Page images
PDF
EPUB

Matthew and Luke from the Logia, but in an incorrect form, because the words of Mark give a true line of poetry appropriate in this place the words in Matthew and Luke mar the line of poetry to which they are attached." I do not feel competent to appreciate the value of such criticism, of which various examples occur in

the volume.

In the course of the work the author touches upon some important and burning theological questions, e.g., Baptismal Regeneration and the Middle State. The former topic comes up in connection with John iii. 5. Dr Briggs distinguishes two kinds of regeneration-one by water, and one by the Spirit. "Regeneration by water admits to the external organisation of the visible kingdom. Regeneration by the spirit admits to the spiritual kingdom itself." This double use of the term does not seem conducive to clear thinking on the subject. "Regeneration by water" is for my mind merely a combination of words without any corresponding thought. In these days it is desirable to avoid vague phrases in connection with sacramentarian controversies, and to take up a position that is unmistakeable and does not wear the aspect of being on both sides of a vital question. Dr Briggs, I am sure, has no intention of "straddling the fence," but a certain mystic element is traceable in his sacramental references, with which, with all due respect, I cannot personally sympathise.

In summing up the Messianic doctrine of the Gospels as compared with Old Testament prophecy, Dr Briggs finds that of the eleven Messianic ideals in the prophetic writings, only a single one of them, the suffering prophet, was entirely fulfilled by the earthly life of Jesus. Of the remaining ten some were fulfilled only in part, others not at all; the full realisation in both cases being postponed to the exaltation state. "The vast majority of the predictions of the Old Testament prophets and the great mass of their ideals were taken up by Jesus into his predictive prophecy and projected into the future." On this account it is held to be the reverse of surprising that the Jews of our Lord's day were so slow to accept him as the Messiah.

With whatever disputable matter it may be weighted, this volume is a scholarly, painstaking, and instructive study of an interesting and vitally important subject.

Nothing has interested me more in the work than its dedication to one who has been the victim of recent ecclesiastical proceedings in connection with the modern critical movement, Henry Preserved Smith, D.D., "true scholar, faithful friend, and brave companion in holy warfare." A. B. BRUCE.

The Book of Ezekiel.

London:

By the Rev. John Skinner, M.A. The Expositor's Bible.
Hodder & Stoughton, 1895. Cr. 8vo, pp. 499. Price 78. 6d.

STUDENTS of the Bible are under a deep obligation to Professor Skinner for his exposition of Ezekiel. The value and comfort of his guidance will be most fully appreciated by those who have themselves tried to explore the depths of this master of visions. In spite of the difficulties of the subject, a lucid style and clear consecutive thinking make the book eminently readable. In Professor Skinner's hands even the obscure and complicated descriptions of the Chariot (i.) and the Temple (xl.-xlii.) attain something like simplicity and vividness, and yield a reasonable and edifying symbolism. For instance, three conspicuous ruling principles in the design of the Temple, "separation, gradation, and symmetry symbolise three aspects of the one great idea of holiness" (p. 413). One could have wished that the careful description of the ground plan of the Temple had been illustrated by a diagram; it is hollow mockery to bid the English reader "see the plan in Benzinger, Archäologie."

Professor Skinner says in his preface "the book has no pretensions to rank as a contribution to Old Testament scholarship." Nevertheless, this disclaimer will prepare the judicious reader for the discovery that this volume is pre-eminent in the Expositor's Bible for its careful and thorough scholarship. The familiar and wide acquaintance with the best work on the Old Testament, which has led Professor Skinner to form a high ideal of scholarship, enables him to contribute without making pretensions. His constant and unfailing mastery of the subject in all its bearings and relations enables our author to move with a quiet ease, which may possibly tempt his readers to overlook the difficulties that have been grappled with and overcome. We do not forget the obligations to Dr Davidson, which are freely and emphatically acknowledged-one could wish that the treasures embalmed in the Cambridge Bible Ezekiel could be further utilised by Dr Davidson for a commentary on the Hebrew text-but the task set Professor Skinner made peculiar claims upon his resources, and these have been fully met. One striking feature of his exposition is its remarkable fidelity to the standpoint of Ezekiel and his age, and the success with which he avoids the tendency to interpret the Old Testament according to the presuppositions of modern dogmatics. Such fidelity is the more valuable, because according to a remark which Professor Skinner quotes and endorses-"Ezekiel is the

first dogmatic theologian." Naturally, therefore, an exposition of Ezekiel deals largely and formally with Old Testament theology.

Partly following Dr Davidson, our author does much to elucidate the doctrine of prophecy. In this connection we may note with satisfaction that Professor Skinner rejects Klostermann's attempt to explain the prophet's liability to ecstatic visions by the hypothesis that for seven years Ezekiel laboured under serious nervous disorders. This theory seems to have been adopted from apologetic motives, but as Professor Skinner says, In the hands of Klostermann and Orelli the hypothesis assumes a stupendous miracle; but it is obvious that a critic of another school might readily 'wear his rue with a difference,' and treat the whole of Ezekiel's prophetic experiences as hallucinations of a deranged intellect."

[ocr errors]

Professor Skinner lays stress on Ezekiel's "serious and profound sense of pastoral responsibility," and the truth which is its modern counterpart, "that the salvation of men and women is the supreme end which the minister of Christ is to set before him, and that to which all other instruction is subordinated." We would also call special attention to the exposition (pp. 333-341, 361, 362) of xxxvi. 16-38, in which, following Dr Davidson, Professor Skinner shows that, according to Ezekiel, repentance is the consequence, and not the antecedent condition of forgiveness. Repentance is not the result of punishment, but with Ezekiel, as with St Paul (Rom. ii. 4), "the effect of the goodness of God will be to lead them to repentance."

