« AnteriorContinuar »
merely personated the character of assailants and accusers), endeavored to convict the Christians of error, and defend the public religion against them. Those, who might have done this, we answer, appear to have neglected it, because they supposed, that there was but little to be feared from the Christians. Foreign religious rites had been often introduced, and the Jewish ceremonies had already been a long time practised without any danger to the public religion. The Christians, few in number, suspected by the magistrates, odious to the multitude, and not protected indeed by public law from the fear of punishment, seemed not to be the persons, who were to overturn those institutions, which had been received from their fathers, which were guarded by the authority of the State, which had become sacred through the veneration of ages. No one could at that time have easily predicted, that domestic usages were soon to give place to foreign ; ancient, to modern ; Greek and Roman, to those, which had sprung from Judea, and that the opinions of mankind, the laws of the empire, and the religion of the whole Roman world, were about to be changed by the efforts of the Christians. The christian church, in all its early progress, was weak; and even in the age of the Antonines was so destitute of the influence, arising either from numbers or the support of literary men, that it could have presented no very threatening aspect towards the rites of paganism, with whatever earnestness it might have sought their overthrow. There seemed to be no occasion for the pen in opposing those, who were falling by the sword. There were a few indeed of such sagacity, that, like Celsus, they saw, that the elements of a mighty revolution were concealed in the principles of the Christians; but for the most part they were deceived by the external appearance of things, and supposed that their few and feeble churches would soon be exterminated. It was a mistake, into which men are liable to fall, who estimate by number and weight the power of what depends upon human thought and volition.
Still further; those, who were unwilling that the public rites should be disturbed and abolished, are not to be considered as having been so attached to them, that they would not suffer any thing to be said in disparagement of them. Neither against Oenomaus, who in the time of Hadrian assailed the art of divination,* nor against Lucian, who in the age of the Antonines
• His book, of which fragınents by no means inconsiderable have been preserved by Eusebius in his Praeparatio Evangelica, L. V. cap.
ridiculed and exposed the gods, did any come forward to defend the religion of their fathers. Besides, it was no easy matter to restore the Grecian theology, neglected as it had long been, and reconcile with philosophy a religion, which was founded upon the senses and in many respects directly at variance with correct reason. It cannot therefore appear singular, that in the age of the Antonines no one, except Celsus, supported the cause of the public religion by attacking the opinions of the Christians. For although the Platonists were every where numerous, yet it was not until the third century that the NeoPlatonic philosophy, which furnished the defenders of the national faith with the most convenient weapons, began at length to prevail.
The examination, into which we have thus gone, furnishes a satisfactory answer, we think, to the question, which we proposed to consider. It has been our design to treat it in such a way, that it might be seen, that it is no discredit to Christianity, that it so rarely attracted the attention of Greek and Roman writers. Unless we are deceived, we have not failed to accomplish our purpose. For we think, that it is abundantly evident from what has been said, that the authors, of whom we have spoken, had either absolutely no reasons for mentioning the Christians, or such as would lead them to do it but very seldom.
But the fewer the facts, which we learn from these authors, in reference to the christian cause, the more highly should we prize the writings of the apostles, apostolic fathers, and apologists, of which, fortunately we have such ample remains. By the perusal and study of these records of early Christianity, we may fully acquaint ourselves with the progress and arguments of the primitive believers. So far from its being adverse to the truth, nothing, on the contrary, contributes so much to excite the mind to its contemplation, as familiarity with the history of the ancient church.
18 sqq. L. VI. c. 6 sqq., was entitled, pupa yontov, detection of impostors. Cf. Fabricii Bibl. Graec. Vol. III. p. 522 sq. ed. Harles.
CONNECTION OF THE OLD AND New TESTAMENTS.
Translated from the Gorman of Professor Twesten of Berlin. By B. B. Edwards, Professor
of Hebrew, Theological Seminary, Andover.
Introductory Remarks, by the Translator. (Professor Twesten, now in the chair of theology recently filled by Schleiermacher in the university of Berlin, is one of the most distinguished evangelical theologians of Germany, though his writings are not very numerous. He was born at Glückstadt on the 11th of April, 1789. His earliest education was acquired at the Latin school of his native place; he then pursued the study of philology and theology at the university of Kiel, in Denmark, from which he received, in 1812, the honorary degree of doctor in philosophy. He then went to Berlin, where he came into particular connection with Schleiermacher from whose theological turn of mind, he received an important influence. In the same year he became a teacher of a gymnasium in Berlin, and, in 1813, inspector in a similar institution. In 1814, he left Berlin, and became professor extraordinarius of philosophy and theology at Kiel. In 1819, he became professor ordinarius of theology in the same university. In 1826, the university of Bonn gave him the degree of doctor in theology. In the same year, he received the order of knighthood, and in 1827, he was chosen a member of the philosophical society of Copenhagen. He declined several invitations to professorships from various universities, among which were Bonn and Göttingen. In 1836, on the decease of Schleiermacher, he removed to Berlin. His not very numerous publications are confined to philology, theology, and philosophy. His only publication in the first named branch is a critical commentary on Hesiod's Works and Days, Kiel, 1815. In 1818, he published a book on Symbolik, and in 1819, in conjunction with the pastor Harms of Kiel, a work on the Augsburg Confession, in German and Latin. He showed himself to be a clear and profound thinker by his Logic, printed at Sleswig in 1825. In 1826, he published an account of the Evangelical Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg, Pa. From 1815 to 1819, he
an active contributor to a periodical at Kjel (“ Kieler Blätter). In addition to his literary labors and his services as an academical teacher, he was quite efficient as a member of society at Kiel, particularly in the concerns of the poor, in which he showed an uncommon practical talent.
