Liberal, LC i. I. W. D. Morrison. New Point of View, HJ ii. 298. J. H. Beibitz. (Systematic), Recent Literature, AJT viii. 412. VERACITY, Law of, BS lxi. 360. G. Campbell. Voragine as a Preacher, PTR ii. 442. E. C. Richardson. WATER-SKINS, PEFSt 54. P. G. Baldensperger. Wesley, Literary Contemporaries, WMM cxxvii. 94, 259. Westcott, AJT viii. 756. C. R. Gregory. West Indies, Catholic Church in, DR cxxxiv. 66. T. Hughes. Woman in Early Church, AJT viii. 360. F. Johnson. Recent Foreign Theology. 1 The New Testament Apocrypha.' RATHER more than a year ago, Dr. Hennecke published his Neutestamentliche Apokryphen, which comprises a German translation of the numerous writings and fragments included under that comprehensive title, together with Introductions by various scholars. On all hands, the work was recognized as worthy to stand side by side with Dr. Kautzsch's Die Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen des Alten Testaments. Its value is now greatly increased by the issue of an elaborate Handbook which supplies detailed accounts of the literature of the subject, and, when necessary, furnishes reasons for the opinions to which expression is given in the Introductions to the several works, and in the notes appended to the German translation. These two volumes supply the student of 'Handbuch zu den Neutestamentlichen Apokryphen in Verbindung mit Fachgelehrten herausgegeben von Lic. Dr. Edgar Hennecke. London: Williams and Norgate. M.12. the apocryphal writings of the New Testament with a thesaurus of material gathered by a band of experts, whose judgment on the complex problems involved has the authority of specialists. A large share of the work has been done with conspicuous ability by the editor,-a 'country parson,' who mentions the drawbacks of rural seclusion. For the loan of books, however, he expresses gratitude to the authorities of the University Library of Göttingen, and of the Royal Libraries of Berlin, Munich, Leipzig, Hanover, Bonn, and Halle an incidental statement which seems to show that German scholars have some advantages which their English co-workers do not possess. Some idea of the range of the Handbook will be given by mentioning the names of some of the best known members of the editorial staff, together with the works entrusted to them: Dr. Paul Drews of Giessen, The Didache; Dr. Krüger of Giessen, Epistles of Ignatius and Polycarp; Dr. Arnold Meyer of Zürich, Gospel according to the Hebrews, Protevangelium of James, Introduction to the Gospels of the Childhood, Jesus in the Talmud, etc.; Dr. Preuschen, Acts of Thomas; Dr. von Schubert, The (so-called) Second Epistle of Clement; Dr. Weinel, Apocalypse of Peter, Shepherd of Hermas, 5th and 6th Ezra. The object of the Handbook is to furnish notes on, and, if need be, more lengthy discussions of, questions bearing on the texts printed in the volume already published. Here and there, however, additional texts have been inserted: for example, German translations of the New Sayings of Jesus, of Coptic fragments of The Acts of Paul, and of a Syriac 'Hymn of Praise' from The Acts of Thomas, etc. But the most interesting and important additions are found in the section on the 'Apocryphal Gospels.' In response to a widely expressed wish, Dr. Hennecke has included two useful articles; one deals with the Jewish writings, which are possible sources of information concerning the words and works of Jesus, and the other with the New Testament and the Koran. Dr. A. Meyer writes on 'Jesus, the disciples of Jesus, and the Gospel, in the Talmud and kindred Jewish Writings.' Twenty extracts from Jewish literature are examined. Of those which narrate accusations brought against Jesus, it is truly said that they add nothing to our knowledge of Him, but are of some value as showing what the Rabbis thought of Him. In the Mishna Jesus is not mentioned; Dr. Meyer thinks that the fact is noteworthy, although much information about Him was not likely to be found in a work which is largely a collection of legal decisions. The Mishna authorities had been brought into contact with Christianity, and what they thought of it is made known in the Tosefta, and in the Palestinian Talmud. In their view Christianity was 'a miraculous healing art, which might be described as exorcism, but not as magic.' By the Rabbis Jesus was regarded as 'a wonder-worker, who publicly depreciated and ridiculed rabbinical teaching.' In the early part of the Middle Ages there was much activity amongst Jews of the baser sort in romance-weaving with regard to Jesus and His mother. Dr. Meyer's opinion of the Toledoth Jesu deserves quotation, inasmuch as modern writers, who ought to know better, still repeat these slanders. This work is described as 'the offspring of low fanaticism, malicious delight in defamation, and vulgar imagination.' From another point of view, these writings deserve attention. Though their direct contribution to our knowledge of Jesus is little or nothing, indirectly they may teach us something about Him by showing what the Rabbis thought of the Jewish Christians, with whom they had personal acquaintance. In two narratives mention is made of a certain Jacob of Kephar-Sethanja; in