CHAPTER VI

THE POSITION AT THE BEGINNING OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

118 Otto Pfleiderer, _Das Urchristentum, seine Schriften und Lehren,_ 2nd ed., 1902, vol. i. 696 pp. On Paul, pp. 24-335. (Eng. trans. “Primitive Christianity,” vol. i. pp. 33-471.)

119 On this point Pfleiderer follows suggestions given by Teichmann in his work, _Die paulinischen Vorstellungen von Auferstehung und Gericht_ (“The Pauline Conceptions of Resurrection and Judgment”), 1896, 125 pp. As a matter of fact he cannot any more than his predecessors give any proof of this evolution.

120 Paul Wernle, _Die Anfänge unserer Religion,_ 1st ed., 1901, 410 pp. On Paul, pp. 95-220. By the same author, _Paulus als Heidenmissionar_ (“Paul as a Missionary to the Gentiles”), Lecture, 1899, 36 pp. Heinrich Weinel, _Paulus,_ 1904, 316 pp. The book grew out of essays which the author published in the _Christliche Welt._ By the same author, _Paulus als kirchlicher Organisator._ (Inaugural Lecture.) 1899, 30 pp.

Other works from this popular literature are: Adolf Harnack, _Das Wesen des Christentums,_ 1900, 189 pp. On Paul, pp. 110-118. Georg Hollmann, _Urchristentum in Corinth,_ 1903, 32 pp. Paul Feine, _Paulus als Theologe,_ 1906, 80 pp. Carl Munzinger, _Paulus in Corinth. Neue Wege zum Verständnis des Urchristentums_ (“Paul in Corinth. New Ways of arriving at an Understanding of Early Christianity.”) 1908, 208 pp. The author pictures the work of the Apostle in the Greek city in the light of analogies offered by modern missionary practice. Whether the new way really leads to a better understanding of primitive Christianity remains open to question.

As a special investigation of a point of detail at this date we may mention Karl Dick’s work, _Der schriftstellerische Plural bei Paulus_ (“The Author’s ‘We’ in Paul’s Writings.”) 1900, 169 pp. There are not many of these studies at this period since the tendency among theologians has been more to popularisation than to scientific research.

121 _Paulus als Heidenmissionar,_ p. 36. Ernst von Dobschütz calls attention to the dangers of this method, which easily becomes unscientific in _Probleme des apostolischen Zeitalters._ (Five Lectures, 1904, 138 pp. See p. 61.) Paul Feine, _Das gesetzesfreie Evangelium des Paulus nach seinem Werdegange dargestellt,_ 1899, 232 pp. _Jesus Christus und Paulus,_ 1902, 309 pp. Arthur Titius, _Der Paulinismus unter dem Gesichtspunkt der Seligkeit_ (2nd Part of the work _Die neutestamentliche Lehre von der Seligkeit und ihre Bedeutung für die Gegenwart_—“The New Testament Doctrine of Final Blessedness and its Significance for the present Time”), 1900, 290 pp. A. Schlatter, in his _NTle. Theologie_ (Pt. ii. The doctrine of the Apostles, 1910, 592 pp. On Paul, 199-407), follows a conservative biblico-theological method like that of B. Weiss.

122 R. Drescher, too “Das Leben Jesu bei Paulus” in _Festgruss an Stade,_ 1900, pp. 101-161, is of opinion that the letters, rightly understood, offer us “an imposing amount of material” on the life of Jesus. The author thinks that wherever possible Paul referred to the teaching of Jesus; and he fought his battle for freedom from the law with such confidence “because he knew that he had Jesus on his side.”

It should be mentioned that J. Wellhausen takes up a similar stand-point. He gives it as his opinion, _Israelitische und jüdische Geschichte_ (6th ed., 1907, 386 pp.), that Paul “was really the man who best understood the Master and carried on His work.”

123 _L’Apôtre Paul et Jésus-Christ,_ 1904, 393 pp.

