where, in so far as one can judge of the first meaning and not of narrative, it is a question of a vision of the disciples It is that referred to in the phrase, "I Jesus, we only note one saw Satan falling from heaven as lightning" (Luke x. 18), and here more than a figurative again it must be asked if this is anything 5

expression. 8

See our study.

interpretation

du

Notes d'histoire faangelique, ii (Esgutsse d'un* Revue d'hist. dei dt la transfiguration).

recit

Religions, Ixxxi, 1920, pp. 145 **

"9*

270 3.

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

The Transference

of Material

Borrowed from

the

Apostolic History It is conceivable that the tradition

of the words and

sayings of Jesus may have been enriched by aphorisms or declarations which were not originally attributed 56 to Him, but we are unable to discover with certainty 57

It any fact of this kind in the Gospel tradition. would, moreover, only be a question of agglomeration and would presuppose the existence of the Gospel

tradition. It is true that the case

of the two sentences spoken of martyrdom has been

moment u Lord Jesus,

at the

by Stephen receive my spirit" and pointed out: "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge" (Acts vii. 60). have an evident affinity with those which Luke

They

"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (xxiii. 34), and spirit" (xxiii. "Father, into Thy hands I commend Certain writers have believed it possible to 46). admit that between the two groups of sentences there attributes to the dying Jesus

:

My

a relation of dependence, the book of Acts being the It is true that M. Loisy leans, original member.

is

that along with certain other critics, to the idea the to evangelists' portion of the Acts is prior

count ; but even it

if this

were proved beyond

all

this

ac-

question,

would be inadmissible to draw conclusions of a too

Acts (i. 15 and xi 6) put into the announcement of the baptism by the Spirit which the Synoptics all give as a sentence of John the Baptist. " The Gospels attribute both to John the Baptist and to Jesus the doubtless an it is there speech about the tree and its fruits, but It is also possible image which must be older than John the Baptist that Jesus had adopted a theme of the teaching of John the Baptist It it thus, for instance, that

lipt of Jesus the

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

271

sweeping and too rigorous character, since these two be found sayings of Jesus (the first of which is not to of Luke) are in any case subordinate elements foreign to the most ancient tradition of the Passion. The dependence of Luke upon the Acts

in the primitive text

The Acts were besides, not absolutely certain. written after the third Gospel by the same author or In telling the story of Stephen's the same editor.

is,

martyrdom he

could, even if he

knew and used

a

more

ancient tradition, have introduced details which recalled the Passion of Jesus, thus obeying a motive which has inspired the attitude of martyrs and confessors and has had a powerful influence on the whole literature of hagiology.

If

from words we pass to

narratives, the theory of

of Jesus of that which is not more originally belonged to the apostolic history is the analogy here relied fact The upon plausible. the transference to the

life

exists (indeed sufficiently striking) which apparently between a series of narratives relating to Peter and a series of miracles attributed to Jesus.

There are three passages

specially

which

it is

neces-

sary to consider in this connection I. That in the Acts (v. 15, 16) referring to the sick he might brought from all parts to Peter in order that :

cure

them by

his

shadow passing over them.

This

Mark vi. 53 f passage presents certain analogies with when related is it how, Jesus returned to 56, in which Gennesareth after the first multiplication of loaves, all they brought to Him from the surrounding country those how and He the sick to the places where passed,

the hem of His garonly succeeded in touching The whole. made analogy between the ment were

who

JESUS

272

THE NAZARENE

two accounts should not lead us to ignore and neglect

The

episode in the story of Jesus possesses an organic importance which it has not in that of Peter. It is found in the Gospel at a the differences between them.

time when Jesus was continually on the road. On the contrary, Peter was at Jerusalem at the time referred to in the passage in the Acts. The extraordinary concourse of the sick and their eagerness are not justified as in the case of the Gospel narrative; there is, therefore, a characteristic accentuation of the miraculous

element

in

The same

it.

conclusion

is

forced on us

if

we

note that the cures of Jesus took place by actual contact, while those of Peter required only the mere

passage of his shadow. 2. At Lydda Peter cured the impotent man, /Eneas, who for eight years had lain upon a pallet (Acts ix. the healing of 32-35). This has been compared with the paralytic in Mark ii. 1-12. But two details essenFirst tial in Mark's narrative are lacking in the Acts. of all the proof of an extraordinary faith given by the

who, in order to get at Jesus, remove a part of the roof of the house. Then follows sick

man and

his bearers,

the discussion upon the forgiveness of sins. The account in Acts is thus a simplification of that in the Gospel; originality cannot be on its side.

woman named Tabitha (in Greek, Dorcas, which means Gazelle), who did much good and was extremely charitable, had just died. Her 3.

At Joppa

a

an upper room, and messengers were sent to seek Peter at Lydda. The latter having been conducted to the place where the corpse was lying, sent every one out of the room, and after offering a and said: "Tabitha, prayer, turned towards the corpse

body was

laid in

THE GOSPEL TRADITION 1

arise!'

The woman

273

then opened her eyes and sat up.

Peter took her by the hand and assisted her to rise. Calling the saints and the widows, he presented her to them alive (Acts ix. 36-43) This narration has strik.

ing analogies with the account of the raising of the daughter of Jairus in Mark. When Jesus, after His excursion to Gerasa, returned to the western shore of the lake, a ruler of the synagogue named Jairus came to

Him, beseeching Him

to

come and

lay

His hands

upon His daughter, then at the point of death. While that the Jesus is on His way, news is brought to Jairus child is dead. Jesus replied to Jairus "Be not afraid, :

He found a only believe." crowd of people weeping and lamenting. He sent them all away, only keeping with Him the father and Arrived at the house,

He

had of brought with Him. He entered into the chamber the hand the the dead, and taking pronounces body by the words in Aramaic, "Talitha Kumi," which, being arise." The interpreted, is "Damsel, I say unto thee, restores child, who was twelve years old, arose. Jesus her to her parents, and commanded that something mother of the

child

and the three

disciples

:

should be given her to eat.

improbable that these two narratives arc in which we are familiar with them form in the side on which But other. each of independent It is

at least

quite

In the Gospel this story is combined the healing of the woman very closely with that of with the issue of blood (Mark v. 25, etc.), while in the Acts it is isolated. This already is favorable to is

the priority?

On the other the priority of the Gospel narrative. discloses Tabitha of hand, the story of the resurrection that the influence of two Old Testament narratives

JESUS

274

THE NAZARENE

of the resurrection of the Sarepta widow's son by of the Elijah (i Kings xvii) and that of the raising child of the It

iv.

is

Shunamite

woman by

therefore a

more developed account than

Elisha

(2 Kings

33). Mark's, where these influences are not revealed. The account in the Acts is also more marvelous, for it is a matter of the resurrection of a person dead already several days, while in the Gospel the child has just

and certain details lead one to think that originot of resurrection. nally it was a matter of healing and account Mark's in The final touch belongs to a very died,

as exercising primitive conception representing Jesus Between the name the medical activity of a rabbi. u 58 Talitha Kumi" the and the words "Tabitha" 59

If it were a real analogy, analogy is quite superficial. taken alone it would not enable us to say which is the original. Here, again, the account in Acts appears subordinate to that of the Gospel, which some have

wished to derive from the former. The two accounts of the cure of the impotent man and the raising of Dorcas are connected in the Acts. Those of the Gospels to which they have been com-

pared belong to two different

cycles.

And

finally,

the

narratives concerning Peter in the book of Acts are of among the least solid and the most recent portions

have, in particular, a very close relationship with the story of Cornelius (Acts x. I to xi. 18), and not to Paul and the designed to attribute to Peter Church at Antioch the initiative of the preaching of it.

They

w Which

i*

certified

as

a

woman's name.

See

Preuschen, Dig

Apoitclgeschichtt, Tubingen, 1912. and It would completely disappear even if, with Wellhausen admitted on the Kloitermann, the reading "Rabitha Kumi" were authority of certain Western witneiset (Dot EvangMum Marti).

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

275

a narrative whose misleadthe Gospel to the pagans and admitted unanimously as is obvious, ing character

such by the

critics.

4.

The Liturgy

There remains to examine one last factor through whose action it has been believed the formation of the Gospels could be explained.

This

is

the liturgical

factor,

M.

Loisy thinks that because of their style a probe attributed to the phetico-liturgical character must fact would Gospels, and he has pointed out that this Discussions serious not be without very consequences. about the historical character of the Gospels would, in his opinion,

lose a great part of their import if

"these were handbooks relating to the cult of the Lord Christ, if the oracles of the Lord Jesus had been worded by the prophets of the first Christian age, if the account of the Passion was related to the ritual or 80 rituals of the Christian Passover in early times." idea that the Gospels are only liturgical handbooks cannot in any case be considered as established.

The

In order to justify it, M. Loisy invokes the rhythm, but up to the present, notwithstanding various deliberate attempts (often ingenious), it has been imof this rhythm. It is hardly possible to discover the law are in the New Testament, there that be to disputed in the Epistles of

Paul as well as

in the

Gospel, pas-

is perceptible, and sages where a certain periodicity as considered be which may rhythmic. But so long as with no one succeeds in defining precision what constio

Loisy,

Revue

crttigue, 1923, P-

4i.

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

276 tutcs a line

and a strophe,

sider the Gospels

it

in their

be impossible to conand with even entirety will

more reason the whole New Testament as written in the Sibylline rhythmic form more or less resembling discoverable in the Gospels most characteristic forms of frequently does not surpass the Oriental thought, with its predilection for parallelism

Books.

