ページの画像
PDF
ePub

brighter light thrown upon the subject by Christianity. This is enough to prove its inspiration, to the mind of a reflecting person.

It is worth while to remark, however, that the history of Adam is not referred to again in the books of the Old Testament, and only for the sake of a figure, now and then, in the New, though theologians have made so much of it in their books. And although we may derive from it, that sin has taken the character of Paradise from the mere circumstances of human life, yet we are not authorized to derive from it, that the race, or the earth, were absolutely cursed in themselves. Even the social state is still a blessing, and the evils that have been introduced into it, may become steppingstones to the highest virtue; as they proved to him who looked upon them in the spirit of God, and acted on their great principle, i. e. on the design of God in instituting them, loving unto death, and conquering the flaming sword in the very eye of sense, and opening to the believer the tree of life, where all may now go and take up the fruit and eat. Moreover, even without the light of Christianity, it is impossible for man in his sound mind to regret that he is a social being; for all his happiness, nay, all his conceptions of happiness centre in the social principle.

Great general truths, however, though not the doctrine of reprobation, are contained in the Mosaic account of the curse. 1st. The nature of the mind is such, that sin when realized, is painful, and sufficiently so to be its own remedy; and, 2dly, God has so ordered the conditions of social existence, that retribution is felt from the very same circumstances, which are the best possible arrangements for the promotion of the happiness of the innocent and good. Let us not lose sight of these truths in our own institutions and plans for the cultivation of the human soul; and when we wish to anticipate the retributions of Heaven, let us do it by raising vivid conceptions of truth and goodness, through the recollections of innocence, the intuitions of conscience, a wide view of providence, and especially by the knowledge of Jesus Christ.

[ocr errors]

ART. III. Christologie des Alten Testaments, und Commentar über die Messianischen Weissagungen der Propheten. Von E. W. HENGSTENBERG, &c.

Christology of the Old Testament, and Commentary upon the Prophecies relating to the Messiah. By Dr. E. W. HENGSTENBERG, Professor of Theology in the University of Berlin. Vol. I. Berlin. 1829.

HENGSTENBERG has been brought into notice, in this country, by translations of several portions of the work before us, in the Andover "Repository." He is a young man, distinguished in Germany chiefly for his zealous endeavours to resuscitate the dry bones of Lutheran orthodoxy, and his strenuous exertions to secure the aid of the powers that be, in favor of the cause or party to which his labors are devoted. From his writings one would suppose, that he had at least sufficient confidence in the correctness and stability of his opinions. But such a supposition it is not very easy to reconcile with the zeal, with which he endeavours to persuade the government of his country, that the cause of legitimacy and the cause of orthodoxy are inseparably connected.*

For the notice, which has been taken of him in this country, he is, we think, indebted in part to his orthodoxy, and in part to the important and difficult subject, upon which he has undertaken to write. That he has some pretensions to scholarship, we do not pretend to deny. He has, no doubt, made a diligent use of great opportunities for the acquisition of ancient languages. But it is evident that he possesses but a feeble capacity of reasoning concerning the meaning of words, or the relations of things. He is deficient in logical discrimination, judgment, and good sense. To those, who are in the habit of distinguishing words from things, and of weighing arguments, rather than counting them, he will prove a most unsatisfactory writer. Paulus. himself is not a more extravagant theorist, than he is in his way. Had the prevalent bias of his mind enlisted him on the side of the Naturalists, our knowledge of him, if we had any, would probably have been derived from the quotations

* For some notice of the school or sect, to which he belongs, see the Christian Examiner, New Series, Vol. V. p. 348, et seq.

VOL. XVI. — N. S. VOL. XI. NO. III.

41

from his works, of here and there a sentence with three or four notes of admiration at the end.

It will be gathered from what we have said, that it is the importance of the subject upon which he has written, rather than the value of his work, which has led to the present notice of him. His work will answer a valuable purpose, if it conduce to a thorough examination of a subject, which, since the theory of a double sense has been exploded, has caused perplexity and anxiety to many minds. It is entitled "The Christology of the Old Testament," that is, as the title is illustrated by the work, "The application and interpretation of the passages relating to the Messiah, in the Old Testament." He undertakes to show what are the predictions of a Messiah, what nature and character they ascribe to him, and how they have been fulfilled in Jesus. The genuineness and antiquity of various portions of the Hebrew Scriptures are also connected with the discussion.