the first he heals, in the name of Jesus, Rabbi Eliezer who has been bitten by a serpent. Rabbi Ishmael held that this healing involved greater peril than the serpent's bite, for thus did he speak to Rabbi Eliezer: 'It would have been well for thee to depart out of this world in peace before thou hadst broken through the fence which the scribes set up; for it is written, "Whoso breaketh through a fence, a serpent shall bite him" (Ec 108). To the obvious retort that the serpent's bite was prior to the breaking through the fence, Rabbi Ishmael replies that the verse quoted refers to a serpent whose bite takes effect in the future world. In the second story, this Jewish Christian is represented as puzzling Rabbi Eliezer by a question about things clean and unclean (cf. Mk 719), and as solving the problem by quoting a saying of Jesus. It is quite inconceivable that our Lord should have uttered the words put into His mouth, but the two incidents show that amongst the early Christians there were some so deeply imbued with the spirit of Jewish legalism as to take delight in the discussion of problems in casuistry, yet these same Jewish Christians were separated from Jews proper by a deep chasm, owing to the use which, as disciples of Jesus, they made of His name. Dr. Flemming, of Bonn, has collected the passages in the Koran which may be regarded as presenting any parallels to the New Testament narratives. If the scope of this section had been extended to include Mohammedan writers, its interest and value would have been increased. Professor Margoliouth's collection of 'Sayings attributed to Christ by Mohammedan Writers' would have been exceedingly helpful (THE EXPOSITORY TIMES, vol. v.). The Koran mentions, in addition to Jesus, Mary His mother, Zacharias, and John the Baptist; the apostles are also referred to, but none of them is mentioned by name. 'All that Mohammed relates about these New Testament characters is derived from very impure sources, and the words put into their mouth have generally been shaped in accordance with his own ends.' Two illustrations must suffice: 'Children of Israel, I am the messenger of God to you, announcing a messenger who will come after me, named Achmed (ie. Mohammed).' In another passage God is represented as saying, 'Jesus, Son of Mary, hast thou said: "Besides God, receive me and my mother as two Gods?" He answered, "I said nothing to them, save what Thou didst command me. Serve God-my Lord and your Lord." Dr. Hennecke introduces an Agraphon of Jesus in a somewhat remarkable way: Through the kindness of A. Meyer, I have been referred to THE EXPOSITORY TIMES, vol. ii. p. 507. ProProfessor Baentsch of Jena was good enough to lend me a copy of this magazine; what is meant by "The Secret of the Presence," I cannot say. Is it the title of another magazine?' The Secret of the Presence is a volume of sermons by Bishop Moule, reviewed on p. 502 of the same issue of this magazine. This Agraphon, quoted without mention of any source, is given in Smith's Life of Dr. Duff, vol. ii. p. 164. Inside the chief gateway of a mosque at Sikri, about twenty-four miles to the west of Agra, Dr. Duff saw 'engraved on stone, in large characters, which stand out boldly in bas-relief, a remarkable sentence in Arabic. Literally translated it is as follows: 'Jesus, on whom be peace, has said, The world is merely a bridge; you are to pass over it, and not to build your dwellings upon it.' To this fine saying there are parallels in substance, though not in phraseology, in the teaching of Christ and the Apostles. Dr. Hennecke cites: Mt 633, Lk 16, Jn 142, Ph 320, Col 31f., I Jn 215-17 Cf. Hermas, Sim. 1, Epistle to J. G. TASKER. Diognetus, v. 9. Handsworth College. Das Weltbild der Zukunft.' THIS is a somewhat ambitious work, the object of which is no less than to revolutionize the world's thinking on all topics of philosophy, science, and theology. It essays to complete its task in some 300 octavo pages, and in these pages it touches on all topics which interest thinkers. It is well written; indeed the style is most admirable, clear, 1 Das Weltbild der Zukunft, Eine Auseinandersetzung Zwischen Philosophie, Naturwissenschaft, und Theologie. Von Karl Heim. Berlin: Schwetschke & Sohn. forcible, and direct; and if at times it becomes somewhat hysterical and rhetorical, yet it fitly expresses the emotion of the author. It will make the author's point of view patent, if we summarize the four tendencies which to him are characteristic of modern thinking-tendencies which meet his emphatic approval. These are, first, the tendency to set the abiding fundamental thoughts of the Kantian system free from all scholastic elements. This has, he says, been so far accomplished by the thorough investigation of the Kantian system during the last century. In particular he instances the works of A. Riehl and P. Natorp as conspicuous in this reference. The second tendency, which he associates with the names of Avenarius and Mach, is what he calls the destruction of the Ego-myth. It is this Egomyth which, in his opinion, has hampered the statement of the problem of the theory of knowledge up to the present time, and has prevented full