The rhythm

antithesis, for opposition, enumeration and gradawhich it tion, which follow from the dialectical process

and

which justifies us habitually employs. There is nothing in calling this a liturgical style properly so called. There is, besides, a very grave objection to the sugfor public gestion that the Gospels were compiled in first-century worship; it is that there is no trace 61 the of use a of Gospels, liturgical Christianity

Mark

14 and in Matt. xxiv. 15, "Let him that readeth understand," may refer to a 62 but it is found in the Synoptic public reading, have had an inApocalypse, which seems originally to

The remark

in

dependent existence.

68

xiii.

The

sole texts

cerning the Christian cult of the

first

we

possess concentury, that of

61 Neither is there any trace of a liturgical reading of the Epistles. 62 It is not certain that this note is primitive. Luke (xxi. 20) has His text, nevertheless, in spite of the to it.

nothing equivalent

substitution of "Jerusalem besieged" for "abomination of desolation," The form of the is closely related to that of Mark and Matthew. "and when ye shall see ... then let them that are in Judea

phrase, have tried elsewhere to show flee to the mountains," is the same. that Luke's text is the oldest, and that it ha* been corrected in Matthew and Mark to dissociate the siege of Jerusalem from the events of the end. If this is so, the note may be considered as a hint to the reader, designed to emphasize the import of the new

We

(See Goguel, Introd. au. N.T., i, pp. 301 ** "00 to have been, from the beginning, designed for public reading, as is shown by the remark in Apoc. i. 3 : "Happy is he who reads and happy are those who barken to the works of

indication. 68

The Apocalypses seem

prophecy and

who

keep what

is

there written."

THE GOSPEL TRADITION

277

xii and xiv of the first Epistle to the Corinand that of the Didache, 84 contain no allusion to

Chapters thians

the reading of the Holy Scriptures at public worship, 65 The first not even the reading of the Old Testament. certification

of a cultural reading of the Gospels

is

Martyr (ApoL, i. 67). The reading of the Gospels was certainly not in his time a novThere is, however, nothing to authorize us to elty.

met with

in Justin

In the century. present state of research concerning the formation of the New Testament canon it seems to be established date this custom back to the

that public reading

first

was one of the

causes, not the con-

That an organic sequences, of their canonization. relation exists between the Gospel narratives and the and in particular it is not doubtful that the divergence between the three Synoptic accounts on one side and the Johannine account on

eucharistic ritual

is

evident,

the other, respecting the date of the death of Jesus, of the corresponds to a difference between the rituals is a relation Roman Church and those of Asia, but this

complex one.

If the rites influenced the narratives,

these latter, especially at the period of origin, must also have influenced the rites. perfectly liturgical which is related narratives the of Gospel explanation the Christian if be to the rites would only possible rites could be entirely reduced to those of an earlier

A

age.

Now

this

is

a thesis

which cannot be considered as

that the first portion of the Didache, of the moral teaching of the Gospels for the use of catechumens, would not be comprehensible if the Gospels had been at the time this book was composed the object of a regular reading. 5 There is no allusion made, either, in what Paul says of the 64 It

which

may even

is

a

be said

summary

Christian cult.

JESUS

278

THE NAZARENE

established, especially in the case of the Eucharist. However important the contacts may be, especially in

subordinate forms, which Christianity, there is in

does not owe

its

it it

shows with

rites foreign to

something original which

existence to borrowing.

As

confirma-

tion of this statement, the rite of baptism (which in

seems to be the transformation and adaptation of a Jewish rite) is not connected by Christian tradition with an episode of the life of Jesus. (See itself

UEucharistie des origines a Justin Martyr, Goguel.) The interpretation of the Gospel history as a liturgy is not to be set aside only because of its hypothetical character and because it is the explanation of something partly obscure by something totally unknown, but still more because it clashes with this decisive obnamely that the influence of the cult on the

jection,

tradition could only be exercised at a time when the traat least in its essential dition was already established details.

66

M

With even greater reason may we set aside without detailed discussion the liturgical explanations of certain narratives proposed by M. Saintyves. For example, that of the multiplication of loaves "by a mystery cult analogous to that of Dionysius," which he supposes "existed in Judaism, or at any rate among the Syrians" (Estais) ; the waters "by a ceremony conor, again, that of the walking on nected with a seasonal and initiation ritual which and Christian the ritual of the Passover/*

was both Jewish

If these are gratuitous hypotheses, what is to be thought of the veil by a rite thus explanation of the rending of the (Temple) described: "When the annual victim which the early Christians sacrificed died, or was on the point of death, in order to show of the Eternal High clearly that this victim was fulfilling the part in pieces, and the porrent was veil the sanctuary Priest, perhaps

tions

that

were dispersed?" (E*sai$, p. 424). It is unnecessary to add one text and for good reason is cited to prove the

not

existence of this rite.

CHAPTER XI

THE ORIGIN OF THE FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION AND ITS FUNCTION IN PRIMITIVE CHRISTIANITY I.

ONE

THE RESURRECTION PROBLEM

of the chief objections which M. Couchoud raises the historical character of Jesus is the diffi-

against

within the space culty he finds in understanding how, of a man could the deification of a single generation, have taken place, and this upon the territory of Juda-

How

did this deification take place, and how did men who had lived close to Jesus come to identify Him with a divine Being, if not (as M. Couchoud says in a phrase which somewhat exceeds the data of the least with His Son texts) with Jehovah Himself, as

ism.

and Messiah? Primitive

1

Christianity

was not a school of

phi-

a common losophers, but a group of believers practicing unite a body not He did worship of the Lord Jesus. of men who admired the teaching of a Master and desired to take

Him

as

a rule for their lives

brought together worshipers.

2

In the Christian

;

He field

word "disciples" possesses a sense quite different from that which it has in the expression "disciples of

the

l

Thc

subordination

of

Christ to

God

is,

in

fact,

very clearly

affirmed by Paul (i Cor. xv. 27, 28). * Even considering him by God.

thia teaching to

*79

have been

directly revealed to

2 8o

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

Plato or Aristotle." It is the equivalent of the word 11 which is the that is, of consecrated ones "saints

most usual name for the faithful. The Christians and not only thinkers

like

Paul or

the author of the fourth Gospel, but also the humblest and least philosophical among them only considered of the history as an episode in a cosmic drama

Gospel

much vaster dimensions. How did they reach this point of view? That which convinced them that Jesus was more than a man was the conviction that He had risen feeling of all be"If Christ be not risen from the

from the dead. Paul expresses the lievers

when he

said

:

dead, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain" (i Cor. xv. 14). The belief in the resurrection is indeed the foundation upon which the whole structure of primitive Christianity is built. The story of its birth is nothing more than the formation of the faith in the resurrection.

In order that we

may form an

idea of the conditions

appeared, it is necessary, without and traditions neglecting the criticism of the narratives this concerning the apparitions, first of all to examine in

which

this belief

Christians picproblem. In what manner did the early Christ? ture to themselves the life of the risen The principal problems which are presented by the resurrection narratives may be reduced to three: I. What is the relation between the discovery of the

of empty tomb and the apparitions? Upon which two these of or rather upon which these two facts

does the faith in the resurrection rest? Were there really at its origin two facts, real or supposed or has one been the empty tomb and the apparitions

beliefs

deduced from the other?

And upon

this hypothesis,

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

281

shown Himself to found empty? been have must tomb disciples, His Or, on the contrary, was it the belief in the empty tomb

was His

it

believed that Jesus, having

which predisposed men's minds to believe

in the resur-

rection and fulfilled the psychological conditions which prepared and caused the visions? 2.

How was

the tradition born which fixed the time *

of the resurrection on the morning of the third day? of the accounts 3. How can the extreme diversity of the apparitions be explained? The anxiety to make them concordant has cost the harmonizers many efforts, but the results obtained are not proportionate to the wealth of ingenuity expended. This diversity is much greater than is to be observed in any other part

of the Gospel history. This fact is all the more strikthe resuring seeing the very great importance which rection story had for the early Christian faith. The noticeable on one point: the is diversity particularly place of the apparitions.

Two

forms of the tradition

be distinguished, one which localizes the apparitions in Galilee, the other in Judea.

may

Criticism has particularly emphasized the considerable influence of apologetic interests on the narratives of the apparitions. The episode of the guard placed over the sepulcher (see Matt, xxvii and xxviii) is a in characteristic example of a narrative imagined

good

faith certainly

to reply to a Jewish objection.

tomb explained the discovery of the empty to by a nocturnal visit of the disciples, who, according The Master. their of off the body them, had carried

The Jews

Behind the present tradition there is perceptible one of older form which attributed to the body of Jesus a period in the tomb xii. 40). lasting three days and three nights (Matt.

282

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

to prevent such reply was that all necessary measures 4 taken. been a maneuver had But the apologetic factor does not explain the extreme diversity of the apparition narratives. One realizes this in observing the complexity, improbability and which M. Voelarbitrary character of the criticisms by

of Amsterdam, has attempted to reduce them to one common source, alleged to be a vision of Peter in his home in Galilee, followed by a collective vision of the apostles on the shores of the lake of Galilee. The theories elaborated to explain the empty tomb are ter,

scarcely

more

satisfactory. All of

them employ

a con-

or abduction of the jectural factor, apparent death, or even by corpse of Jesus, either by Jews, Romans, disciples.

Even

if

there were not so

arbitrary in these hypotheses,

if all

much of

the purely the objections ad-

vanced were refuted, if the tomb had, indeed, been found empty, it would still be true that the fact would not have failed to play an important part in the genesis of faith in the resurrection, whereas we are expressly told by Mark that the women kept silence concerning the discovery they had made and the message they had received (Mark xvi. 8). The later accounts have at-

tempted to diminish the strangeness of the simple tomb and juxtaposition of the discovery of the empty the apparitions without establishing organic relationhave done so only in a ship between them, but they timid and imperfect way which in no degree succeeds in *

welding the two things together/ The

accounts of Luke

and John have an obviously apologetic

character.