It is not a little remarkable, that no work, professing to treat of the subject in a scientific manner, and in its whole. extent, is to be found in the English language. What has been written upon it, has been chiefly in the way of controversy with unbelievers; and has had for its object, to repel their attacks upon the Christian revelation, rather than to give a comprehensive and thorough exposition of facts, in all their relations. Most of the English works on the subject belong to the controversy, which, about a century ago, agitated the reading community of England, commencing with Collins's Discourse on the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion. Perhaps it may not be amiss to glance at some of the principal points of this controversy, and to take notice of the theory of Hengstenberg, as it comes in our way.

It was the object of Collins to show, 1st, That the fundamental article of the Christian Religion is, that Jesus is the Messiah predicted in the Old Testament, and that the proof of Christianity was by our Saviour and the writers of the New Testament made to depend upon the fulfillment of prophecies relating to the Messiah; 2dly, That these prophecies were, and could be, applied to Jesus only in a mystical or allegorical sense, and thus did not prove any thing, according to scholastic rules, by which he means the rules of sound logic, or the dictates of reason; 3dly, That the kind of

-

reasoning adopted by the New Testament writers, or the manner in which they apply passages of the Old Testament, as proofs of Christianity, is not only unsatisfactory and groundless, but affords a positive argument against the divine authority of the Christian religion. These are the principal points of the controversy, stated with greater directness than in Collins's work, but evidently maintained by him. Many important questions, however, were incidental to it.

It is not surprising, that such a work, written with ability, and made attractive to some readers by considerable powers of sarcasm and wit, should produce a strong sensation, and call forth a host of writers in defence of the Christian faith. In his second work, "The Scheme of Literal Prophecy Considered," written in reply to several of his antagonists, Collins enumerates no less than thirty-five publications, many of them octavos, occasioned by his "Discourse, &c." Several others were afterwards called forth by his second work, abovementioned. The principal writers in opposition to Collins, were Dr. Edward Chandler, Bishop of Litchfield, &c., in his "Defence of Christianity from the Prophecies of the Old Testament," and his "Vindication of the Defence, &c.", in reply to "The Scheme of Literal Prophecy Considered"; Dr. Samuel Chandler, in his "Vindication of the Christian Religion"; Dr. Bullock, in his Seven Sermons, entitled "The Reasoning of Christ and his Apostles in their Defence of Christianity, Considered "; Dr. Sykes, in his "Essay on the Truth of the Christian Religion," and "The True Grounds of the Expectation of the Messiah"; Dr. Clarke, in his Discourse of the connexion of the prophecies of the Old Testament, and the application of them to Christ; Dr. Thomas Sherlock, in "The Use and Intent of Prophecy in different Ages of the Church"; Mr. Jeffery, in "A Review of the Controversy between the Author of the Discourse and his Adversaries," and "Christianity the Perfection of all Religions, &c."; Whiston in his "Literal Accomplishment of Scripture Prophecies," and several other publications.

In this country, the controversy was revived about twenty years ago, by the publication of George B. English, "The Grounds of Christianity examined, by comparing the New Testament with the Old"; which called forth the work of

Mr. Everett, "A Defence of Christianity, against the Work of George B. English."

And what was the result of this controversy? Was the united talent of the English theologians sufficient to clear up the difficulties of the subject? That it was not, is evident from the great variety of inconsistent schemes, on which the replies to Collins were founded; from the fact, that the controversy has been repeated in Germany within the last fifty years; from the results of this controversy, and from the unsettled state of opinion upon the subject in this country. Still, the English writers convicted Collins of many errors, and illustrated some important points.

1. It was shown by Dr. Bullock and others, that the fundamental article of the Christian religion is, not that Jesus was the predicted Messiah, but that he was an inspired prophet, a teacher sent from God, speaking the words of God, to whom God gave his spirit without measure, and who proved by miracles, that his doctrines and precepts were worthy of all acceptation.

*

There is, evidently, just ground for such a distinction. For, that Jesus was an inspired prophet, a teacher sent from God, is proved by miracles, in connexion with a doctrine worthy of the divine interposition to reveal. For the proof of this proposition, miracles addressed to the senses of the contemporaries of Jesus, and transmitted to us by contemporaneous history, are the best species of evidence we can imagine. The proof is complete, and would be so, though we knew nothing of such a book as the Old Testament. But in order to prove the proposition, that Jesus sustained a particular character, namely, that of a Messiah described and predicted in the Old Testament, it may be admitted that miracles are not suitable evidence. They are not evidence appropriate to the subject. In order to settle the question, whether the character and life of Jesus fulfilled particular predictions relating to a Messiah in the Hebrew Scriptures, the proper mode of proceeding evidently is, to compare this life and character with such predictions. Here seems to be no place for miracles, but only for common sense in the interpretation of the language of such predictions, and in comparing

* See Bullock's Seven Sermons, p. xix., et seq.

« 前へ次へ »