His principal publication in theology, unquestionably, is his Lectures on Dogmatic, (Vorlesungen über die Dogmatik), published at Hamburg in 1826. Only one volume has yet appeared. The third edition of this volume was published in 1834, in the preface to which we have the promise of an early appearance of the first part of the second volume. The conlents of the first volume are, I. A general Introduction, embracing, the nature of religion, the connection of knowledge with religion, the christian, the biblical and the Lutheran dogmatic, importance of the Lutheran dogmatic for theologians, closer view of its design, reference of the Lutheran creed to the Bible, relation between the Lutheran creed and those of other sects, relation of dogmatic to philosophy, and relation of dogmatic to the office of preaching in the church. II. An Historico-Critical Introduction, including a survey of the progress of Christianity to our times, Catholicism, Protestantism, review of the history of christian dogmatic — first period from Peter Lombard to Melancthon — second from Melancthon to Semler, - third from Semler to our times. Our author then proceeds to discuss the principles and character of Protestantism. The first or critical portion of the work treats of the sources of religious truth, under the subdivisions of authority of the Holy Scriptures, connection of the Old and New Testaments, divinity of the Scriptures — revelation — inspiration, sacred canon, interpretation of the Scriptures, and the right use of reason.
A translation of the second of these subdivisions, we now present to our readers. TRANSLATOR.]
CONNECTION OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.
Under the name of the Holy Scriptures, which we expound as the rule of theology and as the source of our knowledge of it, we include not merely the writings composed by the apostles or their disciples, which refer to the establishment of the christian religion and church — the Scriptures of the New Testament -- but also the religious documents of the Jews — the Vol. XI. No. 29.
writings of the Old Testament or Covenant.* Herein we follow the authority of Christ and the apostles, who refer to the laws, precepts, ordinances, prophecies of the Old Testament, and derive their arguments from thence. They indicate its sentiments as those of God, or of the Holy Spirit ;I they expressly establish its validity, or recommend its use.
Still, there is another aspect in the religious constitution of the Old Testament, which is represented in the New as imperfect, 2 Cor. 3: 6 seq., Heb. 8: 6 seq. ; as the first rudiments, Gal. 4: 3,9; as a mere preparatory or intermediate stage in religious education, which as Christians we have passed over, Gal. 3: 23, seq., and as sometbing now antiquated and dissolved, Heb. 8: 13. 2 Cor. 3: 11. Thus the writings in question cannot come to us in the shape of a rule of faith and practice like the New Testament, and hence we have the problem, otherwise worthy of attention, to determine how we are to regard these writings from the stand-point of christian theology ?
Since it is no other than Christ himself by whom we are delivered, not merely from sin, but from the darkness of our understanding and heart, so must we look especially to him, in order to arrive at the light of true knowledge, and then to those persons who propagated and established what he commanded the apostles and their disciples, whose writings are contained in the New Testament. But the appearance of Christ does not stand isolated. He is the object and aim of a series of divine preparations, which point to the redemption of men. For, as the divine determination in respect to redemption and expiation must be regarded as eternal, so must its accomplishinent have commenced along with the fall of man. But since every thing in the world follows the laws of its being which God would not
* The Vulgate translates the Greek Sia lliun by the word testa. mentum, as though the covenant established by the Deity was intended to be in close connection with the Mosaic religious dispensation, from which the name and the idea were transferred to Chris. tianity when the old covenant ceased. Heb. 9: 15. 12: 24. Matt. 26: 28, not without reference to Jer. 31: 31. Comp. Heb. 8: 8 seq.
+ Luke 10: 26. 16: 29. 20:37, 42. 24: 25–27, 44--47. John 5: 39, 46. Acts 2: 25-31. 28: 23,-also particularly in the epistles.
Matt. 15: 4–6. Acts 3: 18, 21. 4: 25. 1 Cor. 9:8. Heb. 1: 1. 3: 7. 10: 15. 1 Pet. 1: 10-12, etc.
§ Matt. 5: 19. Luke 16: 17. 2 Tim. 3: 14–16. 2 Pet. 1: 19.