'Matthew (xxviii. women, immediately

to the 9, to) mentions an apparition of Jesus after the discovery of the empty tomb. Jesus

renews the message already given by the angel.

The

disciples

go

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

283

us the choice Literary criticism alone does not permit are which of one out of two hypotheses equally possible, and to decide if the accounts of the apparitions have been subsequently introduced to establish the reality of the resurrection

and

set aside the divergent

or if the discovery explanations of the empty tomb, from visions and deduced been has tomb of the empty the reality incorporated into the tradition to establish

Various theories have been pro"the third posed to explain the genesis of the formula Even if they were less hypothetical than they of the apparitions.

day."

our documentation, they would and would only have a bearing on a subordinate point, leave the true problem existing in its entirety. are, in the conditions of

THE PAULINE CONCEPTION OF

II.

CHRIST'S

RESURRECTION

The

decisive fact in the genesis of Christianity

was

neither the discovery of the empty tomb nor the apfaith in the pearances of Jesus to His disciples, but to Galilee to the meeting place Jesus had given them, and there He to Luke (xxiv. 9-11) appears to them (verses 16-20). According the women bring also the message of the angel to the disciples, but However, Luke states that the these latter do not believe them.

have been to the tomb and found it empty. This action is Luke xxiv 8), but this verse, which absent from manuscript D and in several forms of the old Latin It betrays the influence of Luke xxiv. is much suspected.

disciples

directly attributed to Peter (in is

version,

and must originate from John's narrative. In the fourth Gospel Mary Magdalene, on her own initiative, goes to inform Peter and the the disciples that she has found the tomb empty.

a4,

(xx. 1-18)

is only of the latter that disciple run there at once, but it that he believed. Jesus appears afterwards to Mary to the disciples the news of Magdalene, who is charged to carry

unnamed it

it

aid

His resurrection. she

is

received*

She carries out this task, but

it

is

not said

how

JESUS THE NAZARENE

284

resurrection.

From

the religious point of view,

it is

not

facts which have importance, but ideas and sentiments. It is to the study of the conception of the early Christians of the risen Christ that it is necessary to address

ourselves.

We possess one precise and accurately dated

document (it was written about 55 or 56), which shows us how the apostle Paul conceived the person and import of the risen Christ. This is the fifteenth Corinthians. The chapter of the first Epistle to the affirmation of the resurrection (verse 4) is confirmed The by an account of the apparitions (verses 5-8). the thought in the text would be exactly rendered by He that is the is "Christ risen; apstatement: proof the Twelve," etc. The unto then unto Cephas, peared at the discovery of the empty tomb is not mentioned between understood as considered be most it might ;

the interment and the resurrection, each formally attested both as facts and the fulfillment of prophecies.

To conclude from the

was about the empty tomb would

silence of the apostle that he

ignorant of the tradition be going too far. It is still none the less true that, for Paul, faith in the resurrection is linked with the apparitions

and not with an empty tomb, and

this conclusion

is not only true as regards Paul, but also for the whole Christian preaching of his time, for all that was transmitted in unanimity and taught equally by Judaic or

Gentile Christians.

In the course of the chapter Paul establishes a very close relation, intimate and organic, between the resurrection of Christ and that of believers. He sees in the resurrection of Jesus the guarantee of that of the faithful. Christ inaugurates a series of resurrections; is the first-born among the dead, the chief of the risen.

He

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

285

We are, therefore,

able to apply to Christ what is said concerning the resurrection in general. Christ is thus a spiritual being, which does not mean (given the Hebraic anthropology to which Paul remains faithful)

"pure spirit," but only that He is endowed with a special organism, whose attributes are different, and in a certain degree opposed to those belonging to Paul characterizes the terterrestrial organisms. that

He

is

or psychic body of which the earthly man consists by a series of terms such as corruptible, mortal, confeeble, dishonor. This being is a living "psyche," stituted by flesh and blood. The body of the heavenly man, on the contrary, possesses immortality he is the restrial

;

"pneuma zoopoioun," and he

is

characterized by the

terms "incorruptible," "glorious," "powerful." The are the prototypes of these two species of beings first man Adam and the second Adam, who is the Christ.

The

risen Christ, therefore, in Paul's view, possesses

from that which He posIt is formed of a life. subsuperior substance, the spirit, and is no longer the necessities which jected to the contingencies and a

body

essentially different

sessed during His earthly

humanity; it is no longer subjected (as we should of physics or say in modern terminology) to the laws confirmed is This by the fact that perhaps physiology. uses the word he when Paul speaks of apparitions affect

with a dative as though he would indicate that in these experiences the initiative belongs to the Christ: He shows Himself to the disciples rather than these u$0r),

the expression which Paul uses must not be pushed to the point of reducing the apparitions in his thought to simple visions with no reality see

Him. However,

286

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

outside the consciousness of those

who were favored

with them.

and his ideas on this point do not appear to diverge from those of the rest of the Church of his time the risen Christ lives no longer an

Thus

in Paul's

life.

earthly

He

view

human being who, after an comparable to a more or less prolonged is

not a

interruption slumber, resumes his former life, as might be conceived to be the case for the daughter of Jairus, the young man of Nam, or Lazarus. The earthly life of Jesus

ended on Calvary; something new began at a celestial life, but in which Christ the resurrection

was

really

power of intervening in the who are His own and of influencing them. has

still

the

life

of those

does not appear that Paul assigns to the period duraduring which the apparitions occurred a definite is which of last the tion. Those mentioned by him It

that which he himself experienced upon the Damascus road cannot in any case by restricted to the short period of forty days spoken of in the Acts (i. 3). Furthermore, although concerning the apparition which he had seen, Paul says, "and last of all, He was seen by

me also" ( i Cor* xv. 8 ) there is no theoretical reason why the series of apparitions should be at an end. The Pauline conception of Christ glorified leaves no ,

The vision of Peter or that place for the Ascension. road are not differentiated Damascus of Paul on the from the visions and revelations of the Lord referred rather, since the terms employed by Cor. xv. 8 imply that the vision upon the road

to in 2 Cor.

Paul to

in

i

xii, or,

Damascus

closes the series of the first apparitions,

the difference between them and those which occurred later can only consist in this, that the later ones arc not,

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

287

of belief in the resur-

like the first, the creative source

rection and of the apostolic vocation. Thus, in Paul's view, He who showed Himself to

the apostles was the Christ glorified, as He existed in heaven. There was a personal identity between this Being and the Jesus whose body was laid in the tomb,

body had undergone the transformation through which all the bodies of the elect would pass In at the second coming of the Lord ( I Cor. xv. 5 1 ) Paul's view the Lord's body did not remain in the

but

this

.

tomb, but the fact that he does not consider

it

necessary

important and significative. An analogous conception, although of a more emphatically nature, is met with in certain elements of

to say so expressly

is

spiritualist

the Johannine tradition. The activity of the Risen One upon the faithful is therein replaced to a certain extent 6

by that of the

The

Spirit.

substitution of the Spirit for the Christ

is

not,

however, carried to its extreme consequence that is, the suppression of apparitions. The influence exerted to perby the current Gospel tradition was too strong

mit John's 7

thought.

obedience to the inner logic of his Several Gospel narratives contain details full

which directly 6

1*

recall the Pauline conception of Christ

notion Johannique de VEtprit

et

tes antecedents historiquei,

Goguel. 7

The

marked to

original Johannine conception in an early form of the Gospel,

end with the

brothers and

tell

was perhaps more

distinctly

where the narrative appears sentence of Jesus to Mary Magdalene: "Go to my them that I ascend to My Father and your Father,

and your God" (xx. 27). It is difficult, indeed, to conceive that such a message could have been originally followed by

to

my God

other apparitions of the risen Jesus. The narrative of the apparia tradition tion to Mary Magdalene might thus be the remains of in celestial in which the Gospel history ended by the return of Christ glory.

288

JESUS

glorified.

THE NAZARENE

For example, there u

Lo

is

in

Matthew

the dec-

am

with you always, even laration of Jesus until the end of the world." He who thus speaks is to the ordinary conditions of existence. In not :

I

!

subject the episode of Emmaus (Luke xxiv. 13-32) there are three features, not marked, it is true, with equal distinctness.

and

First of all

this is only slightly indi-

Jesus seems to appear in a somewhat mysterious way at the side of the two disciples walking and this is the second feature along the road. These cated

do not recognize

Him

at

first.

8

The very appear-

had changed. Finally, at the just made Himself recognized, He becomes invisible which

ance, therefore, of Jesus

moment when Jesus had

He

vanishes

literally,

seems to imply that the Risen One possessed the faculty of rendering Himself at will either visible or invisible

in

any

case

to

appear

and

to

disappear

suddenly. In the account of the apparition at Jerusalem which Luke gives it is expressly stated the disciples thought In the Johannine they beheld a phantom (xxiv. 27). account Jesus said to Mary Magdalene, "Touch not" (xx. 17). In the present form of the narrative this seems to suppose that Jesus, having left the tomb,

Me

to undergo in heaven a kind of purification before being able to resume contact with His disciples.

was obliged

possible that this detail signified originally not touch the glorified body of

But

it

that

human hands must

is

In the Johannine account of the first appearance to the apostles, Jesus is found suddenly

the Risen One.

8 The same feature is found in the fourth Gospel, in the account of the apparition to Mary Magdalene (xx. 15) and in the scene on the shore of the lake (xxi. 4).

