Skip to main content

Full text of "[untitled] The American Journal of Theology, (1897-01-01), pages 248-251"

See other formats


Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World 

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in 
the world by JSTOR. 

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other 
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the 
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. 

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this 
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial 

Read more about Early Journal Content at 
journal-content . 

JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people 
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching 
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit 
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please 


of the Incarnation lies "in its revelation of a universal and transcend- 
ently significant aspect of God's nature, — namely, the human aspect." 
To say that God is love is to say that God has been or will be incarnate. 
It is by this conception alone that we pass from the God who is mere 
Power to the God who is also Love. 

The problem now is to reconcile Love with Power in the world as 
we know it. 

Shelley's solution of the problem of Evil (in the Prometheus cycle) 
is shown to be trivial, because it lacks the conception which so power- 
fully possesses Browning. To the latter love includes strenuousness ; 
it means " triumph amid suffering" in the sphere of human experience 
and still more in the divine. " Even the divine love itself must need 
for its fulfillment these struggles, paradoxes, estrangements, pursuits, 
mistakes, failures, dark hours, sins, hopes and horrors of the world of 
human passion in which the divine is incarnate. Perfect love includes 
and means the very experience of suffering, and of powers that oppose 
love's aims." Herein lies the solution of the problem of Evil. 

The poet sees in the world as it is enough of "love's beginnings" 
to be sure that with more life more light will come, and we shall learn 
of God's love by seeing in dark Power "the source of that element of 
conflict, of paradox, of suffering and of Ignorance, without which love 
could never possess the fullness of the divine life. 

I have left space only for the comment that Professor Royce's article is character- 
ized throughout by his well-known qualities, — learning, acuteness, and philosophical 

Springfield, Mass. Philip S. Moxom. 

The Raising of the Dead in the Synoptic Gospels. By Edwin 
A. Abbott; The New World, September 1896, pp. 473-493. 

In the Talmud the symbolism of death is repeatedly applied to 
those who are " dead in sin." In the Targum blindness, lameness, 
and the like are interpreted to represent spiritual disease. It was said, 
"In the coming age the saints shall raise the dead as Elias did . . 
. . What 'dead'? Proselytes." The language of Jesus continues 
this Jewish usage : " Let the dead bury their dead ; " "The dead shall 
hear the voice of the Son of God." Hence we naturally infer that 
when he said to the Twelve, " Raise the dead," he meant " Make prose- 
lytes." The process of translating the gospel from eastern metaphor 
and poetry into Greek prose might easily give rise to hypotheses of 


miracle where no miracle was intended. That we find, in parallel 
passages, one gospel saying that Jesus "healed" while another says 
that he " taught," suggests that the " healing " is a misunderstanding 
of a word intended to mean "spiritual healing" or "teaching." 
(Compare Mark 6 : 34 with Matt. 14:14; Mark 10:1 with Matt. 19:2. 
In the Parable of the Sower in quoting Isa. 6:9, 10 Matt, has, " lest . 
. . . I should heal them" Mark, "lest their sins should be forgiven." 
Luke, who alone of the synoptists uses laa-Oai in his own person and 
always literally, omits this part of the quotation.) In the charge to the 
disciples (Matt. 10 -."j, 8), the closing words, "Freely ye have received, 
freely give" clearly indicate that it was not literal disease they were 
sent out to cure. All the sick were to be "healed," but it was the sick 
in heart and spirit. What vestige of evidence is there that in Corinth, 
Antioch, Caesarea, etc., any apostle attempted to make a practice of 
healing the sick in the city? 

Are we then to infer that all the acts of healing attributed to Jesus 
in the gospels are non-historical ? That would be most unreasonable. 
The healing of the paralytic and of the lunatic child, the raising of 
Jairus' daughter, and other similar narratives contain no suspicious 
elements ; they are vivid and generally coherent ; are supported by the 
three synoptists ; their phenomena are consistent with what we recog- 
nize as laws of nature ; they correspond with acts of Paul and others 
described in the Pauline epistles and in other New Testament books. 
One safe general conclusion is that Jesus spoke and acted in the con- 
viction that his main object was to heal the souls of men, and that 
bodily healing was far less frequent than the synoptic gospels would 
lead us to suppose. Whenever the synoptists describe the healing of 
great multitudes at a time the original tradition probably used the 
word in a spiritual sense. 

The second century shows Apollonius alleging that John in 
Ephesus raised a dead man. But Clement of Alexandria tells us that 
John, having entrusted a young convert to an elder, and upon his 
return, questioning the elder about his charge, received the answer, 
"He is dead." "What death ?" " He has died to God." The apostle 
reconverts the man, who becomes a "trophy of resurrection." When 
Irenseus says that men have been raised from the dead " frequently in 
the brotherhood on account of sore need " by " the prayers of the 
saints" it is by no means improbable that he was loosely and errone- 
ously referring to those who in the preceding generation were rescued 
from spiritual death by the prayers of the Gallican saints. 


