« AnteriorContinuar »
flash into the mind by the use of the word cherubs, understanding by that word, the Divinely appointed symbols of the covenant of grace, to which life, intelligence, and piety are ascribed in heavenly visions ? Say, if that ugly, uncouih, and unnatural word “beasts” should not be expunged from our translation without delay, as injurious to the beauty and sense of the passages where it occurs, as obscuring the mind of the Holy Spirit, and as disgraceful to our literature, and our theology ?
New Publications in Germany. From the long list of German publications, we select the following as worthy of special notice :
"Das Dogma vom heiligen Abendmahl und seine Geschichte. Von Dr. Augustus Ebrard, ausserord, Professor d. Theol. zu Zurich." I vol., large. 8vo. pp. 533. Frankfort.
The design of this work is to facilitate the union of the various evangelical confessions in respect to the Eucharist, by setting forth its true doctrine and history, and its connexion with the cardinal truths and facts of Christianity. How far the author has succeeded in harmonizing the views of Luther and Calvin, may be judged from his own sunmation of the result of his argument: "Christ is present in the holy Eucharist ; but he is present not in the bread and wine, but in us : he unites himself with us. But yet this union is so connected with the participation of the bread and wine, that they become not mere signs, but a pledge and seal; not a mere memorial of Jesus, but a condition of union with him."
* Codex Friderico-Augustanus sive Fragmenta Veteris Testamenti e codice græco omnium qui in Europa supersunt fucile antiquissimo. In oriente detexit, in putriam attulit, ad modum codidis edidit Constantinus Tischendorf.", 23 pp. Prolegomena; 43 leaves text; fac-simile in lithograph. Professor Tischendorf gives, in the Leipsig Repertory, some account of this ancient MS, which he procured in the East, and to which he ascribes an earlier date than any previ. ously existing in Europe, supposing it to have been written in the fourth century. Few can enjoy the opportunity of examining the MS. from which the text of the Scriptures is formed. This advantage is in a measure extended to a much larger number by accurate fac-similes, like the one above noticed. This MS. derives an additional value from a considerable portion of it having been collated with a copy of the lost Hexapla of Origen, and the variations noted upon it. Professor Tischendorf's journey to the East was made under patronage of the Saxon Government, by whom this work has been issued as a proof that so rare an acquisition to theological,
philological, and palæological science is duly prized in Saxony.
** Commentar zur Genesis ron Rabbi David Kimchi. Nuch einen Munuscripte in der Bibliothèque royale zu Paris.” Leipsig, pp. 95. 4. Commentar zum Hohenliede Ton Obulja Sforno." Königsberg, pp. 24. The above two tracts are in Hebrew, and their publication is evidence that the spirit of Biblical research is extending itself in new directions. There can be no doubt that great light may be thrown upon the Scriptures by the Jewish commentators, and we rejoice at every opportunity atforded the student of consulting their works, instead of taking his knowJedge of them second-hand. The name of Kimchi is well known in the department of exegesis and Hebrew philology, as of high repute. The commentary of Sforno on Solomon's Song is reprinted from a rare Venetian edition. He explains the book allegorically, as setting forth the relation subsist. ing between God aud his people.
“ Das Erangelium Maicions und das kanonische Evangelium des Lurus. Eine kritische Untersuchung von Dr. Albert Ritsch.2" Tubingen, Svo. pp. 318. "The design of this work is to controvert the general statement of ecclesiastical historians, that the so-called Gospel of Marcion was a corruption of that of Luke, put forth for the sake of supporting the opinions of the heretic. The author attempts to show, on the other hand, that the Gospel of Marcion constituted the original groundwork from which the present canonical Gospel of Luke has been formed, by interpolations and alterations. There is, we think, little probability that the work, though confessedly written with considerable ability, will effect much towards the setting aside of Luke's Gospel.
“Ulrich von Ilutten, der Ritter. der Gelehrte, der Dichter, der Kämpfer für die deutsche Freiheit. Durgestellt ron Aug Bürck.' Dresden. pp. 356, Svo. Hutten was a remarkable man, and performed great services to his country, to science, and to religion, in a most eventful period. " This work presents a true picture of the man and his times," says the Leipsig Repertory : " The brave old hero of words and deeds stands living before the reader's eyes, and speaks for truth and right, for light and liberty, with his own glowing zeal for his father-land, for his own and future times."
"Allgemeine geographische und statistische Verhältnisse in graphischer Darsteilung von A. Borbstädt. Mit einem Vorwort von C. Riller." This work, which consists of 38 sheets of tables, is designed to present pictorially to the eye some of the principal statistics pertaining to geography. The various numbers are represented by rectangulars, the size of which is proportionate to their value. The principle is not new, but there are several very ingenious applications of it. To represent the proportional density of population, a quadrat represents a square (German) mile; this is divided into as many lesser quadrats as there are inhabitants: Thus, the figure représenting Europe has 1423 of these divisions, Asia 514, Africa 224, America 74, Australia 12, the whole earth 36. In like manner, the products, revenues, expenditures, and in fact all the leading statistics of the world are geographically represented, in this series of statistical maps. Carl Ritter, who is certainly author ity on the subject, pronounces this one of the most valuable auxiliaries to the science of Geography which has been presented to the public.