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

289

midst of His followers, who had met together, with the doors shut, owing to the fear they had of the in the

Jews

(xx. 19).

III.

THE CONCEPT OF THE RETURN OF CHRIST TO MATERIAL LIFE

narratives also contain an entirely different concept, which may be designated by the term "revivification/' The idea seems to be that the life

The Gospel

resumed after having been interrupted by the drama on Calvary. Thomas was invited to put his and his hand into the fingers upon the nail marks

of Jesus

is

xx. 27). Luke insists that with a phantom, but with not the apostles are dealing, 9 a Being who can be felt and who eats (Luke xxiv.

wound

in Jesus' side

(John

and 39-42). In the account of the walk to Emmaus, the xxi. less distinctly in John disciples recognize 13, their Master when He performs the familiar gesture of the breaking of bread. Finally, in Acts i. 3 it is stated that Jesus, during the forty days which preceded idea that a phantom cannot cat, and that an apparition taken for a spirit offers a decisive proof of his corporeal to be widely disseminated reality by sitting down to a repast, appears It serves as the theme of a popular song, composed in folklore at the camp at Holzmmden by a soldier, native of Mayenne

&The

which

is

prisoners'

It refers to a prisoner whose (France) his family and who, having returned is taken for a spirit up to the moment table before them Having announced

refrain

death certificate had reached

from captivity he

sits

down

in

Germany, meal at

to his

his continued existence, the

runs:

"In order to reassure you I'm going to eat and drink." states that since his book was published in has been proved that the song referred to in the note was

The author

Note.

France

it

composed before the

late

War.

Translator.

JESUS

290

His His

THE NAZARENE

ascension, gave many proofs to His disciples of resurrection. These proofs, concerning whose na-

ture the text gives us no information, ought probably to be conceived as confirmations of the reality of the life

He

had resumed.

That which has been

said suffices, without

it

being

and extranecessary to have recourse to more recent two tradition the in to canonical narratives, distinguish to which one, concepts of the resurrection. According is

comparable to that of Paul, the Risen One

of longer subject to the ordinary conditions existence.

Himself

is

no

human

a celestial being who sometimes shows on earth. According to the other, the risen

He

is

Christ resumes His terrestrial existence at the very point where death had interrupted

it.

He

possesses a still bears the

body which may be felt He eats He marks of the nails in His hands and the spear thrust in His side; His wounds are not even cicatrized. ;

;

IV.

PRIMITIVE

The Gospel The theory of

FORM OF THE RESURRECTION BELIEF

traditions combine these

two concepts.

apparitions during forty days is an atthem. They are, however, entirely harmonize to tempt different, and in reality irreconcilable. They corre-

development of most Which Christian thought. primitive? Which had the first Christians in mind when they affirmed "J esus is risen"? What were the causes which brought about the progress from one concept to the

spond to two

different phases of the is

the

other? already a presumption favorable to the as glorificapriority of the concept of the resurrection

There

is

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

291

it appears in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, while the other concept of revivification is only found in writings which, in the form known

tion in the fact that

to us, are distinctly younger. Another consideration has

more weight

still.

The

is found in Paul's writings in all its with any other heterogeadmixture without purity, neous element. On the other hand, there is no narrain which the tive, whether canonical or extracanonical,

spiritual concept

concept of revivification is not alloyed with some detail borrowed from the idea of glorification. It would, doubtless, be hazardous to affirm that there has never existed a narrative conceived uniquely from the point of view of revivification. The existence of such a recIt would ord appears, nevertheless, very doubtful. and controversies have suited later apologetic needs so how it admirably that it is not easy to understand could have disappeared. The combination of the fea-

tures which belong respectively to the

two

different

is explicable in two ways. Either the two conat first as independent and parallel, and it existed cepts was only afterwards that an attempt was made to com-

concepts

bine them; or, on the contrary, primarily there was one simple homogeneous concept to which there were added subsequently certain divergent details which, elimihowever, did not possess sufficient plausibility to cabeen have not nate others, which logically should them. In the case before us pable of association with

the

explanation has

little

probability. of revivification in itself never appears to first

The

Concept have inspired

reasons which have caused more any narrative. The and more importance to be attached to the bodily maniof the Risen One also enable us to underfestations

JESUS

292

evolution

the

stand

THE NAZARENE of the

tradition

resurrection

without being obliged to ascribe to

it

a double point of

10

departure.

of the priorAgain, it is possible to urge, in support that all the fact the ity of the spiritualist conception, features which imply the concept of revivification ap-

pear to be inspired by apologetic

necessities.

They

are

direct replies to objections urged against the belief in the resurrection. It would be, on the contrary,

so

many

to suppose, in face of the need to refute the criticisms of opponents, that apologists should have

very

made

difficult

their task

more

difficult

by sublimating and

ualizing the belief in the resurrection. The resurrection was, therefore, first of

ceived as the accession of Christ to a higher

spirit-

all

con-

life.

The

of concept of the resurrection as a mere suppression death and a restoration to the former life of Christ is

a secondary one, born out of the necessities of apologetics.

This conclusion throws

light

on the primitive char-

the belief in the resurrection.

acter of

The

progress of the tradition has been, if one may so from inside to outside. It has had a ten-

in the history

express

it,

least to render faith dency, if not to materialize, at in the resurrection more concrete. The evolution has been quite spontaneous, without there having existed any plan concerted by any one whatsoever. It is a case call to mind Pascal's saying: "I only in which we

may

10 In the narrativc8 containing details implying the concept of renot it ia easy to convince oneself that these details are

vivification in

harmony with other elements

in

it

Thus

in

John xx 26-29 the

exhibition of wouads, implying "corporal ity" of the Risen One, does not harmonize easily with the fact that Jesus passes easily into the

room when

the doors

were

shut.

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

293

whose witnesses would

suffer

believe the narratives

death."

forced to believe at least in the good faith of these witnesses, for a belief founded on dishonest machinations would not have resisted persecution.

One

is

In the resurrection faith there are two elements. The first is a conviction of a religious nature: Jesus

He

cannot be (like other men) vanquished, a the power of death; prisoner of death. He has escaped victor. is the who it is He, in a word, Alongside of this lives;

there

is

a conviction of a material historical fact

has quitted the tomb

What Did

relation

is

;

Jesus has been seen by so-and-so.

He

:

there between these two convictions?

the apostles believe that Jesus

was

living because

to them? they found His tomb empty and He appeared were and they Or, on the contrary, did they see Him, found been have must tomb His that empty persuaded

because they had the conviction that He was living? The Gospel narratives, as we read them, express the first

of these conceptions.

They show us men pro-

prepared to believe in foundly discouraged the resurrection of their Master (which, nevertheless, so

little

had been announced to them) that they treated the first news of it brought to them as "idle tales" (Luke and when Jesus showed Himself to them xxiv. 1 1 ) Him eat in they had need to feel Him and to watch ;

order to convince themselves they were not in presence of a phantom. In spite of this, Matthew relates that some of them doubted. In the Pauline faith, on the is the affirmation of contrary, the fundamental element the resurrection; no allusion is made to the empty as contomb, and the apparitions are only mentioned evidence. If this is not the most ancient con-

firmatory

JESUS

294

THE NAZARENE

the resurrection faith must have cept, the evolution of a in very strange way. Material at the beproceeded it was founded upon material ginning, in the sense that facts or on facts held to be such (empty tomb and ap-

in order paritions), it would have become spiritualized The more. once in nature later to become material

faith in the resurrection

and

was

an affirmation and it was not an

in its origin

a conviction of a religious nature,

experimental observation. This explains the fertility it has shown in the development of Christianity. The fourth evangelist had an exact appreciation of its true

when he put into the mouth of Jesus the declaramade to Thomas: "Blessed are they who have n have believed." and

nature tion

not seen

V.

yet

How THE

BELIEF IN THE RESURRECTION AROSE

M. Couchoud

considers that belief in the resurrecspontaneous way, without ante-

tion arose in a quite

cedents directly recognizable, and that the apparitions were only the manifestation of an ideal Messiah whose

This mythical history included a crucifixion espisode. theory seems to be liable to several decisive objections. the simple history is not, as we have seen, transformation of a myth. On the other hand, the be-

The Gospel

the resurrection was in the whole of primitive of Christianity intimately associated with the thought the Lord's death. Under these conditions, how could lief in

the resurrection have been for Peter and his first comthe object of a direct panions, at the primitive period, the belief in the death and religious experience, while with Luke xvi. 31: "Neither will they be persuaded from the dead." rose one though

"Compare

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

295

Messiah was borrowed from an ancient myth? myth could have included the idea of the sufferings and death of the Messiah without also including the idea of His triumph. The myths of Attis or of Osiris, which the sufferings of the

It is inconceivable that a

to the history of mythologists readily cite as parallels the Christian Messiah, are on this point characteristic. Death and resurrection of the divine hero in them are

on the same plane. Could tianity?

