One may dismiss this evidence against the origin- ality of Christ in the words of Wellhaiisen (IJG^), ' Jewish scholars think that all that Jesus said is found in tlie Talmud. Yes, all, and a good deal more. IlX^ov Tjfiurv -n-avrds. The originality of Jesus consists in this, that He had the feeling for Avhat Avas true and eternal amid a chaotic mass of rubbish, and that He enunciated it M'ith the greatest emphasis.' No doubt there are occasional parallels to the words of Christ to be found in the Talmud, but there is a vast amount in the Talmud to which no parallel can be found in the preaching of Christ, for it falls lamentably short of the lofty sijiritual tone whicli chai"acterizes every utterance of the Saviour. Even if it be the case that we can find sometliing corresponding to every clause of the Lord's Prayer in the Jewish Liturgy, it might still be maintained that there was originality in select- ing precisely these petitions and bringing them together in such a brief and simple prayer. But indeed we are not much concerned to defend the originality of the Lord's Prayer. Christ's object was not to teach His disciples some new form of prayer, but to give expression to the deepest long- ings of the human heart ; and it would be strange if these cravings had not already found utterance in some measure in the prayers of His fellow- countrymen. When we turn to the parallels which have been traced between sayings of Christ and quotations from the Jewish Rabbis, it will be found, on examination, that in many cases they are not so striking as they appear at first sight. For instance, the saying of Hillel which has been often quoted as an anticipation of the Golden Rule of Christ really falls far short of it. Hillel merely Avams us against doing to others what we would not that they should do to us. One might conform to that maxim on grounds of selfishness. At best it re- quires only that we do no evil. But Christ's maxim is positive. It insists not merely that we do no evil, but that we do good, and can be carried out only by one who has his heart full of love for his brother. And, further, with regard to the parallels that are drawn between the sayings of Christ and the words of the Rabbis, we must ask what place the quotations occupy in the resjjective writings from which they are taken. Quotations from the Talmud which have a striking resemblance to some words of Christ may prove, when we consider the context in which they occiir, to bear a different meaning from what they assume when put into juxtaposition with similar words of Christ, or may lose a great deal of tlie impressiveness which attaches to them when regarded as isolated utter- ances. Upon the whole, Ave conclude that little weight is to be placed upon the occasional parallels Avhich have been found in the Avords of the Jewish Rabbis to sayings of Christ. The general spirit of the Rabbinical teaching is very difierent from Christ's. When sayings are found Avhich seem to approach to the teaching of Christ, they are rather to be regarded as isolated utterances Avhich rise for the moment above the general level of Rabbinical theology.
There is another branch of late JcAvish literature which, it is alleged, has had a marked influence upon Christ, and from Avhich He is said to have derived many of His leading ideas, viz. the series of Messianic-Apocalyptic Avritings in Avhich the hopes and aspurations of later Judaism found ex- pression.
There are numerous points of contact between the leach- ing of Christ and the literature in question. His eschatology, e.g., is said to be almost entirely drawn from this source. Cer- tainly the expectation of His second coming was a novel idea, as it presupposed a want of success on His first appearance which had not been anticipated by any of the later Apocalyptic writers. But otherwise, for the most part. He simply accepts the general eschatological programme which they had outlined. The sharp contrast in which the present age (o xiav o'Cro;, Lk 168 20*», Mt 1232 ; i xccipoi oZro;, Lk 1830) and the future (o ctlm i /uaxm, Mt 1232 ; i aliiv 0 E/j;(;i5^£K)f, Lk 1830) are set to one another, the in- auguration of the new era by the miraculous intervention of God, who is to bring in the Kingdom of God with power, the belief that the Kingdom thus to be set up is to come down from heaven, whence also is to come the agent to whom is en- trusted its establishment, the series of dire calamities which are to herald the approach of the new era, the great judgment scene and resurrection of the dead with which it is to be ushered in, — all these familiar features of Christ's eschatology are to be found in the writings referred to. In painting tlie blessedness of heaven and the torments of hell, Christ uses the colours which the Apocalyptic writers have prepared, — Abraham's bosom, the great banquet, eating bread and drinking wine in the Kingdom of God, the furnace of fire and the outer darkness. Again, the Messianic hope which Christ cherished was largely in- fluenced by the expectation which had found expression in the Apocalyptic literature. There was much, indeed, that was sen- suous in the expectation of those writers which could not apjieal to Christ, and which He put aside. But under their hands the Messianic hope of the OT writers had undergone a transforma- tion which prepared the way for the more spiritual conception of Christianit}'. They had widened its scope so as to make it embrace not only the nation but the world ; they had detached it from earthly political ideas, and raised it to the realm of the supermundane ; they had deepened and developed that tendency to individualism which had begun to show itself in the later \\Titing3 of the OT. In these respects they had prepared the way for Christ, and in much of His teaching He was in sym- pathy with the aims, and did but develop the doctrines, of the Apocalyptic writers of later Judaism.