« PreviousContinue »
German Reviews. THEOLOGISCHE STUDIEN UND KRITIKEN. (Theological Essays and Reviews.) Es
says : 1. CREMER, The Roots of Anselm's Theory of Satisfaction. 2. KAWERAU, The Outbreak of the Antinomian Controversy. 3. NÖsGEN, The Origin of the Third Gospel. Thoughts and Remarks : WIESELER, The Death Year of Polycarp. Reviews : Baudissix, The Idea of Holiness in the Old Testament, reviewed by
RiEhm. An article on " the Third Gospel” gives in ninety pages a very full review of the recent German literature on the subject. Its author, C. F. Nösgen, had published in two former volumes of the Studien und Kritiken elaborate articles on the historical causes leading to the composition of the third Gospel, which have attracted great attention. The author argues at length that the writer of the third Gospel did not use a common source with the authors of the first and second Gospels, that his work was not a mere translation, but that it was probably based upon notes which the writer himself had made of the great events of the gospel history. He regards it as certain that this Gospel was composed prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, and rejects as entirely groundless the opinions of those who, like Köslin and Holzmann, place the time of composition about the year 80 A. D., or, like Ililgenfeld, Volkmar, and Scholten, toward the close of the first century, or even, like Keim, into the time of Hadrian, shortly before the second destruction of Jerusalein. Proofs are adduced that the third Gospel was generally known to the Churches of the East and the West at the time of Irenæus and Tertullian, and that before this time it was known to Papias and to many of the early heretics and pseudo-epigraphıs. If this Gospel had been composed after the end of the first century, it might be expected that the Gnostics, who had already begun at that time to develop a great strength, would have been in some way or other referred to. The argument against the authenticity of the Gospel which Keim derives from a pretended acquaintance of the author of the third Gospel with Josephius is refuted as inconclusive. Nösgen refers to an essay published by him in a former number of the Studien und Kritiken, (1879, p. 521,) in which the relations between Luke and Josephus have been fully discussed by him. The similarity of certain expressions found both in Josephus and Luke is no greater than might be expected between any two writers who belonged to the same period of literature, and both whom wrote Greek as foreigners. In regard to the author of the third Gospel Nösgen believes that the uniform belief of the ancient Church which called Luke its author is unimpeachable. For though the statements found in the Muratorian fragment, in Irenæus, in Origen, and Eusebius concerning Luke and his Gospel are regarded by him more as surmises than ecclesiastical tradition, he lays great stress on the entire unanimity of these carly statements in regard to the authorship of Luke, and he considers the weight of the argument all the greater as the name of Luke is by no means prominent in the other books of the New Testament, and as the high place he now holds in the estimation of the Christian Church rests entirely on the assumption of his being the author of two books of the Sacred Canon. The author refrains from discussing the question where the Gospel of Luke was composed. He believes that there is no passage in either the third Gospel or the Acts from which any inference could be derived. The arguments which have been adduced for several towns are based upon opinions which have no scientific value. The purity of the Greek found in the third Gospel is a testimony for the writer, but allows no inference as to the place where the book was written. ZritSCHRIFT FOR WISSENSCHAFTLICHE THEOLOGIE. Edited by Hilgenfeld. First
Number. 1880. 1. A. HILGENFELD, The Gospel of John and the Defense of its Authenticity, by F. Godet and C. E. Luthardt. 2. Fr. Görres, The Pretended Persecution of Christians at the Time of the Emperors Numerianus :und Carinus. 3. H. HOLTZMANN, Papias and Johannes. 4. Spatu, The Jonathan of the New Testament. 5. R. HILGENFELD, P. Sulpicius, P. F. Quirinius, Reviews : 1. HarNACK, The Muratorian Fragment, (1879.) 2. NösGEN, Ou Luke and Josephus,
(1879.) 3. Annulus Rufint, edited by Tobler. We have referred, in our account of the new number of the
Studien und Kritiken, to the controversy which German theo logians keep up on the relations between Luke and Josephus. Several theologians of the liberal school are very positive in maintaining that Luke, both by the use of some Greek phrases peculiar to Josephus, and still more by a reference to facts which he must have taken from Josephus, shows a dependence on that writer, and that, therefore, the Gospel bearing his name must have been composed later than the works of Josephus. Among the theologians who defend this view i: II. Holtzmann, Profesbor of Theology at the University of Strasburg, and a regular and frequent contributor to the Zeitschrift fur Wissenchaftliche Theologie. He has explained his reasons at full length in the volume of the Zeitschrift for 1877, (p. 535.) In reply to him C. F. Nösgen, the author of the above article in the Sturlien und Kritiken on Luke; wrote in the volume of tho Studien for 1879, denying that any phrase or fact can be found in the third Gospel which can be traced with certainty to the works of Josephus. In the present number of the Zeitschrift fur Wissenschaftliche Theologie Holtzmann replies to Nösgen. The controversy is somewhat seasoned by the flavor of personalities, each writer assuring us that he cannot discover any thing of real worth in the dissertation of his opponent. Holtzmann declares himself to have derived great pleasure from the fact that his views regarding the partial dependency of Luke upon Josephus are indorsed by some able scholars, of whom he mentions E. Rénan; the author of “Supernatural Religion,” in the “ Fortnightly Review,” October, 1877; and W. Brückner.