The

it

be otherwise in Chris-

belief in the resurrection in the latter

stands in organic relationship with an experience of the following diprimitive believers, which imposes that drama the is, the idea of lemma either Gospel :

the sufferings and death of the Messiah and that of Is only the transformation of an old the resurrection or it was the object of direct knowledge. It is

myth

of the not, however, impossible that a reminiscence of the god resurrection and death the concerning

myth

may have prepared

the minds of

men

to conceive the

idea of the resurrection of the Messiah, Jesus, but the affirmation of this resurrection, far from having been

deduced from the single fact of the death, represents in relation to it something original and new. This is confirmed by a study of the conditions in which the belief in the resurrection arose, which did not

happen with a group of

enthusiastic

disciples,

among men profoundly discouraged. The personality, activity and teaching of

but

Jesus had

the little circle of disproduced a deep impression on Him. Without having translated ciples formed around their sentiments into precise theological propositions, had closely associated the personality of their

they

Master with the

ideal of the

Kingdom of God which

JESUS

296

THE NAZARENE

was in they had conceived under His influence. Jesus divine the fulfill to intended was their eyes He who destined by God to realize His of the devil and to establish plan, to destroy the power the world. The Messianic over the divine dominion

work, the Son of

man

12

consciousness of Jesus imposed itself on them if it be incomprehensible that would it otherwise been had the drama of the survived belief in Jesus could have Passion. ;

Even

if it

certainly seems necesforeseen the eventuality of

be admitted, as

sary to do, that Jesus had

it

and had attempted to prepare His disciples for the less true that the apostles were it, it remains none arrest of their Massurprised and disconcerted by the ter. Their confusion was complete; they dispersed. This point is beyond doubt the Gospel tradition which defeat,

;

tends, nevertheless, to glorify the apostles, has preserved a very distinct memory of their flight. It makes 12

We

cannot discuss the problem of the Messianic affirmations Gospels, nor the various hypotheses proposed to We think that Jesus really considered Himself as the

of Jesus in the explain them.

Son of God, and that if the Messianic conceptions of the primitive Christians may have influenced the manner in which the declarations of Jesus are related in the Gospels, and given them more precision, our opinion we shall only cite they do not explain them In support of one decisive fact that is, the reply of Jesus to the high priest. asked if He was the Christ, the Son of the Blessed, Jesui see the Son of man sitting on the replies: "I am: and ye shall on the clouds of heaven" (Mark right hand of power and coming If this declaration is a product of Christian faith, the xiv. 62). fundamental idea of primitive Christianity it found therein that of

When

Matthew (xxvi. 64), in introducing resurrection on the third day. the sentence "Henceforward shall ye see. . . ." tends to substitute the idea of glorification for that of return, but he does so only in an of return upon the imperfect way, since he preserves the idea clouds of heaven. Luke goes farther still, and suppresses the idea of return in giving to the declaration of Jesus this form: "Henceshall the Son of man be seated at the right hand of the power

forward of

God" (Luke

xxii. 69).

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

297

an attempt, if not to excuse, at least to explain it, by showing in it the realization of a prophecy (see Mark 1S xiv. 27 and Matt. xxvi. 31, quoting Zech. xiii. 7). This attempt at an excuse has the value of a very precise

confirmation of the fact.

Even

Peter,

who seems

to have

had more assurance

and boldness than his companions, and who had protested that, whatever might happen, he would never 14

forsake his Master, according to the fourth Gospel and only made the beginning of an act of resistance, not it did this could not have been very serious, since 15 for him. He only involve any grave consequences led who away his Master, from accompanied the guard a distance (Mark xiv. 54), and he did not even find

the courage to admit in the presence of the servants the attachment he had had for Him. The abandonment of Jesus by His disciples can be into interpreted in two ways. The fact of Jesus falling the hands of the soldiers without any supernatural intervention taking place on His behalf may have killed

the disciples' faith and persuaded them that they had deceived themselves in believing they found the Messiah in Him. The disciples of Jesus would thus

have been in the same case as the partisans of innumerable Messianic pretenders of the type of Theudas, later on, Judas the Galilean (Acts v. 36, 37), and, to Him attachment their and Bar-Kochba. Their faith of Jesus a 18 The fourth Gospel (xviii 8, 9) puts into the mouth sentence which justifies the dispersion of the disciples. but they do not name 14 The Synoptics also relate the incident, Peter. 15

The behavior

that of the

of Peter

was

in

young man who wished

soldiers tried to arrest

(Mark

any case more circumspect than to follow Jesus and whom the

xiv. 51,

5)

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

298

Their suffered have would Messianic faith complete collapse, so far at least as this faith was centered in Jesus. The alternative interpretation is that the crisis was resisted the defeat of their hero.

would not have

less it

The

profound.

was only shaken.

proclaim

it

faith did not collapse; primarily the courage to

disciples'

It

was

which they lacked.

There was

in

them

eclipse, if

weakness of character, discouragement, you Mesthe of total no there was but bankruptcy wish, sianic faith in Jesus.

not easy to decide between these two hypothof the eses, partly, no doubt, because the memory this on dwell apostles and tradition did not willingly It

is

troubled and dark period when their faith had at least vacillated. Certain observations impel us, however, to incline toward the second of the just mentioned.

There

is,

two interpretations

in the first place, a

reason

which we shall call one of psychological economy. The later evolution of the apostles is easier to understand under the hypothesis of momentary or temporary weakness than under that of a total collapse of their Messianic faith. If this latter really took place, it would be necessary to admit that the disciples had remained completely impervious to what certainly seems to have been the dominating note in the thought of Jesus in the last days of His ministry, and particularly on the last evening the thought of His death and return.

Certain significant facts favor the hypothesis of a temporary weakness. It is sufficient to mention them. The first is that Peter, in short, had only denied Jesus

because he desired to follow it is

true.

He

was

Him

from a

distance,

not, therefore, completely indiffer-

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION ent to the fate of Jesus.

disavowal which

16

The

denial itself

is

299

a formal

demands consideration to see how and how far it was dictated by fear.

still

it was sincere But Peter only refused to admit that he knew Jesus he did not declare He was an impostor. His behavior was not that of a man who had lost all belief in Jesus it was that of a man who had not the courage to declare his faith. The ancient Church did not consider

far

;

;

the behavior of Peter as the equivalent of a renunciation of his apostleship it has preserved no memory of a new reinstatement which in such a case would have ;

been necessary, and whose record would have been dissolubly linked to that of the forfeiture.

The

in*

inci-

15-19, habitually spoken of as the "rehabilitation of Peter," has a quite different signifident in John

xxi.

Peter, notwithstanding his denial, plays a part of the first importance in the resurrection narratives, and in the incident which has been taken for his cance.

restoration there denial and

au N.T.,

its

is

found no allusion which implies a

consequent disqualification. 2>

M

(See Introd.

Goguel.) p. 3 did the apostles go in their perplexity? Did remain in Jerusalem hiding themselves more or ii.

-

Where they

less carefully,

or did they quit Judea to take refuge in

tradition represented by Luke and John the addition of (under its first form that is before to Chap, xxi) supports the first hypothesis. According exthe beginning of the book of Acts (i. 4) it was by at waited His that of disciples

Galilee?

The

command

Jesus the for inspiration of the Spirit. Jerusalem

plicit

to

know

was

to the oldest tradition, it was not before the Sunday that the disciples quitted Jerusalem; they desired, therefore, the issue of events in the drama.

According

morning

It

3 oo

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

therefore at Jerusalem where the decisive evolution to which the Church owed her existence took place. Events are not presented in the same way in the other

Mark

17) the disciples were still at Jerusalem, since the women received from the angel the commission to tell them that they had found the tomb empty and that they must repair to Galilee, where they will see Jesus. Owing to fear the accounts.

According to

women keep

silence.

The

(xvi,

account stops at this point.

must originally have related the apparition of Jesus in Galilee, announced in xvi. 7. But was it in conseinitiaquence of the women's message or on their own It

tive that the disciples quitted

Jerusalem?

The

first

the last phase hypothesis must be put aside owing to to relate intended had narrator If the of the Gospel. dewomen why, after the event, it came about that the

cided to speak, would he not have linked up this new u account by saying, for instance: At first they said to anyone" ? The primitive Gospel of Mark

nothing could not have related that the disciples quitted Jerusalem to go to meet their risen Master at the place even a flickering assigned by the angel. It was not with

was in despair, that they returned to Galilee. They must have quitted Jerusalem as soon as the tragedy of Calvary had been consumhope

in their hearts, it

mated, leaving only the Sabbath to pass, during which they could not set out on their journey. It is thus that the Gospel of Peter presents the events :

discovered the empty tomb and received the testimony of the angel fled terrified, and although it is not explicitly stated, they said nothing. It was with tears and distress that on the morning of

The women who

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

301

the third day the disciples set out on the road for Galilee, That which the Gospel of Peter contains this namely the story of the resurrection is from another origin, and has called so properly not been intercalated in a satisfactory manner in the narrative of the discovery of the empty tomb and the

more than

return to Galilee. Neither the women nor the disciples could have ignored such a sensational event as the exit

of Jesus from the tomb, as it is related in the Gospel of Peter. The account of Matthew reproduces that of Mark with some variations. In the first place Jesus appears to the

women

(xxviii. 9, 10).

These

latter deliver the

is after message confided to them (verse 8), and it to having received it that the disciples go to Galilee, meetthe as them had the mountain which Jesus given

return of the disciples ing place (xxviii. 16). The other than in character a to Galilee has, therefore, of sense a certainty, at Mark. It was, if not with least in the

hope of the resurrection, that they

left

Jerusalem.

The

priority of

Mark's narrative compared with

Matthew is beyond question. The apparition of Jesus to the women is under suspicion; Mark would

that of

not have suppressed it if he had found it in the source of his work. It makes a useless repetition of the apconfided by Jesus parition of the angeL The mission to the

women

adds nothing to those they had already

received.