It is scarcely necessary to say that in critical matters Professor Skinner moves along modern lines; he has some very compact and suggestive paragraphs on the relation of the Book of Ezekiel to Pentateuchal criticism, showing how disastrous traditional views on Leviticus would be to the value and authority of Ezekiel. But this volume is itself thoroughly constructive, and the reader cannot fail to be struck with the great positive gain for evangelical truth, which is obtained by a fearless and candid application of the principles of modern scholarship to the interpretation of the Old Testament. We may quote, in conclusion, some sentences worthy of careful pondering in these days when the Social Gospel is so vigorously preached. In reference to Ezekiel's river which flows from the temple to reclaim the Judæan desert and purify the Dead Sea, Professor Skinner writes: "Nowadays we are sometimes reminded that the Dead Sea must be drained before the gospel can have a fair chance of influencing human lives, and there may be much wisdom in the suggestion. But the true spirit of Christianity can neither be confined to the watercourses of religious habit, nor wait for the schemes of the social reformer. . . . Ezekiel believed in the possibility of reclaiming the waste places of his

country for the Kingdom of God. When Christians are united in like faith in the power of Christ and the abiding presence of His Spirit, we may expect to see times of refreshing from the presence of God, and the whole earth filled with the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea."

W. H. BENNETT.

Die Quellen der Apostelgeschichte.

Von Johannes Jüngst. Gotha: Perthes. 8vo, pp. 226. Price, M.4. In recent years the attention of New Testament critics has been somewhat withdrawn from the Synoptic problem and concentrated on the Book of Acts and the Apocalypse. These books afford an inviting field for that kind of analysis and partition among various sources, which has been so vigorously exercised upon the Hexateuch. It is a legitimate exercise of criticism, having for its aim the attainment of more accurate knowledge of the composition of our New Testament books. And even when it fails to reach conclusions which commend themselves as quite incontestable, it sheds so much light upon peculiarities of language and upon the relation of the various parts of the book under consideration, and it so thoroughly awakens attention and demands feasible solution of difficulties which previously have been rather evaded than solved, that every effort in this department of criticism must be welcome. It is also a process

which calls for so much scholarship, patience, acuteness, and judgment that, when seriously undertaken, it should receive recognition. And it may at once be said that Herr Jüngst, although not infallible, possesses the qualities which inspire confidence in a critic, and that no one can follow him through his analysis without receiving an excellent lesson in criticism, and without gaining much valuable insight into the Book of Acts.

Herr Jüngst divides his work into three parts. The first of these occupies thirteen pages, and presents a brief sketch of the search for the sources of Acts up to the present time. The second part forms the body of the volume, and consists of a careful analysis of each section of the book with a view to the discovery of repetitions, illfitted connections, unusual expressions, contradictions, and, in short, any marks which betray that the writer has used more than one source of information. The third part occupies thirty pages, and presents the results of the investigation, describing with some fulness the characteristics of the sources which have been discovered, and concluding with a table, by the help of which it can be seen

at a glance to what hand each verse of the book is due. The whole is written with conciseness and lucidity, and in a serious and dispassionate spirit.

Some of the foremost of recent critics despair of ascertaining with any completeness the sources of the narrative of Acts. Although persuaded that the writer has made use of written sources, they think he has so freely adapted his material to the requirements of his book, that it is now impossible thoroughly to sift source from source, or source from redaction. Weizsäcker, e.g., says (E. Tr. i. p. 14): "If he used a source, it cannot be indicated in his text. The narrative is too much of a piece, and too smooth for that." This position, at anyrate so far as regards the earlier parts of the book, is held by Holtzmann, Pfleiderer, and Beyschlag. On the other hand there have always been, since Schleiermacher's time, critics who not only believed in the possibility of dissecting the narrative into its original component parts, but have actually attempted the dissection. Some of these attempts have, indeed, been merely conjectures or suggestions, not based upon any close examination of the text. Thus Schleiermacher suggested that the book was made up of scraps of local tradition-an idea which, as Jüngst points out, takes no account of the unity of style in various parts of the book, nor of the relation of the speeches to one another. Biographies of Peter, Paul, and Barnabas have been supposed, and a number of other documents. When greater attention began to be paid to the language there was, except in Van Manen and Clemen, a return to simpler views. Feine was satisfied with two sources: Spitta found that two-thirds of the book, including the "We-passages," were from the hand of Luke, and that a Jewish Christian document, containing scarcely any speeches, and admitting much more of popular tradition, appears to have been used, not only in the early chapters, but throughout. Jüngst makes no mention of the theory of Blass -whose recent commentary affords so much help from the linguistic side-although he seems to have published subsequently. Blass suggests that Luke may have derived his information regarding the early history of the Church in Jerusalem from Mark, who lived there, and who was connected both with Peter and with Barnabas. Whether Mark had put in writing what he knew is not so easily determined but the probability is that he had.

The result reached by Jüngst himself is that the Acts of the Apostles have been composed essentially out of two sources, of which the one (A) embraces the "We-passages," and extends through the entire work, but has admitted in the second half considerable interpolations at the hand of the Redactor. In the first twelve chapters the Redactor (R) has used the so-called "ebionite" source made use of in the Gospel (B), but has dislocated its chronological order

« PreviousContinue »