"A Commentary on Paul's Epistle to Philemon, by Dr. Ang. Koch,” has just been issued, of the character of which we are unable to speak. De Wette has just published new and enlarged editions of his commentaries upon Mark, Luke, and John. A German translation of Maimonides has just been put forth, executed by Elias Soloweiczyk. Fr. W. C. Um breit (one of the editors of the Studien) has put forth an improved edition of his commentary on Isaiah, in one large volume, being one of his series of commentaries on the Old Testament Prophecies. G. Ch. Crusius, the author of the Homeric Lexicon, so ably translated by Prof. H. Smith, has issued a Lexicon of Virgil, with special reference to the Mythological, Geographical, and Proper names, and the explanation of difficult passages.
THIRD SERIES, NO. XI.-WHOLE NUMBER, LXVII.
REVIEW OF PROF. STUART ON THE DATE OF THE
By Rev. Geo. DUFFIELD, D.D., of Detroit, Mich.
The confidence with which some learned critics and biblical scholars have undertaken, in all cases, to decide upon the authorship, and even the original date of certain portions of the sacred Scriptures, from internal evidence alone, received a justly merited rebuke in that remarkable work, the “Amber Witch," written expressly to experiment on the extravagant pretensions of those who claimed to exercise such lofty powers of critical intuition. The success of the shrewd piece of irony has overwhelmed them with merited ridicule ; and hereafter the biblical student need, not be troubled by the professions of their superior skill and discernment, who, from language and style alone, affect to determine all that it is important to know about the author or the date of certain parts of the Scriptures, and paragraphs of the same.
We may now, with renewed proof of the propriety of such a course, adhere to the historical evidence, and require it in all cases to be thoroughly investigated. A priori reasonings may be of use, among the wise and learned, for the illustration and confirmation of positions already founded on fact. But a posteriori deductions are best suited to the common sense of mankind. External and internal evidence, each possesses its own distinctive and peculiar properties. In all investigations of the authenticity and genuineness of any work, we should be careful not to confound, or even to mingle them, at least until they have been separately examined. It will prevent prejudice, and facilitate the ascertainment of truth, THIRD SERIES, VOL. ill.
first to hear the credible witnesses ; afterwards it may be proper to attend to the intrinsic evidence; and when both have been separately examined they can be better united.
Neglect of this common sense principle has led to confusion and error on the part of some who have undertaken to inquire into the inspiration of the Apocalypse. Michaelis, as Woodhouse has remarked, is "an unfair reporter of the external evidence," in favor of its divine authenticity, having allowed his mind to be prejudiced, by an opinion previously formed, with regard to its internal evidence. If an author, from what he considers to have been an exact fulfilment of Apocalyptic prophecies, has been convinced of the divine inspiration of the book, he will be disposed to look with less scrutinizing eye on the external evidence. The internal evidence being accounted sufficient, he will care but little to examine the external. On the other hand, if he has been dissatisfied with all expositions of the Apocalyptic prophecies, and the contradictions and endless variety of sentiment among commentators have obscured or vitiated all internal evidence, and affected him unfavor. ably towards their inspiration, he will regard with more or less prejudice the external evidence of their authenticity,
These remarks are applicable to the evidence alike of the divine inspiration of the Apocalypse, and of its being the genuine production of the Apostle John; for the argument in support of the former derives much force from the latter. The external evidence, in both cases, is to be gathered from the testimony of ancient writers living at a period near to its publication. This testimony may be either direct and explicit, like any ordinary historical statement, or it may be indirect, furnished in the quotations or allusions found in the writings of those Christian authors in the second century, who received it as divinely inspired. Eusebiushas distinctly informed us that the rule he observed in estimating the evidence of the genuineness of scriptural books, was, “their being handed down as catholic writings,” writings generally or universally received by orthodox Christians of preceding ages.