Moreover,

in

stating that

the

disciples

went to

Galilee to the meeting place named by the angel, the narrative of Matthew establishes a close relationship

between the empty tomb and the apparition;

it

thus

JESUS

302

THE NAZARENE

does away with one of the strangest features of Mark's account the simple juxtaposition of these two It is natural for the tradition to

facts.

them to each derstand

if it

It would be more had dissociated them.

other.

have linked

difficult

to un-

of tendency to connect organically the account the discovery of the empty tomb with that of the first in Luke, and particapparition is still more distinct

The

the angel's message is ularly in John. In Luke's work so transposed that he no longer speaks of a rendezvous in Galilee, but of a rendezvous that Jesus had given

while he was in Galilee (xxiv. 6). The message is delivered to the disciples, but they are not convinced It is not even said that they went to the (xxiv.

n).

tomb. 17 In the narrative of the meeting upon the road to Emmaus matters are somewhat more definite. The to the sepulcher, but they disciples certainly had been had seen no angel (xxiv. 22-24). The message of the

women had

at least disconcerted them.

They

could not

what had been told them, but they make some inquiry. When the returned to Jerusalem from Emmaus, they are

fully believe in

took the trouble to disciples

greeted with the cry,

"The Lord

is

risen

indeed"

of the (xxiv. 34), which implies that the question resurrection had been at any rate raised by the dis-

covery of the empty tomb. The reasons why Matthew's version must be considered as of secondary value compared with Mark's maintain all their force for that of Luke. to

them as

Here 1T

At

In xxiv.

idle tales,

1 1

:

"Their words seemed

and they believed them not." which estab-

a trace of the primitive conception, least,

primitive one

in the version

which there

is

reason to consider the

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

303

no relation between the empty tomb and the

lished

apparitions, very clearly persists. In John's narrative (xx. 1-18) the relation between

tomb and

the apparitions is closer still. to Mary Magdalene, and two disciples Jesus appears come to the tomb to investigate the women's asser-

the empty

tion.

One

of them "sees and believes."

The

synthesis

thus perfectly realized. It is upon the empty tomb that the belief in the resurrection rests. Such is the is

case, at least, for the

sents as a noble soul

one whom the evangelist preas the very ideal of a disciple.

Mary Magdalene and Peter are not convinced in the same way; for them apparitions are necessary. They served as confirmation for those who were not directly convinced of the existence of Christ. Their function is thus essential; although subordinate to that of the perfectly coordinated with it. comparison of the accounts of the resurrection

empty tomb,

The

it is

therefore prove that in the most ancient tradition which we can find the empty tomb and the apparitions were merely juxtaposed. This condition of things, to

be long maintained. inorganic, could not An obligation was necessarily felt to seek to express be in the narratives the relation that could not fail to

some degree

Thus two secondary perceived between the two facts. forms of the tradition came to birth. In the older of the two the character of the return of the disciples into Galilee

is

transformed:

it is

to go to meet Jesus that

at length, this could not they quitted Jerusalem. But, farther and associate suffice; it was necessary to go in the the empty tomb with the apparitions, not only but also in time and space. thought of the disciples, the apparitions were transferred to With this

object

3 o4

JESUS

THE NAZARENE

remained at the Jerusalem, where the disciples still 18 tomb. the of time of the discovery empty Various objections have been raised to the thesis

They rest in more or less un-

of the priority of the Galilean tradition. the a priori

dogma general upon that there cannot be any contradiction beconscious tween the various accounts of the resurrection, and recononly necessary to find some means to Certain critics have imagined in the encile them. virons of Jerusalem, on the Mount of Olives, a place

that

it is

19 but this place obviously has only "Galilee," Others, been imagined for the needs of the case. the example already given by the again, following author of the unauthentic ending of Mark and by the

named

editor

who added Chapter

have combined the two

xxi to the fourth Gospel, by positing a series

traditions

of Judaic apparitions followed by a series of Galilean the fact that in the apparitions. They misunderstand

was quite primitive tradition the Galilean apparition the risen Jesus. distinctly a first apparition of Johannes Weiss has offered an original theory which seeks to explain the origin of the Galilean tradition the through a misunderstanding. It rests entirely on I that "After 28 xiv. Mark in words of Jesus related words to before you into Galilee" am risen, I will :

go which reference was made

(Mark

xvi.

message of the angel 7). According to Johannes Weiss, Jesus in the

has been Accessorily the evolution of the narratives in this sense and perhaps partly determined, by the always increasing affirm importance of the Jerusalem Church and also by the need to that the apparitions did not take place in a far-off province, and thus escape more or less the possibility of verification. lfi

facilitated,

*9

Rud.

GalUaea

Hofmann,

Oelbera; A. Resch, Das atif dem Der Auferstandcne Galilaea bet Jerusalem.

Galilaea

lei Jerusalem;

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

305

had announced to His disciples that after His resurrection He would lead them into Galilee, walking at their head. If this theory had any basis, the problem of the resurrection would be much simplified. The Church would be the direct continuation of the communion which during the lifetime of Jesus existed between Him and His disciples. The ingenuity of the a whole system which suppresses rather than solves series of problems demands a very serious examination. The Jerusalemite tradition of Luke arises from downright juggling with the phrase in Mark on which 20 In the way it is underthe Galilean tradition rests. the stood by Johannes Weiss, phrase concerning the return into Galilee is the sole surviving element of a

tradition according to which Jesus had resumed, or considered it necessary to resume, after His resurrection the life which disciples.

thought when proves

it)

heaven?

He

had formerly led with His

How

could Jesus have entertained such a (His declaration before the Sanhedrin expected to return upon the clouds of

He On the

contrary,

is

it

to be supposed (ad-

mitting the otherwise weak and improbable hypothesis of an apparent death) that Jesus, after the drama of a certain time with Calvary, may still have lived for

How

that this period of His life could pass and leave no other souvenir except one senis it that traditence, very soon misunderstood? tion had never made use of it as the argument best

His

disciples?

is it

How

adapted to refute those

who

denied the resurrection?

last part of the 20 Matthew (xxviii 7) slightly transposes the in his version superfluous, and phrase, which consequently becomes can only be explained as a survival of the version in Mark, whose priority is thus confirmed.

JESUS

306

THE NAZARENE

how could a tradition arise which, in opmost obvious interests of apologetics, the to position reduced the manifestations of the risen Christ to a few It is still possible to suppose that brief apparitions? about the sentence Jesus leading His disciples into Galilee originally related to the period which must

And

finally,

follow the success

He

hoped to obtain

in

Judea and at

the hope of Jerusalem. It is easy to understand that, having been deceived, tradition may not have

Jesus preserved the

memory

of

how does it happen survived, and why should

it;

but

that a fragment of it has one single phrase, misunderstood by Mark,

suffice to

and suppress in give birth to the Galilean tradition the his version the souvenir of primitive Judean tradition? It is objected against the priority of the Galilean

tradition that

munity

we know nothing about

in Galilee

whose

existence

a Christian com-

was the

in that region.

direct con-

Tradition has

sequence of apparition not preserved the souvenir of the disciples' return to of Jerusalem either. The chances as to the preservation should documents may explain the first point.

We

the existence in the early years of Jesus of a Christian commufollowing the death not mentioned in the narranity at Damascus were it

know nothing about

tive of the conversion

of Saul of Tarsus.

The same

it explanation holds for the second point. Moreover, is comprehensible that the souvenir of the Galilean

tradition tradition

had become

when

the Judean so preponderant that it was

may have been

obliterated

to His possible to speak of an order given by Jesus there to await but disciples not to leave Jerusalem,

the effusion of the Spirit (Acts

i.

4).

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

BELIEF IN THE RESURRECTION AND THE BELIEF

THE

VI.

307

religious thought of the early Christians had foci : the belief in the resurrection and the Mes-

The two

sianic belief.

Between these two there

relationship.

What was

is an organic of each, the function precisely

and what was their relationship? The Messianic belief of the first disciples was earlier than their belief in the resurrection. The first named was born of the not impression which Jesus made on them, and was by the drama of the Passion. If the failure of Jesus had been also a complete negation of the confidence the disciples had placed in Him, it would entirely destroyed

not have caused a complete collapse of their abstract faith in a Messiah, but it would have radically destroyed the faith they had placed in Him. Certain passages, however, might at first sight induce one to consider the belief in the resurrection as the origin of belief in the Messiah. Such is particuof Peter's address larly the case as regards a passage at the feast of Pentecost (Acts ii. 36), where a conarchaic and pre-Pauline ception is found of such an character that there can be no hesitation in recogniznotion. According in it the echo of a fairly primitive and Christ" Lord made "has ing to this passage, God who had (that is, the Messiah) the selfsame Jesus 21 But it is not asserted that been crucified by the Jews. before His resurrection; it Jesus was not the Messiah that He was the one on the

contrary, presumed

is,

21

This

Paul's

text

work

Messiah.

it

to be compared with that in Rom i. 4, but in rather a question of the manifestation of Jesus as

ought is

3 o8

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

whom God destined

to

fulfill

the Messianic mission, but

who, during His earthly ministry, was not invested with the attributes of power and glory. The dignity of the Messiah has now been conferred on Him in all its that is, the Messiah fullness Jesus is now the Lord ;

transcendent

who will

return at the end of time to com-

enemies of God, assuring plete the discomfiture of the of the faithful and the the salvation at the same time establishment and triumph of the Kingdom of God. "It is from heaven," writes Paul, "that we await the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ" (Phil. iii. 20) and if the continuation of this declaration, with the idea of the similitude of the body of the believer to the glo;

body of the Lord, expresses an idea essentially Pauline, the commencing phrase contains the faith rious

common

to all Christians.

first place,

The

resurrection was, in the

a sentimental satisfaction for the disciples, and a reparation of the indignity

at once a consolation

by His ignominious condemnation. By its means Jesus was rehabilitated, and the faith of the disciples, shaken by the drama of the Passion, was restored. But this was not all. The resurrection From the placed the Messianic faith on a new plane. it asthe Church of the life of first manifestations sumed a character and outlook different from those she had nourished until then. It was no longer an inner offered to Jesus

conviction, having the character of a secret of which even among the initiated one could only speak with

a certain prudence, and which remained surrounded by bemystery. It became a certainty openly proclaimed fore the world, forming the very essence of Christian

preaching.

change of

something more than a or the abandonment of precautions

There was tactics

in this

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

309

henceforward superfluous. The Messianic creed had been exalted; it had passed from the imminent to the transcendental plane. However paradoxical it may appear at first sight, the Christ preached in the primitive Church was not rigorously identical with the Jesus in

whom the

disciples trusted

when

He

accompanied them

on the roads of Galilee or in the streets of Jerusalem. Doubtless He was indeed the same person, but He had

now

received from

God

the full Messiahship which

formerly had been only promised Him.

