ARCHEOLOGY AND BIBLICAL RESEARCH

THEOLOGICAL REACTION IN GERMANY

THE Babel and Bible controversy, still fresh in the memory of biblical students everywhere, though having extended over the entire Christian world, raged more fiercely in Germany. It is, therefore, but natural that the results of this controversy should be seen the most clearly in that land of theological strife and speculation. The past ten years have shown more than ordinary interest in the discussion of the relation of the socalled "advanced" theology to the religious life and spiritual welfare of the Protestant Church in Germany. Protests have been going up all along the line from individuals, more or less prominent, against the encroachments of the destructive critics, and, so too, from several prominent churches and religious conferences. The claims of the "advanced" theologians had become intolerable, for to them the Bible was only one of the sacred books which the ancient world has bequeathed us. Our Lord Jesus Christ was, according to them, a man, and nothing more. Such assertions could not but grieve the faithful pastor, who was trying to feed hungry humanity on the bread of life. There was, however, no leader of national importance to throw down the gauntlet, to challenge the radical critics, apparently so firmly entrenched behind the "scientific" breastworks of historical theology.

But unexpectedly and without a moment's warning the lightning struck. The immediate occasion was that famous lecture by Professor Delitzsch before the German emperor and other celebrities. This address, comparatively harmless, aroused the entire Christian world as nothing else has done for many years. This was not due to the lecture itselffor more rationalistic views were daily promulgated, and had been for many years by many professors at various German universities-but rather to the fact that the emperor, and especially in a subsequent interview with Delitzsch, found fault with some of the statements presented by the lecturer. The advanced ideas put forth by the learned Assyriologist did not harmonize with the more orthodox views held by the emperor, the empress, and Dr. Dryander, the court preacher. Thus the lecture may be regarded as the first gun which precipitated the subsequent discussion. It called out the expression of opinions from a vast army of learned men, and, what was still better, it aroused the common people, especially those at all religiously inclined. The lecture pleased few, but offended many; and, strange to say, some of the most radical theologians, like Gunkel, were greatly exercised because poor Delitzsch, not a professional theologian, had dared to trespass on sacred ground. So conceited are some men like Gunkel as to believe, or at least profess to do so, that theological speculations must be absolutely restricted to the regular professor of theology.

Delitzsch's assertions regarding the debt of the Hebrews to the Babylonians for their best religious thought were discounted by most all critics, regardless of the school which they represented: Jew and Gentile, Protestant and Catholic, conservative and liberal discussed the question in all its bearings, with the result that our knowledge of biblical criticism has been deepened and broadened. The professor of Assyriology at the Berlin University found himself in an insignificant minority. His mistake had been "to assume the position of apologist for the Babylonian religion, placing it on a level with the Hebrew, and detracting from the latter as much as he adds to the former"; and this, too, notwithstanding the apparent consensus of opinion which recognizes the great superiority of Hebrew religious thought, as presented in the Hebrew Scriptures, over that of Babylonia as revealed to us in the cuneiform inscriptions and the monuments. It was fortunate that the discussion was not confined to a few professional theologians whose writings are seldom read except by a very limited number, nor yet to a few of the leading pulpits in the larger cities, but extended to the village pastor and the intelligent layman in all the churches of the Fatherland. Thus the entire religious public was moved into a reëxamination of the cardinal doctrines of Christianity. Pulpit and press lent their aid. The result has been a greater study of the Book and a profounder respect for the teaching of the church as regards the origin of the Bible. Conceal it as we may, the Lutheran Church of Germany, during the past fifty years, has held some very vague and loose views concerning inspiration and revelation, differing but little from those held by Unitarians in this country. This was still more true of a large number of theological professors at the universities. This meant much, for it is well known that most of the advanced thinking not only in theology, but in all branches, is done in Germany by the university professors. There much more than in England or America the terms professor and advanced thinker are synonymous. Of course, there are exceptions, for occasionally a profound thinker may be found who is not a professor.

The "advanced" thinking of the professor was not suited for young theologues who were expected to break the bread of life for hungry souls in their parishes. Thus there often grew an estrangement between the professor and the humble pastor, for the latter discovered that he could not preach what he had learned from his professor. The few who were reckless enough to try it soon lost their grasp on their congregations. How could it be otherwise? Hungry souls could not feed on negations. These "advanced" professors realized that their cause was a lost one, and seeing that the pastors could not preach this "gospel of enlightenment" they now determined to publish the "advanced" views in cheap pamphlets and scatter them broadcast among the common people. Many such pamphlets have been written during the past three years. As a specimen of what is given the public by the radical critics we may call attention to one entitled Babel and Bible, by Reimarus, Jr. This is written in elegant German, concise and clear, in manifest contrast with the belabored, obscure style so characteristic of German theological writers. It pro

fesses to give in a nutshell the "up-to-date" creed of an advanced critic. We have no space even for a brief analysis, but shall simply give the following ten theses with which he closes the pamphlet. We give these even in an abridged form:

1. The biblical conception of God is self-contradictory, base, and gross. 2. The Bible is not inspired, nor in any sense a revelation. 3. The biblical doctrine of God is an evolution from the teachings of nonIsraelitic nations. 4. The oldest biblical narratives are mere adaptations borrowed from Babylonian sources. 5. The Pentateuch narratives, including those of the patriarchs, are legendary and mythical, without historical bases. 6. The person of Christ is attested; not so, however, the gospel narratives concerning him; the miracles recorded are myths, 7. The doctrine of Christ as the Son of God did not arise till the second century; it was evolved by some Alexandrians from the emanation theory of Plato. 8. The dogmas of the church have been evolved from Babylonian, Hellenic, Roman, and other sources. 9. Semitic conceptions are gradually giving way to more excellent ones of Aryan origin. 10. It is the duty of advanced theology to purify and clarify these conceptions.