As to the inspiration of the Apocalypse, Professor Stuart—whose views with regard to its date we purpose in this article to examine -has no doubt. Yet, we regret to say, there are indications everywhere throughout his work on the Apocalypse, of his having been seriously influenced by the views of German critics on the nature of the inspiration of this sacred oracle. On this subject we think he has exposed himself, by his want of caution, to just censure; yet he has not departed from the well established foundation on which the faith of the church for ages has rested. He has collated, carefully, the evidence that John the Evangelist and Apostle, and not another John, was the penman whom the Spirit of God employed to write this wonderful book. Yet, he tells us, that should recent leading German critics only be consulted on this point, the reader would scarcely suppose there is any ground for believing that it is a genuine production. Oeder, Semler, Corrodi, and others, not only questioned the fact, but heaped contempt and reproach upon it. Michaelis and Luther, and others, doubted; and, even in the third century, Dionysius of Alexandria, and in the fourth, Eusebius of Cæsarea, were sceptical in relation to John the Apostle being its author. De Wette, Ewald, F. Lücke, Credner, and others, although they vindicate it from reproachful criticisms as a rhetorical production, nevertheless are convinced, from its peculiarities of style and language, that the writer of the gospel and of the first epistle bearing the name of John, was not the author of the Apocalypse. The internal evidence is turned against the external ; and, although Professor Stuart seems to regard it almost a desperate undertaking to defend the claims of the Apocalypse to Apostolic origin, yet, having been the whole round of examination,” he has come back with the persuasion that the argument from the testimony of the ancient Christian fathers is strongly on the side of the common opinion;" and that “the internal evidence is not of sufficient strength to settle the question against the authorship of the Apostle."
1 1. Euseb. Hist., lib. iii., c. 3.
We could wish that, on some other points, Prof. Stuart had exhibited equal logical accuracy in comparing the internal and external evidence. The TIME when the Apocalypse was written, presents an inquiry of vital consequence in any correct view, either of its origin or of its exposition. Prof. S. has magnified the internal evidence, that is, as he understands it, to the subversion of the entire chain of external evidence, or historical testimony, in relation to its commonly assigned date. It is essential to his entire views as to its structure, design, and exposition, to give it an earlier origin. For, inferring from what, according to his exposition of certain passages, he calls its internal evidence, that it was written during the reign of Nero, A. D. 68, he goes to work, most systematically and resolutely, to break up the whole chain of external evidence, or historical testimony, which has dated its origin A. D. 96, during the reign of Domitian. It deserves serious attention, that all this internal evidence is nothing more nor less than his preferred exposition of certain parts of the Apocalypse, sustained, chiefly, by some general remarks, and by results, to which he thinks he has been brought with regard to “the Economy of the Apocalypse considered as a great moral Epopee”“circumstantially” differing from the Iliad, the Æneid, or the Paradise Lost," as it celebrates “the deeds, not of an Achilles, or of an Æneas, with their associates, but of the King of kings and Lord of lords, with his angels and saints." It is not our object to examine the correctness of his exposition;
I Vol. i., pp. 190, 191.
nor of the hermeneutical principles he deems applicable to the Apocalypse. His unprotestant views,-if we may be allowed this expression, -have already been unanswerably exposed, in the last number of the Repository; so that the book still remains a rich magazine, replenished with invincible arguments against the apostate church of Rome, that “ Antichrist” or “ Vicar of Jesus Christ,” who has usurped his prerogatives, and is doomed to irretrievable perdition, “with the spirit of His mouth” and “the brightness of His appearing.” Some things we had prepared on this subject have been rendered unnecessary by the publication of the article above referred to. An examination of the internal evidence of the date of the Apocalypse, would necessarily lead more or less into an exposition at least of some of its parts ; also of its object, economy, and the hermeneutical principles applicable, which would render our article too extended. "We confine our attention to the external evidence. What is the character and force of that historical testimony which assigns the date of the Apocalypse ? Prof. Stuart relies entirely on the internal evidence, rejecting the external as insufficient and unworthy of respect. Our object is, to vindicate the claim of the latter, and to show, that he has not invalidated the evidence which has commonly assigned the date of its origin to the reign of Domitian.
It may be proper, however, to state Prof. Stuart's general views. In what he calls the proem” of “the Epopee,” he comprises the three first chapters of the Apocalypse, designed to administer instruction, consolation, and admonition to the Asiatic churches.? In the first part, comprising chapters IV. to XI. inclusive, he supposes the destruction of Jerusalem and the fall of the Jewish persecuting power to be set forth, forming "THE FIRST CATASTROPHE.” In the second part, comprising chapters XII. to XIX., he thinks is set forth, “Christianity struggling with the tremendous Roman power which governed the world-yea, carrying on a death-struggle for a long time, and with agonies often repeated_until final victory lights upon the standard of the cross' --which forms the SECOND GRAND CATASTROPHE, introducing the church into a long season of peace and prosperity diffusing themselves "over a great portion of the earth." A sketch of this diffusion and prosperity, Chap. 20:4-6, forms a brief proem to the THIRD AND FINAL CATASTROPHE, when “a new Heaven and a new earth appear, the new Jerusalem comes forth in all the splendor of the upper world, a dwelling-place fit for the habitation of God and his saints," and “the Epopee” has terminated its climacteric course."
The reader will perceive that this sketch depends on certain general views, which the author takes, of the nature, character, and design of prophecy, and likewise of the manner, or modus operandi, 1 2 Thessalonians 2:8.
2 Com. i., p. 173. 3 Com. i., pp. 162 and 189.
• Com. i., p. 190.