cher's theology and of Christianity itself, is not entirely new. It was inculcated by the German Mystics of the Middle Ages.^ lie- gel says that what the Bible teaches of Christ is not true of an individual, but only of mankind as a whole ; and Hegel's Christo- logical ideas, Dr. John Nevin of Mercersburg, says, " are very significant and full of instruction." ^ The objection that these prin- ciples are pantheistical, he pronounces " a mere sound without any force whatever," and adds that we need a Christian pantheism to oppose the autichristian pantheism of the day. Schleiermacher says that a pantheism which holds to the formula " One and All " ("the all-one-doctrine") is perfectly consistent with religion, and differs little in its effects from Monotheism ! Similar avowals might be adduced witliout number. Theologians of this class deny that God and man are essentially different. They repeat, almost witli every breath, that God and man are one, and they make this the fundamental idea of Christianity, and especially of Christology.
Pantheistical Christology.
As Christian theology purports to be an exhibition of the theol- ogy of the Bible, every theory which involves the denial of a per- sonal God, propei'ly lies beyond its sphere. In modern systems, however, there is such a blending of pantheistic principles with theistic doctrines, that the two cannot be kept entii'ely separate. Pantheistical and theistical theologians, of the modern school, unite in asserting " the oneness of God and man." They under- stand that doctrine, howevei', in different senses. With the former it is understood to mean identity, so that man is only the highest existence-form of God ; with the others, it often means nothing more than that " natura humana capax est naturce divince." The human is capable of receiving the attributes of the divine. Man may become God.
It follows, in the first place, from the doctrine, that God is the only real Being of which the world is the ever changing plienome- non, that " die Menschwerdung Gottes ist eine Menschwerdung von Ewigkeit." The incarnation of God is from eternity. And, in the second place, that this process is continuous, complete in no one instance, but only in the whole. Every man is a form of the life of God, but the infinite is never fully realized or revealed in any one manifestation. Some of these philosophers were willing to
1 Dr. Ullman, E«say in the Sludien und Kritikenfor 1846.
2 Mercersburg Rerieio, January, 1851, pp. 58, 61, 73. Review of Liebner's Christology by Rev. John W. Nevin, D. D., Professor of Theology in the Seminary of the Gernua Beformed Church.
430 PART m. Ch. m. — THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
say that God was more fully manifested in Christ than in any other individual of our race, but the difference between Him and other men is only one of degree. Others say that the peculiar distinction of Christ was that He had a clearer view and a deeper conviction of the identity of God and man than any other man. It all amounts to the summation of the doctrine as given by Strauss.^ " If," says he, " the idea of the oneness of the divine and human natures, of God and man, be a reality, does it follow that this reality is effected or manifested once for all in a single individual, as never before and never after him ? . . . . An idea is never exhibited in all its fulness in a single exemplar ; and in all others only imperfectly. An idea is always realized in a variety and multiplicity of exem- plars, which complement each other ; its richness being diffused by the constant change of individuals, one succeeding or supplanting
another Mankind, the human race, is the God-man. The
key to a true Christology is that the predicates which the Church applies to Cln'ist, as an individual, belong to an idea, or to a generic M'hole." So Blasche^ says, " We understand by God's becoming man, not the revelation of Himself in one or more of the most per- fect of men, but the manifestation of Himself in the race of men (in der ganzen Menschheit)."
Tlieistical Christology.
We have the authority of Dorner for saying that the modern speculations on Christology ai'e founded on the two principles that there is but one nature in Christ, and that human nature is capax naturae divince^ is capable of being made divine. To this must be added a third, although Dorner himself does not hold it, that the divine is capable of becoming huuian.
The advocates of these principles agree. First, in admitting that thei'e was a true growth of the man Christ Jesus. Wlien an infant He was as feeble, as ignorant, and as unconscious of moral character as other infants. When a child He had no more intellectual or physical strength than other children. There is, however, a differ- ence in their mode of statement as to what Christ was during the maturity of his earthly life. According to some. He had no super- human knowledge or poAver. All He knew was communicated to Him, some say by the Father, others say by the Logos. The miracles which He wrought were not by lis own power, but
i Dot Leben Jesu, § 149, 3d edit. Tubingen, 1839, vol. ii. pp 766, 767; and Dogmatik. vol. ii. p. 214. 9 Quoted by Strauss, Dogmatik, edit. Tiibingen, 1841, vol. ii. p. 214.