BIBLICAL THEOLOGY.
Origin and History (§ 1). The Old Testament (§ 3). Study of New Testament Limitations (§ 4).
Theology (§ 2). Constructive Work (§ 5).
The True Aim (§ 6).
Biblical theology, or the orderly presentation of the doctrinal contents of Scripture, is a comparatively modern branch of theological science. In general the term expresses not so much the construction of a theology which is Biblical in an especial sense as a method of dealing with the Biblical matter which is midway between exegesis and dogmatics. Its object and limitation can be shown best by tracing its history.
So long as the Church felt or admitted no discord between its tradition and the Biblical tradition, there was no need to compare or contrast the contents of the Bible with the teaching of the Church. On this account the beginnings of a Biblical theology appear in the circles of the theologians of the Reformation, who perceived in Scrip-
, _ . . ture the test by which to try eccla- 1 Origin ■ • i
and siastical tradition. Since to them
History. ^e Bible was the sufficient, self-explaining basis of dogmatics, by this juxtaposition the possibility was given of a separate treatment of the doctrinal contents of the Bible. The first timid effort confined itself to a discussion of the customary quotations (Sebastian Schmidt, Collegium Biblicum in quo dicta Veteris et Novi Testamenti juxta seriem locorum explicantur, 1671). Under the influence of Pietism the close connection of dogmatics and the Bible was relaxed, because in the latter was seen less an infallible source of knowledge than a means of grace (A. F. Busching, Gedanken von der Beschaffenheit und dem Vorzuge der bibl.-dogm. Theologie von der scholastischen, Lemgo, 1758, and similar works). When in the eighteenth century J. S. Semler and his school busied themselves in discovering the differences in date and characteristics of the different books of the Bible, and brought to light the dissonance between crystallized dogma and New Testament teaching (a dissonance greater still in the case of the Old Testament), the desire naturally arose to show the essential agreement of the teaching of the Church and that of the Bible by an unprejudiced study of the latter (G. T. Zacharia, Biblische Theologie oder Unlersuchung des biblischen Grundes der vornehmsten kirchlichen Lehren, 5 vols., Gottingen, 1771-86). The rationalistic school in
Biblical Theologry
THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
opposition to the formulated dogma of the Church, endeavored to read its own views (those of natural religion) into the Bible (C. F. Amnion, Entwicklung einer reinen biblischen Theologie, Erlangen, 1792; G. P. C. Kaiser, Die biblische Theologie oder Judaismus und Christianismus nach einer freimutigen Stellung in die kritisch-vergleichende Universalgeschichte der Religionen und in die universale Religion, 2 vols., Erlangen, 1813). In contradistinction to this there was during the nineteenth century an eager desire to give the purely historical results of examination of the Bible. In this way, the fact of differences of conception in the parts of the Bible was fully brought to light.
Probably under the influence of Schleiermacher (q.v.) especial attention was directed to the New Testament, and the " systems " of the different apostles were separately treated (the Pauline by Meyer, 1801, L. TJsteri, 1824; the Johannine by K. Frommann, 1839). Along with this an effort was made to show the unity of the Gospel in the very variety of individual conceptions (of the many important works, note A. Neander, Geschichte der Pjlanzung der christlichen Kirche, Hamburg,
1832; B. Weiss, Lehrbuch der biblischen Theologie, Berlin, 1868; W. Beyschlag, Neutes-
of N^w7 tamentliche Theologie, Halle, 1891). Testament ^ *^e same time another class of Theology, theologians was eagerly engaged in tracing the differences of the individual conceptions to their very roots. According to Hegel's formula the crystallized dogma was a synthesis of the two sharp opposites of Paulinism and the primitive apostolate, and this development was followed up in all its details from a literary-historical point of view (F. C. Baur; H. E. G. Paulus; F C. A. Schwegler, Nachapostolisches Zeitalter, Tubingen, 1846; O. Pfieiderer, Paulinismus, Leipsic, 1873; C. Holsten, Evangelium des Paulus und Petrus, R,ostock, 1868; A. Hilgenfeld, Urchristenlum, Jena, 1854). In like manner the life of Jesus and its sources were treated, in connection with which work there originated a countless number of monographs on the selfconsciousness of Jesus and the titles he assumed. The result from this point of view was the conviction that New Testament theology has to deal not with a completed whole, but with a mobile and developing Christianity. Hence " Biblical Theology " and " Introduction " together represent simply a part of the apparatus of general church history (cf. A. Hausrath, N eutestamentliche Zeitgeschhhte, Heidelberg, 1868; O. Pfieiderer, Urchristentum, Berlin, 1SS7).
Parallel to this development of New Testament theology was that of Old Testament theology. Students came to discern the narrowness and onesidedness of the Old Testament religion, upon
3 Th wnich Hengstenberg vainly insisted in Old Tes- his obuteration of the limits between
tament" the Old and the New Testament. In acknowledging the principle of slow historical genesis, others sought to understand the development of the Old Testament religion by the principle that no doctrine is completed in the Old Testament, no doctrine in the New Testament is
altogether new (G. F. Oehler, Theologie des Alten Testaments, Tubingen, 1873-74; similarly Schultz and Riehm). J. Wellhausen {Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels, Berlin, 1886) and A. Kuenen produced a revolution in the treatment of the Old Testament. Under the influence of their religioushistorical suppositions and literary-critical conclusions, Old Testament theology served to describe how from the supposed original conditions, from animism and totemism, the prophetic monotheism of the prophets and ultimately the theocratic ceremonialism of postexilic Judaism gradually developed (B. Duhm, Theologie der Propheten, Bonn, 1875; R. Smend, Alttestamentliche Religionsgeschichte, Freiburg, 1893; S. Kayser and Marti). In this way the Old Testament religion was placed on a level with other religions, and the surprisingly rich discoveries concerning the ancient Orient and the rising science of the history of religion grasped hands with this method of treatment. It was a natural consequence to show that the New Testament possesses a rich heritage of religious fancy common to ethnic religions (cf. especially H. Gunkel, Schopfung und Chaos, Gottingen, 1895; Religionsgeschichtliche Abhandlung des Neuen Testaments, 1904). The idea of unity and special individuality of the New Testament thus goes by the board.
In glancing over the development of Biblical theology, it is surprising to see how this branch has worked out its own disintegration. In the beginning the aim was to make the Bible the only and sole source of Christian doctrine in the Reformers' understanding of the phrase, by allowing it to speak for itself without introducing any diluting medium. The investigator sought to penetrate its polymorphous nature, and finally . saw that under his touch the uniting
tations" ^ond ^a(^ disappeared which formerlykept together the disparate parts and made it an undivided object of scientific research. This self-immolation the discipline owes to a one-sided maintenance of the historical and religious-historical method. Biblical theology must indeed be a historical science; but the adjective must not become a noun and the method must not master the subject. For in this study there are fundamental perceptions which can not be obtained by literary criticism and general historical researches. Thus the subject itself — namely, the whole Biblesuggests the question whether the subject-matter is the remains of a religious literature or documents, productions, and descriptions of a history which is fixed by a revelation from God. And the answer to this question is of the greatest import for the investigation. How different must be the verdict of higher criticism, provided the miracles or the declarations of Jesus are regarded as a priori historically possible or impossible; how much the selection of the matter decides whether one shall find only religious-ethical views, or historical facts of the " religion of Jesus," or that " the belief in Christ " belongs to the essence of Christianity.
For this reason there has always existed an opposition to the development described above. The history of salvation with its literary deposit