application of the method of the natural sciences to psychology, and consequently has hindered the progress of psychology. Thirdly, the tendency which he admires is that which has dissolved the atomistic foundation of physics, as physics has been expounded up to the present time. The names he associates with this tendency are those of Stallo and Ostwald, names good enough in their way, yet not quite in the front rank of physical thinkers. The fourth tendency instanced by him is that represented by Ritschl and his school, and by the Frankfort school. This tendency he describes as 'the search, characteristic of the whole apologetic of the nineteenth century, after a position of faith resting only in itself, and free from all metaphysical and philosophical grounds of proof.' His method of procedure is to unite all these tendencies, or at all events, to set forth a method which shall make use of all these tendencies, unite them in a consistent method, and work out their results into a consistent picture, which he hopes may represent the Weltbild der Zukunft. So he leads his readers through a large and interesting country, and describes to them what he finds there. He is an entertaining guide, well informed; one, too, who is the master of clear and incisive speech, and who can beguile the way, largely by criticism of all those who have formerly passed that way. So he begins with an introduction, and afterwards states the problem, as he has conceived it. He describes what he calls the common foundation of European thinking up to the present time, and states his dissatisfaction with it. But the reader is brought at once to the heart of the problem in the chapter called 'Das Wirkliche.' It is really the problem of the ages, not yet solved. What is the real? That is a question asked by every philosopher, and one that is not easily answered. But our author begins with a description of the dissolution (selbstauflosung) of the Subject-object-scheme, and proceeds to set forth the law, according to which this scheme must go astray. The author has not yet brought the reader face to face with the real, he has only shown that up to this time no one has really been brought face to face with it. But in the next section, called 'Die Weltformel,' he tells the reader what the real is. The real is the relational, if we may coin a word to express what is meant by the phrase, Das vertaltnischaracter alles Wirklichen. Reality consists of relations, and these relations are three, and it is through the compilation of these relations that reality is constituted. They are the relation of proportion, the relation of ground, and the relation of exchange. He works out these relationships, in themselves, and in their interrelations with some elaboration. It would take more space than can be given to make his meaning plain. The discussion is, however, full of interest, and will repay study. Having settled that reality consists of relations, and of these three relations, he proceeds to apply these to the elucidation of the notions of time and space. These have formed the crux of human thought ever since men began to think. The author applies his theory of relation to them, and finds a solution to satisfy himself, but we fear a solution that will hardly satisfy any other thinker. The next section has the strange title, 'Das Du,' which, being interpreted, means The Thou. More explicitly it is called the I-and-Thou relationship, or the relation between a member of a realized relationship and another member of a relation that is yet in the province of possibility. This is followed by a discussion of the relation of the Ego to an organism. It is not possible to enter into the discussion, nor to criticise it within our limits. The phenomena of the will are next described, still from the point of view of relationship. Then we pass on to a discussion of the law of nature (Das Naturgesetz). Here we have a description of the process of the building-up of the conceptions which can express laws of nature. The unity of experience is dwelt on, and here again stress is laid on the relative. We see consciousness swinging between Determinism and Indeterminism, and we are introduced to the province of the Vorstellung. Here, too, are the phenomena of the struggle for existence, and its place within the sphere of the Vorstellung. Finally, under this head we have the consequences of the struggle in the antithesis between Darwinism and teleology. Through it all moves the fundamental principle of relationship, and it appears to be a wonderful solvent of all possible difficulties. There is an interesting chapter on the Energetische Weltbild.' It is outspoken. It begins with a characterization of "The mythological character of anthropomorphic atomism.' Such is his prescription of the current theories of physics and chemistry. Here the author follows Ostwald, whose writings certainly have added to the sum of human knowledge. There is no doubt that 'the main conceptions of physics and chemistry are in the melting-pot, and the great leaders of thought in these departments are on the search for more adequate conceptions. But the work of criticism of the conceptions of physics and chemistry