From the above it will be seen that our friends the critics have now recommenced their attacks on the New Testament. Professor Gunkel, of Berlin, has recently published a pamphlet to prove that the New Testament, too, is an evolution-chiefly from Babylonian sources, according to this "advanced" theologian. Both New and Old Testaments are "very largely appropriations and adaptations of extra-biblical material." He avers that the leading features of our Christology are not derived from the historical Christ, but had their origin outside of Judea. The doctrine of Christ's deity is merely an adaptation of the very common heathen idea according to which great heroes were deified. The virgin birth is a mere myth; the baptism, the transfiguration, the resurrection and ascension of our Lord have no historical basis, but have been appropriated from the mythology of heathen nations. The walk to Emmaus is paralleled often in heathen accounts of their gods which assumed human form and conversed with men. It would be easy to enlarge, but let this suffice. No wonder that the theological student rebelled against such "advanced" views. No wonder that the pastor could not satisfy his flock with such a Christless gospel. No wonder that the Lutheran Church has at last awakened from its sleep and has protested against such teaching though proceeding from high seats of learning. No wonder that the "advanced" thinker himself is trying to effect a compromise. No wonder that war has been declared, and that the lines are being more distinctly drawn. Some conservative has published a "black-list," with the names of all radical or advanced professors at the universities. This is unfortunate and seems a little like persecution.

If a table published in a recent number of the Chronik der Christlichen Welt be correct no less than ninety-six out of one hundred and seventy-five professors and instructors in the theological faculties of the German universities (Catholic professors, of course, not included, for

these are all conservative) are "advanced." This looks bad, but if compared with tables of twenty or thirty years ago it will show a decided gain in favor of the positive, or conservative, professors. The past few years have been demanding more positive teaching. It was this demand that placed Seeberg in Berlin. If reports be true he was sent there to counteract the teachings of Harnack. (Here in parenthesis let us ask, What does the appointment of Harnack as librarian of that university mean?) What is more significant is the fact that the number of students is generally very small in the theological faculties of those universities of pronounced "advanced" theological tendencies where the radical theologians have full sway. The only exception to this is Tübingen. This point can be made more clear by the following table. Availing ourselves of the statistics in the Chronik der Christlichen Welt, which gives the number and classification of the professors in all the Protestant faculties of the German universities, and then of some figures in the Deutscher Universitätskalender for the summer semester of 1903-the latest we happen to have-which gives the number of theological students in the same institutions, we have the following:

The above table shows very conclusively that the advanced professor is not a magnet in Germany. Of course, there are marked exceptions, as in the case of Harnack, at Berlin. But there is Giessen, Jena, and Strassburg, with an aggregate of twenty-four instructors of all grades, and all "advanced," and only one hundred and sixty-nine students, or a fraction over seven students to a professor. If we take Erlangen and Greifswald, noted for their orthodoxy, and where all the professors are conservative, we find seventeen instructors and two hundred and forty-eight students, or about fourteen to a professor, which is a little more than double the proportion in the first three. Take Marburg and Leipzig for comparison. The former has two conservative and ten advanced professors, but only ninety-six students, while the latter, with ten conserva

tive professors and only two radicals, has two hundred and sixty students. The above figures may not be conclusive evidence in support of the growth of conservatism among students of theology in Germany, for there are doubtless other reasons why persons should select Berlin, Leipzig, or Halle as places to study; nevertheless we must not lose sight of the powerful influence exerted by the professors in all these schools of the prophets. It stands to reason that if the majority of students are brought under the influence of conservative teachers, and that by their own will, the results will be favorable to more evangelical and spiritual work in their churches after they have become pastors. The latest developments seem to indicate that the radical leaders are beginning to show signs of discouragement. They are not satisfied with the results of their efforts, especially when regarded from the standpoints of the religious and spiritual life. 'Their inane doctrines and subjective dicta have not fed the hungry souls of a sinful and dying world. The condition of affairs is well stated in a recent article in the Allgemeine Evangel-Lutherische Zeitung (No. 36), Leipzig. Portions of this were translated and published in the Literary Digest. The following is worth quoting: Whosoever is observing the ups and downs in the theological world at present cannot fail to see the growing weakness of the advanced cause. Even Dr. Rade himself, the brilliant editor of the Christliche Welt, the leading exponent of this school, recently declared that "modern theology is becoming very tired in its researches." . . . "We are begining to see before us certain limitations and checks to our further progress."... Pastor Steinmann, a representative of this school, in a noteworthy article expressed strong fears that the whole theological structure reared by the work of the advanced clans will fall to pieces like a house built of cards. He declared that men cannot be satisfied with mere religious conceptions and ideas, but that they must have real religion, and that the great realities of religion, such as God, sin, salvation, eternal life, and the like, must be something more than mere mental concepts to speculate with. Jesus must become more in the eyes of the believer than an enthusiastic national hero of piety: He must be the Saviour and Mediator.