Applying these principles to the raising of Jairus' daughter we find 
the following reasons for accepting it as authentic : It only professes 
to be the restoration of one who had just died; it contains no signs of 
symbolism ; the graphic details of Mark are natural ; and Matthew's 
and Mark's accounts when compared indicate the confusion of an 
earlier tradition. 

In contrast with this account is that of the widow's son at Nain, 
given only by Luke (7 : 11-17). Contrary to his usual practice, Luke 
mentions a definite place. From the Talmudists and Josephus we con- 
clude that this was a certain Nain in Samaria, so that the "widow" 
was a Samaritan. Furthermore, one meaning of Nain is "sleep," 
which suggests a symbolic reference to the sleep of death. 

Again in 2 Esdras there is a vision of a woman mourning the 
death of her only son. The mother is Sion, the son the city or temple 
of Solomon. Hence after the destruction of Herod's temple, when 
"widowed" Sion (Lam. 1:1) was mourning for her "only son," it was 
natural that a tradition should spring up among Hebrew Christians 
that the Saviour had raised up the "widow's son" in raising up him- 
self, the true Temple. Such a metaphor once accepted as a literal 
story, details would naturally be sought in corresponding acts of Elijah 
and Elisha. In 2 Kings 13:21 we find the words, "came and touched 
the bones .... and he lived and stood up;" in 1 Kings 17 : 22, 23 the 
child "called out" and the prophet "gave him to his mother." These 
details, slightly varied, are combined in the narrative of Luke. 

No good reason appears why Mark and Matthew should omit this 
miracle if it were fact. But Luke places it just before a discourse of 
Christ's which contains the words, " the dead are raised," as if to pre- 
pare for them, and indicates by the rare use of " the Lord," which is 
regular in the gospel of the Hebrews, that he drew this account from 
an Aramaic source. We can thus, on the poem hypothesis, explain 
the origin of this narrative, its evolution, date, position in Luke's gos- 
pel, the motive of the author, and many of his expressions in detail. 
Hence we conclude that it is not history, but metaphor misunder- 

This learned and ingenious article loses most of its weight if one accepts miracles 
and credits Luke with that careful research and respect for eyewitnesses which he claims 
in the preface of his gospel. The author's frank rejection of the miraculous is a con- 
stant make-weight in his scales. The degree of probability in the possible explanations 
which this rejection leads him to suggest will be variously estimated. There is slight 
evidence that Luke chose Nain in order to represent this sign as done in a Samaritan 
village whose name signified sleep. That the "widow" originally symbolized Sion, 


whose " son " was the Temple, literally destroyed but figuratively restored in the risen 
Messiah, and that this poetry, originating after the year seventy, was transformed into 
literal prose before Luke wrote, taxes belief very heavily. It seems easier, on the 
premises of the paper, to suppose that a young man was resuscitated after some hours 
of apparent death or that one " dead in sins " was restored " alive again " to his 
widowed mother. The phrases upon which Dr. Abbott, like Strauss, Keim, and Holtz- 
mann, base a dependence upon the revivifications of Elijah and Elisha are quite com- 
monplace and naturally involved in the situation. The omission from Matthew and 
Mark is the most serious matter; but if the synoptic common tradition is due to 
sharply defined limitation, oral or written, it might omit even such a miracle as this, as 
well as the great parables peculiar to Luke or the mighty works done in Chorazin. 
Most satisfactory and valuable is the first half of this article. 

Garrett Biblical Institute. Charles F. Bradley. 

Die Taufe bei Paulus. Von Ernst Teichmann ; Zeitschrift fur 
Theologie und Kirche, 1896, Heft 4, pp. 357-372. 

The testimony of Paul on Christian baptism is important because he 
is the oldest source for the history of Christianity, and uninfluenced by 
such dogmatic considerations as underlie Matt. 28:19. Paul has few his- 
torical data; his interest is that of the theologian. Hence we must notice, 
first, the place of baptism in his teaching. The theology of Paul has 
throughout an eschatological orientation. So the significance of Christ 
lies chiefly in the fact that he has overcome death. Entrance into his 
approaching kingdom is not by works, but by faith in him. By this 
faith one comes into possession of the Spirit, and he who has the Spirit 
has eternal life. 

In Gal. 3 : 26 Paul speaks of sonship to God as consisting of two 
elements, freedom from law and the reception of the Spirit. These two 
elements are closely related. The Spirit unites the believer with Christ. 
In Gal. 3 : 27 this union is expressed in the figure oi putting Christ on. 
One who does this is in Christ. This conception is parallel to that of 
sonship. In vs. 26 the means of becoming a son is faith in Christ; in 
vs. 27, it is baptism into Christ. Of these two conceptions, baptism is 
secondary, and brings no new element into the thought. The apostle 
might have used faith in vs. 27 as in vs. 26. We have now to ask how 
far the other passages, which deal dogmatically with baptism, confirm 
this result. First, Rom. 6. Baptism into Christ is baptism into his 
death, that is, into fellowship with his death. But Christ rose from 
the dead ; hence the hope that fellowship with his death will become 
fellowship with his resurrection. Baptism in this passage has an ethical