are better conducted by Dr. Ward in his Gifford Lectures than they are in the present volume. Perhaps the most ambitious chapter in the work is that which is called 'The History of Thought.' In some forty-seven pages the author traces the history of thought from the dawn of reflection to the present time. He discloses for us the roots of formation of all philosophical and religious thinking. He indicates what in his view are the weightiest results of religious development up to the present time. After indicating the significance of speech in the development of thought, he gives us a bird's-eye view of the history of thought from the Vedanta philosophy to Aristotle, and from Aristotle to Kant. It is a bold undertaking, to be done in less that twenty octavo pages. But from the author's point of view it is, perhaps, sufficient. For to him it is the history of a mythology, and the writers of philosophy have, up till now, mistaken the problem in hand, and have had no conception of the key to the knowledge of the Real contained in the doctrine of relations. The last chapter deals with the problem of Religious Certainty. It sets forth the impossibility of grounding the contents of religious conviction on any secular methods of proof. Briefly, the author holds that religious certainty is impossible under the conditions set forth by the theory of knowledge held up to the present time, still less is it possible under the presuppositions of the natural philosophy of the past. He has his own solution of the problem, but religious certainty is possible only if men return to healthiness of thought, and healthy thought is for him identical with the system set forth in this book. The book is highly suggestive. It is characterized by clearness of style, and by wide knowledge. But on the whole, one is not prepared to bring an indictment of errancy and incompetency against all previous thought. On many parts of the book a great deal might be said, but a thorough examination of it would lead us far afield, so we conclude by saying that it is a fresh and stimulating book. JAMES IVERACH. Aberdeen. A Modern Attempt to reduce King Saul to a BY PROFESSOR ED. KÖNIG, D.D., BONN. SOME time ago I called attention in this periodical | canonized. But this statement is simply incorrect, (February 1903, p. 217 ff.) to recent attempts to give a mythological character to the patriarchal history. The same disposition to combine biblical personages with the figures of mythology has been at work seeking to apply this transforming process even to O.T. persons whose history has never hitherto been regarded (even in Goldziher's Der Mythus bei den Hebräern) as anything but a purely human one. Such a person, for instance, is King Saul, regarding whom H. Winckler, in particular, has put forward the assertion that the O.T. accounts of him contain elements which indicate that this king was looked at in conjunction with the moon-god. Winckler has developed his theory in various publications, partly in vol. ii. of his Geschichte Israels (1900), partly in an article 'Die Weltanschauung des alten Orients' (Preuss. Jahrbb., May 1901, p. 224 ff.), partly in vol. i. of his Die Keilinschriften und das A.T. (1903), as well as in his brochure Das Himmelund Weltenbild der alten Babylonier als Grundlage der Mythologie aller Völker (1901). Let us now proceed to examine the strength of the foundations on which this startling assertion is built. 1. The starting-point of this attempt to explain the O.T. history of Saul in the way above noted is found in his very name. The name 'Saul,' we are told by Winckler (Preuss. Jahrbb., p. 268), never recurs, and, like the names of the patriarchs, comes to be used as a personal name only in the era of late Judaism, when the Bible had been already as far as the name 'Saul' is concerned. The name (Heb. S, Sha'ûl) occurs not only as that of an Edomite king (Gn 3637), but also as that of a son of Simeon (4610; witnessed to also by the derivative form Sha'úli, Nu 2613), while a third Sha'ûl is mentioned in 1 Ch 6o. Moreover, even with regard to the names of the patriarchs, it is only seemingly correct to say that they do not recur in the Bible as personal names. For Abram is the contracted form of Abiram, just as Abner arose by contraction from Abiner, and Absalom from Abishalom. About the latter two instances there can be no doubt. For Saul's well-known commander-in-chief, the first time he is mentioned, is called by the full form of his name, Abiner (1 S 1450), but after he has been thus introduced with the proper form we encounter immediately (v.51), and so uniformly, the contracted form Abner. In like manner the less known father of Queen Maacah is called Abishalom (1 K 152), but the son of David, whose name was constantly on the lips of the people, is always Absalom (2 S 38, etc.). So, too, Abiram is found in the case of persons who play only a subordinate part in history (Nu 161. 12, etc., 269; Dt 116; 1 K 1634), but the great ancestor of the Hebrews is regularly called by the shorter form of the name, Abram, Gn 1126, etc.). Thus the assertion that the name of the first patriarch has only a single bearer in the O.T. is only relatively valid. |