A still more destructive attitude (comp. Lange, I, x sq.) was assumed by Strauss, who, \v'hile not denying that Jesus iiad lived, yet recognised in tlie accounts of the gospels simply a mythical reflex of what the young Christian society had invented to connect with the prophetical announcements of the old covenant, 1
though, of course, he added that it had been done un- consciously and thoughtlessly. Thus the (poetico-spec- ulative) truth of the ideal Clirist was to be maintained, but it soon vanished in the clouds like a mist. In a modified form this mythical theory was advocated by Weisse, who, like others before him, endeavored to solve the miraculous in the life of Christ by the introduction of higher biology (magnetism, etc.), and used Strauss's hypotheses in order to dispose of whatever he found impracticable in his own view. The Tubingen theolo- gian, Bruno Bauer {Kritik. der evanrjel. Gesch. vol. iii), went further, and declaring that he could not see in tlie accounts of the apostles a harmless poesy, branded them as do^vnright imposture. A much more moderate ]iosition was taken by one who utterly disbelieved the fulfilment of the prophecies, Salvador the Jew. He ac- knowledged the liistorical personality of Jesus, though the Saviour, in his treatment, came to be nothing but a Jewish reformer (and, of course, a demagogue also).
It must be acknowledged, however, that these criti- cisms provoked a more thorough study of the subject, and that orthodox Christianity is therefore in no small measure indebted to German rationalism for the great interest which has since been manifested in the history of our Lord. The rationalistic works called forth innu- merable critiques and rejoinders (most prominent among which were those of W. Hoffmann, Stuttg. 1838 sq. ; Hengstenberg, in the Eram/el. Kirchenzeiluriff, 1836; Schweizer, in the iStied. u. Krit. 1837, No. iii; Tholuck, Hamburg, 1838 ; Ullmami, Hamb. 1838) ; andfinally re- sulted in the publication of a vast number of produc- tions on the life of Jesus.
We call attention, likewise, to the efforts of the Dutch theologians, among whom are Meijboom (Groniiig. 1861), Van Osterzee, and others. A new treatment of the sub- ject was promised by the late chevalier Bunsen (Preface to his //ippolj/tits, p. xlix) but it never made its appear- ance. Ewakl, however, continued his work on the Jews (Gcscli. d. Volkes Israel), closing in a fifth volume with the life of Christ {Leben Christus). The author evi- dently is a non-believer in our Lord's godhead (compare Liddon, Banipt. Lecture, 1866, p. 505). His method of dealing with the subject has something of the same in- definiteness which cliaracterizcd the work of Schleier- macher (compare Plumptre, Boi/le Lecture, 1866, p. 336). Ewald views Jesus " as the fuliilmeiit of the O. T. — as the final, highest, fullest, clearest revelation of God — as the true Messiah, who satisfies all right longing for (iod and for deliverance from the curse — as the eternal King of the kingdom of God. But with all this, and while he depicts our Lord's person and work, in its love, activ- ity, and majesty, with a beauty that is not often met with, there is but one nature accorded to this perfect Person, and that nature is human." Of a very different character from all these works are the lectures of Prof. C. J. Kiggenbach, of Basle, who presents us the picture of our Lord from a harmonistico-apologetic point of view.
Here deserve mention also the labors of Neander, who, "ill the conviction, which runs through his Church Ilis- tori/, that Christendom rests upon the personality of Christ," was not a little alarmed by the production of Strauss, and " with fear and trembling, feeling that con- troversy was a duty, and j'et also that it marred the de- votion of spirit in wliicli alone the life of his Lord and blaster could be contemi)lated rightly," entered the lists against rationalistic combatants. His excellent work has found a worthy translator in the late liev. Dr. jNI'Clintock. We pass over men like Hare, "who re- protluce more or less the rationalism of Paulus" (perhaps the first conspicuous work of the rationalistic Germans, though it failed to awaken the general interest that Strauss's work did ; comp. Plumptre, Buyle Lect. 1866, p. 329) ; others also, who, like Ebrard and Lange, " avow- edly assume the position of apologists, though their works are at least evidence (as are bishop Ellicott's IIul- senn Lect., and the many elaborate commentaries on the Gospels in our country and abroad) that orthodox tlieo-
JESUS CHRIST
900
JESUS CHRIST
logiaiis do not shrink from the field of inquiry thus opened."