The this

resurrection in itself alone cannot have given character to the faith of the disciples. The

new

Christians believed that Jesus had restored several persons to life, but this did not imply in any way their exaltation. They were considered only as hav-

first

not as having resumed for a time their preceding life, The resurrection ing radically triumphed over death. these persons has only importance for the evanof Jesus whose power they thus gelists as an activity than death. The belief in the as revealed

of

all

stronger resurrection of Jesus

had

in

primitive

Christianity

other consequences. The Risen One, to those who had received the revelation of His return to life, was no The resurrecordinary man, but already the Messiah. tion belief

exaltation of their Messianic con-

afforded a striking confirmation. Socialist writer, Maurenbrecher, introduces here

viction;

The

was the

it

He

speaks of the faculty acin the course of the tragic quired by the Jewish race, vicissitudes of its history, to surmount all catasall disillusions sources of trophes and to extract from a racial consideration.

new hopes and new illusions. This interpretation demands reservations of some importance. That which

THE NAZARENE

JESUS

3 io

in primitive Christianity survived the

drama of Cal-

but vary was not alone the Messianic faith in general, asfaith had also the personal character which this sumed. It did not attach itself to another Messiah, but continued to see the Messiah and Savior in the crucified of Golgotha. This is not explained by a racial disbut presumes a profound attachment to the

position,

first Christians did person of Jesus the Messiah. The not make of Jesus the Messiah transcendent because He rose from the dead, but it is because His departure from earth and return to heaven had made of Him the

Messiah that they believed in His resurrection and, in a new sense, in His Messiahship. This is the conviction which explains the apparitions.

He

disciples

This propthe that than truer Gospel suggested by

saw Jesus because for them osition

The

is

narratives

that

as living because

is,

was

living.

that the disciples believed in Jesus

He

had appeared to them.

faith of the disciples is older than the belief in the resurrection. It is this faith which was the

The Messianic

because they believed Jesus to be the Messiah and no ordinary man that they besource of the belief.

It is

22

lieved in

His

resurrection.

lieved in

His

resurrection.

As M. Loisy

judiciously observes, the disciples of John the Baptist, who never held a similar opinion about their Master, never be-

is

true, to object, as does

28

It

would be

Maurenbrecher,

possible, 24

it

that this

belief explanation of the origin of the resurrection who those of case the does not hold for (like James, see in Jesus not did case in and Peter) any possibly, Meyer, Vnprung und Anf.f ii. p. 453, and iii, pp. 316-19, le myttire Chritwn, p. 215. Loisy, Lfs Myitlres patent ft a* Maurenbrecher, Von Nazareth nach Golgotha, p. 16*.

*8

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

311

the Messiah before acquiring the certainty of His This is evident, but the causes of the resurrection.

appearance of the resurrection faith are not necesthe conquests it sarily identical with those explaining

first

very certain that the existence of a group of men who believed in the risen Jesus was, if not the unique factor, at least an essential one in the conversion to the Christian faith of those who, like Paul, had never felt the influence of Jesus during

made

His

afterwards. It

is

ministry.

VII.

We

are

now

CONCLUSION

able to imagine the conditions in which

the apparitions occurred, on which is based the apolothe first century and by means of getic literature of

which the resurrection faith was vindicated. They were in the first place independent of the have seen, discovery of the empty tomb, since, as we the most ancient tradition assumes that the disciples had no knowledge of this fact before experience of

the apparitions, and because the comparison of narrative proves that in the sequel the narrators must have been forced to subject the tradition to a complete to coordinate and process of retouching in the attempt fuse together the narratives of the empty tomb and the Moreover, in this task they never apparitions. completely succeeded. It

in Galilee that the disciples

was

visions.

had

their first

They had not returned there expecting them, had returned in a period of discouragement.

but they The time of the precision.

The

apparition cannot be existing accounts, which place first

fixed

with the

JESUS

3 i2

resurrection on the

THE NAZARENE

morning of the third day, represent

The primitive tradition. phase "after three but formula was not "the third day," a

of the

second

after a short days"; this probably originally meant fixed with not was duration precision. interval, whose

seems from Paul's testimony that it was Peter who had the first vision, which must have been of which doubtless rapidly followed by others, several

It certainly

were

collective visions.

among them had repasts as their occasions, and may have happened at the moment of the breaking of bread. The evocation of the last repast of Jesus and the memory of the words It is possible that certain

His affirming at one and the same time sacrifice for His friends and the promise of a future reunion, must have played an important part in the of a spiritual genesis of apparitions, the intense feeling transformed into the sense of a

He then spoke,

presence being easily real presence.

At

first

there must have been

some

indifference as

so exregards the details of the apparition narratives, the of sentiment clusively were minds dominated by the It is this which presence and the life of the Christ. an at early date, took explains that the narratives,

forms of sufficiently varied character, and ended in the extreme diversity which we observe between the accounts known to us, both canonical and extracanonical.

Lastly,

it is

certain that the resurrection

must very

soon have become a subject of bitter controversy between Jews and Christians, and the necessity of rethe plying to the varied objections advanced against Christian faith greatly influenced the narratives

and

FAITH IN THE RESURRECTION

313

led to the creation of entire groups of traditions such as that of the empty tomb.

The

conclusions to which

we

are thus brought in

studying the origins of the resurrection faith have for the problem before us an importance whose meaning The genesis of the it is superfluous to insist upon. resurrection faith not only presumes the historic tradition about the death of Jesus, but it appears to us as

the continuation of the activity exercised by Him duris thus the ing His lifetime. The resurrection faith link

which unites the story of Jesus with that of Chris-

making the second the consequence of the first. We do not, therefore, find at the birth of ChrisM. Couch oud retianity this naive euhemerism which to Renan from Loisy, as having proaches historians,

tianity,

so easily accepted, but we find something quite differThe early Christians did not deify a man whose ent. and the worteaching and authority impressed them, resemblance at all to ship of the Lord Jesus has no because is It that of the emperors. they had found in Him during His ministry the one destined to accomIt is because, under the influplish the divine work. ence of the belief in His resurrection (a direct

had made on them), consequence of the impression He of their faith, exaltation the in of the disciples Jesus, but directly identified saw in Him no ordinary man,

Him

with the

Messiah. Henceforth the story of Jesus was for them only an

celestial

of the earthly life and it was in episode of a great redemptive drama, the light of their conception of this drama that they

devoted themselves to present and interpret the facts of the life of Jesus and the circumstances of His death.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS the Church; JESUS did not create

He

did not trouble

about establishing institutions or laying down rules to assure, after His death, the continued existence of the group which had formed around Him and to direct His mind was too much dominated by the its life.

economy to the future of His friends permit Him to trouble about on earth and to dream of organizing it. Jesus was idea of the immediate end of the existing

not, therefore, in the usual

meaning of the word, the desired only to announce

founder of a religion; He and fulfill by His advent the accomplishing of the promises

made by God

to Israel.

His Gospel imtradition of His

no rupture with the religious the abuses which the Scribes people. If He combated

plies

and Pharisees had introduced,

He

faithful to the inspiration of the

intended to remain

Law

and Prophets.

on the contrary, was a new religion, was so from the day after the death of Jesus,

Christianity,

and

it

of the Jews, long before the time when the hostility on one side, and the necessity of freedom to welcome the pagans on the other, had forced believers to of the organize themselves in a society independent

synagogue.

The

Christians did not only preach, as

of God, Jesus had done, the nearness of the Kingdom but before all else the doctrine of salvation by the

death and resurrection of Jesus

a death and resur-

rection which have precisely the effect of introducing 314

GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 1 Kingdom of God. The

the

315

Christianity of the primi-

form of Judaism 2 nor the tive transformation of a pagan mystery, and this is true Church was neither

a

notwithstanding all the elements which it has in common with these two religious species. It was a new religion. If in the course of events Christianity absorbed elements foreign to the thought of Jesus and was, nevertheless, born out of the made preaching of Jesus and the impression He had around themselves had who men grouped upon the few to Judaism,

it

Him. it is that Christianity is not the religion of Jesus; the It was of of the worshipers personality Jesus. of the Master which linked together the Gospel

preached in Galilee and the religion of the primitive Church, and which explains the organic unity of the

movement initiated by Jesus. Not only did the thought of Jesus

entire

exercise

(especially in the moral fluence as the source of her inspiration, but

on the

sphere) a decisive in-

Church

still

more

was it the impression by the personality of Jesus which gave the impulse through whose activity the whole system of Christian thought was developed. left

Between the preaching of the Kingdom of God by salvation elaborated and deJesus and the doctrine of is more than a simple there Church veloped in the coincidence in time; there It

is

is

an organic relationship.

through the impression produced

by Jesus that the

If mystlrt Chrtticn, p. 210. Loisy, Les Mysterff patens et the rupture between Christianity and Judaism was from the not brought about at once, but it was nevertheless fatal from the moment the Christians invoked the name of that

1

2 It is true that

start

one

is,

who had

of Judaism.

been disavowed and rejected by the authorized leadcti

JESUS

3i6

THE NAZARENE

Church professed her doctrine of redemption. If this doctrine has some kinship with the Mystery Religions, to it is differentiated from them and cannot be reduced and them. While the worshipers of Mithra, Attis Adonis knew perfectly well that the redemptive story of their heroes plunged into such fabulous antiquity the Christians were persuaded that it was' not at the beginning but at the end of the age that their Christ had lived. His life, for that

all reality

was

lost to

it,

them, could be fitted in a very intimate manner into the reality of history. If Christianity is a mystery, it is one of a very with others even more special type which contrasts

than

resembles them.

it

strongly insisted

upon the

As M.