In a postscript to the present number of the Zeitschrift fur Historiche Theologie, Professor Hilgenfeld indorses the opinion expressed by Th. Zahn in the Zeitschrift für Kirchenge schichte, that the Greek original of the work of Irenæus against the heretics, and the amouvňuata of Hegesippus in five books, were still extant in the sixteenth century, and may yet bo found. He adds that he has recently found, in an edition of the Constitutiones Apostolorum, by Turrianus, (De Torres,) published at Venice, in 1563, another proof that not only the work of Hegesippus, but also the Syntagmas of Ignatius and Hippolytus were extant at that time.
1. LEOPOLD MONOD, French Protestantism and Evangelical Missions. 2. Hector Berl10%. September, 1879.–1. G. MEYER, The Evangelization of France. 2. PRESSENSE,
The Last Manifestations of the Naturalistic School in Literature. 3. DE RicusYOND, La Rochelle Beyond the Sea. John Jay. 4. Rour, Discourses Addressed to the Students of Theology at Strasburg by Professor E. Reuss. 5. DECAPPEL,
The Invasion of the Locusts, Joel i and ii. October, 1879.-1. Stapfer, Review of the third volume of Havet's Le Christian
isme et Ses Origines. Tom. iii, Judaism. 2. E. W., The Life of Charles Kings
ley. 3. F. ALONE, Too Probable Not to Be True. A Novel. November, 1879.-1. PRESSENSÉ, Address on the Influence of the Christian Press
made at the Eighth Ecumenical Conference of the Evangelical Alliance. 2. B.
W., The Life of Charles Kingsley. 3. F. ALONE, Too Probable Not to Be True. In France, as in the other Latin countries of Europe and America, Protestantism has been crushed by the iron hand of bigots
and tyrants, but it has secured a permanent place in the history of Protestantism. What Protestant France has done for the foreign mission cause is the subject of the very interesting article by Leopold Monod in the August number. The article was originally prepared for the Allgemeine Missions Zeitschrift, :: German monthly, devoted to the cause of foreign Prol. estant missions, which in this field has hardly any superior; but as the subject is of special interest to French Protestants, it is published in the Revue Chretienne also. Of course, while suffering from terrible persecutions at home, and struggling for a mere existence, the Protestant Churches could not be expected to do much for the extension of Protestantism in foreign countries. IIow efficient the persecution was to which the Protestants were subjected may be seen from the fact that at the last enumeration of the Reformed Churches made at the national Synod of Alençon, in 1637, there still were in existence eight hundred and six Churches, with six hundred and forty-one pas
In 1806 the number of Churches had dwindled down to one hundred and seventy-one, and of these fifty were vacant. The first French Republic ended the long persecution of Protestants, and secured to it for the future religious toleration. The first French Protestant Bible Society was founded in 1818; in the same year the first Protestant paper, the Archives du Christianisme, was established. In 1821 Pastor Janssen, of Geneva, published in the French language a missionary work entitled, “ Description of the Present Condition of Protestant Missions in Intidel Countries,” as far as it was known in the beginning of the year 1820. It produced a great effect, and in many towns appeals were made by the pastors for missionary contributions. The first contributions were sent to Basle, but in December, 1822, a Missionary Society was established at Paris. The director of the missionary institute at Basle, M. Blumhardt, urged the society to establish its own mission, and the society resolved to follow this advice. The first missionary employed was Jonas King, an American minister, who offered to work under the auspices of the society among the Mohammedans and Jews of Palestine. In 1823 this committee announced that it had secured a mission-house, which had received two pupils from Basle. From that time a rapid progress was achieved. The receipts in 1823 amounted to thirteen thousand
and sixty-one francs, in 1816 to one hundred and four thousand francs, in 1878 to two hundred and eleven thousand francs. Soon after 1516 came a great crisis, and the mission-honse had to be closed for several years; but, thanks to the liberal aid furnished by the Protestants of other countries, it was reopened in 1856. It had in 1879 four students, and two others were educated in the preparatory school of Batignolles. As a condition for admission to the mission-house the academic degree of bachelier ès lettres is required. Auxiliary societies have been formed among women and children, but it is com plained that the organization of the branch societies is not as efficient as it ought to be. The liberality of the missionary contributions considerably varies in different parts of France. The total Protestant population was given by the census of 1872 as 580,757, in a total population of 36,102,921.* At the census of 1872, which gave an entire population of 36,905,788, no inquiry was made into the religious divisions of the population. The tigure given by the census of 1872 for the Protestant popalation is generally considered by Protestant writers as too low, and Monod, in accordance with an article on the religious statistics of France in Lichtenberger's “ Encyclopædie,” estimates it from 600,000 to 650,000. Dividing the Protestants of France into eight territorial groups, it has been found that the highest average contribution for foreign missions from any of these groups was ninety-two centimes for every Protestant inhabitant, the lowest ten centimes, and the average for all France twenty centimnes. The number of missionaries sent out was forty-nine, of whom thirty-seven were Frenchmen. France has only one Protestant missionary journal, the Journal des Missions, which is sent to 1,820 persons, and has 714 paying subscribers.
Many of the Huguenots who were driven from France by * The figure given in the census of 1872 (580,757) means the entire Protestant population, including children. Some works crroneously give it as the number of communicants, and estimate the entire Protestant population at about 1,500,000. That this is a mistake appears at once from the denominational division of the population of France given in the census, which is as follows: Catholics, 35,387,703 ; Protestants, 580,757 ; Israelites, 49,439 ; other non-Christian denom. inations, 3,071; without religion, or religion unknown, 81,951; total, 36,102,921. It will also be noticed that the author of the above article claims no higher figure than 650,000 for the entire Protestant population.