Loisy,

who

has

originality of Christianity in

comparison with the contemporary religions, has very well observed: "It may be said, if you wish, that underChristianity is a mystery, but it must be quite stood that this mystery is unique of its kind, and that it does not enter into the same category and is not of the same type as the pagan mysteries, to which, nevertheless,

way

compared and from which

it is

it

has in some

issued."

If there assimilated elements,

about the

it

is

in

early Christianity any speculation

from preexisting Jewish and even pagan is upon the basis of an historical tradition

life

and death of Jesus that

this speculation

The historical reality of the perhas developed. to understand the sonality of Jesus alone enables us birth and development of Christianity, which otherwise would remain an enigma, and in the proper sense of the word, a miracle.

INDEX Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha, 48 Acta Petri cum Simone, 224 Acta Pilatt, 45-50 Alfanc, 24, 69, 193 Annales (Tacitus), 40 Anonymous writer on Luther, 19 Antiquities (Josephus), 33, 36

Appolinarius, 60 Ascension of Isaiah, no, 114

Burkitt, 29, 31

Calmes, 233 Case, 19 Celsus (Origen), 78

Cheyne, 53 "Chrestianoi," 44

"Chrestianos," 44 Colani, 12 Corssen, 30, 37, 40, 41 Couchoud, v, 20-28, 39,

103,

106-109, 118, 119, 182, 192,

Babut, 39 Bahrdt, 4 Baldensperger, 178, 179

Bultmann, 166, 208

199, 219, 226, 267, 279,

73,

80,

158,

294

Couissin, 90

Cyril (Alexandria), 78

Bardenhewer, 46 Batiffol, 30, 34, 35, 40, 4*> 43,

Dalman and

44 Bauer, Bruno, 10 Bauer, W, 78, 79, 87 Baur, R, 9

De De

Bayle, I Berendts, 35 Bertram, 14 Bible du Centenaire, 219, 222

Didache, the, 277

Bole, 31

Drews,

Bolingbroke, 5 Bolland, 16

Dunkmann, 19

Streeter,

38

Bella Judaico, 35, 37, 42

Faye, 78, 83, 85 Deissmann, 52, 93 Deists, the, 2 Dieterich, 53

Docetism, 20, 82, et seq. Dom Leclercq, 223 18, 51, 93, xoi, 126,

Dupuis, 7

Bousset, 19, 61, 126, 158

Bratke, 30 Ebionites,

Bruckner, 158 Brune, 30

6p Edschmiadzin, 248 317

182

INDEX

3 i8 Enoch (Apoc.), nj>

"9

Jacoby, 30 Jensen, 17

Epiphanius, 46, 58, 60 Erbt, 16

Jerome, 86 Josephus, 29-38, 53 Julian (Apostate), 78 Julicher, 19

IV. Esdras, 115, 15* Eusebius, 30, 32, 48, 241

Justin Martyr, 44, 46* 78, 83,

in,

Fabia, 49 Picker, 224

172,

220

Pillion, 19

Kalthoff, 16

Fuhrmann, 16

Kattenbusch, 176

Fulda, 218

Kegd, JO

n

Keim,

Klostermann, 105, 274 Kneller, 31

Gardner, Percy, 126 Godet, 232 Goethals,

30

Goetz, 30, 42 Gogud, M., 29, 39, 47, 73, 87, 88, 93, 95,

"1,

126, 129, 137,

204, 223, 227, 229, 235, 237, 246, 255, 262, 269, 276, 278, 287, 299

Guignebert,

2, 8,

19, 28,

39

Laible,

38

Laqueur, 30 Lessing, 2 Levi, Israd, 196

Levy (on Strauss), 8 Lietzmann, 127 Linck, 30, 34, 39, 43

Harnack, 29-42, 45, 83, 84 Haupt, 126 Herder, 4 Herford, 38 Heulhard, 20 Hilgenfdd, 58 Hippolytus, 57, 60, 241 Hochart, 40, 43 Hofraann, 304 Holbach, 6 Holtzmann, 9, 55> 8 7

Lipman, 19 Lipsius, 46 Lobstem, 121 Logia (Q), 9 Loisy, 14, 86, 90, 126, 195, 220, 232, 275, 310, 315

Lucian, 78, 79

Luke

(chap, xxiii, 34), 207

Magic

papyrus

(Bib.

Paris), 52

Mandaean (Apoc.), 76-77 Manicheans (sect), 85 Ignatius, 80, 87, Irenaeus, 84, 241, 242

Marcion, 83, et seq. Massebieau, 186

Nat.,

INDEX Matthes, 15

Maurenbrcchcr, 309, 310 Messianic pretenders, 297

Meyer, A., 38 Meyer, Ed, 30, 37, 4*, 43,

53,

Reimarus, 2, 12 Reinach, Salomon, 20, 31, 39, 40, 49, 80, 87, 89, 90, 199, 219 Reinach, Theodore, 33 Reitzenstein, S3, 58, 73, 75

Renan, n, 96 Resch, 123, 304 Reuss, 9

7 31

63, 65, 69, tf,

3*9

Mirabeau, 6

Reville, Albert,

9

Naber, 15

Reville, Jean, 87,

Naasseni, 58

Ritschl, 12

Robertson,

Naasseni hymn, 58

Napoleon

I,

Naumann,

232

M., 16, 51, 52

J,

Rouffiac, 234

7

19

"Nazarene," 54-fo

Nicodemus (Gospel), 46 200

Nicolardot, 55, Niemojewski, 16

Sabatier, 96

Sadler, 17

Saintyves, 265, 278 Schelling, 199

Niese, 31

Schmidtke, 60

Norden, 30, 42 "NSR," 54

Schiirer, 29, 31, 34, 158, 201

Schweitzer,

n,

2, 4, 9,

13, 17,

19

Origen, 34, 35, 49, 201

7,

83, i

Osiander (on Josephus), 30 Ovid, Metamorphoses, 266

Seitz,

30

Seydel, vi

Smith,

W. B

,

17, 30, 66,

57-63,

66, 69, 73, 182 Spitte, 185,

186

Stahl, 20, 24-25, 192-195

Strack, 38, 61

Papias, 241 Paulus, 4

Pernot, 82 Pfleiderer, 96, 126

Strauss, 8, 9, 10,

n

Stuelken, 47

Suetonius, 37, 43

Philo, 38, 118, 219

Photius, 37, 85

Tacitus, 37, 40, 41, 42, 43

Pierson, 15

Tertullian, 44, 46, 84,

"Pistis Sophia," 57

Tixeront, 59

in

Pliny, 39

Plutarch (Co*ar), 266 Polycarpe, 87 Preuschen, 44, 275

Valla, Laurentius,

Van den Berg van

I

Eysinga, 15

INDEX

320 Van

Wellhausen, 28, 53, 56, 74, 105, 192-196, 274 Wetter, 56 Wernle, 166 Whale, Mrs. G., 21

Loon, 15

Venturini, 4

Virgil (Georgics), 266 Volney, 7 Voltaire, 5,

6

Wilke, 9 Windisch, 182 Wrede, 13, 105 Wunsche, 206

Volz, 201 Von Schubert, 48

Von Von

Schultze, 223

Soden,

19, 176,

Weinel, 19, 115 Weiss, B., 9 Weisse, Johannes,

182

9,

13,

38, 52, 59; 96, 101, 105,

19*

304

Zahn, Th., 105, 185, 232, 242

Zimmern, 17

0)

BOOKS OF RELIGIOUS SIGNIFICANCE CONTRIBUTIONS OP SCIENCE TO RELIGION

By SHAILER MATHEWS and Thirteen Contributors How modern science conceives the universe, and how the conception of

God

necessary to complete it

is

RELIGION AND THE MIND OF TODAY A. LEIGHTON , confusion sincere, unbiased, reverent study of the between the spirits of scientific inquiry and religious

By JOSEPH

A

$2.50

faith.

THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SPIRITUAL IDEAL By FELIX ADLER

.....

Dr. Adler's philoso$1.50 phy applied to burning questions of the day.

The Hibbert Lectures

of 1923

RELIGION AND LIFE By DEAN INGE and Others Six connected chapters by eminent thinkers, on tne fundamentals of personal religion.

A CENTURY OF ANGLICAN THEOLOGY By CLEMENT

C. J.

WEBB

Theological developments in the Church of England and their relations with modern thought and life.

RELIGION AND NATURAL By

C. F.

RUSSELL away difficulties between

_

Clears

HUMAN RELATIONS By

H

C.

$1.25

LAW religion

and science

IN THE LIGHT OF CHRIST

CARTER

Applications of Christianity to

modern human

VILLAGE SERMONS BY A NOVELIST

life.

$1.51}

By GUSTAV FRENSSEN

straightforward

Simple,

little

talks

on

essentials.

Christian $1 SO

CONCERNING CHRIST

By A C. McNEILE Fundamental truths of Christianity for the world day.

D.

New York

to-

$1-50

APPLETON AND COMPANY London

r 6

127560