124 Adolf Harnack, _Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte,_ 4th ed., 1909, vol. i., 826 pp. See p. 107. To the same effect, Adolf Jülicher, _Paulus und Jesus,_ 1907, 72 pp. See p. 34.

125 Hermann Jakoby. _Neutestamentliche Ethik,_ 1899, 480 pp. On Paul, pp. 243-406. Alfred Juncker, _Die Ethik des Apostels Paulus,_ part i., 1904, 288 pp.

Among other monographs we have to notice Emil Sokolowski’s _Die Begriffe Geist und Leben bei Paulus in ihrer Beziehung zu einander,_ 1903, 284 pp. The author ascribes little importance to Greek influence in comparison with Jewish, and tries to explain what is peculiar and vital in the Apostle’s views as due to his individual experience, especially the vision on the Damascus road.

Hans Windisch, _Die Entsündigung des Christen nach Paulus,_ 1908, 132 pp. The difficulties raised for Paul by his mysticism are pointed out. It is shown that this, strictly speaking, makes it impossible for him to admit sin in the case of baptized persons. The eschatological character of the sacramental-mystical theory of deliverance from sin is strongly brought out. The author continues the investigation which Paul Wernle, in his work _Der Christ und die Sünde bei Paulus_ (1897, 138 pp.), was the first to undertake. See p. 60 of the present work.

126 Wilhelm Bousset, _Die Religion des Judentums im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter,_ 1903, 512 pp. Simultaneously appeared the same writer’s work, _Die jüdische Apokalyptik, ihre religionsgeschichtliche Herkunft und ihre Bedeutung für das neue Testament_ (“Jewish Apocalyptic, its Origin in the Light of Comparative Religion and its Significance for the New Testament.” A Lecture, 1903.)

Eschatology receives special attention in the fine work of Hugo Gressmann, _Der Ursprung der israelitisch jüdischen Eschatologie_ (“The Origin of the Israelitish and Jewish Eschatology”), 1905, 378 pp. The author takes up an attitude of some reserve in regard to the “religious-historical method,” and seeks to determine in the case of every statement whether it can have arisen in Israel or must be regarded as having been introduced from without.

Paul Volz, _Jüdische Eschatologie von Daniel bis Akiba,_ 1903, 412 pp., endeavours, somewhat unconvincingly, to give a sketch of Jewish conceptions of the future age.

Everling’s investigations are continued, on modern lines, by a study of Martin Dibelius, _Die Geisterwelt im Glauben des Paulus,_ 1909, 249 pp. (“The World of Spirits as conceived in Paul’s Belief”). In addition to the Late Jewish passages the author cites also the Rabbinical and those suggested by the Comparative Study of Religion. The excursuses on the linguistic history of the subject are very instructive (pp. 209-232). On Everling, see pp. 55-57 of the present work.

127 G. F. Heinrici’s work, _Das Urchristentum,_ 1902, 142 pp., still occupies the old stand-point. On Paul, pp. 71-101. For what he has to say against the “physical” in the doctrine of redemption, see pp. 95, 96.

W. Bousset, _Der Apostel Paulus,_ 1906, holds that we shall never completely understand the Apostle’s doctrine. We must make up our minds to the fact . . that in his letters we have before us only fragments of his spiritual life, the full wealth of which we can only vaguely imagine. The individual arguments of Paul look to us like erratic boulders; only toilsomely and partially can we reconstruct the connexion of thought.

128 Rendering _naturhaft._ Dr. Schweitzer has favoured me with the following note on this difficult concept, which from this point becomes prominent in the discussions. After consultation with him, the word has been rendered “physical,” but placed in quotation marks to indicate the special use.—TRANSLATOR. “In the special sense in which it is here used _naturhaft_ is intended to convey that it is not a question of a purely spiritual redemption, but that the whole physical and hyperphysical being of the man is thereby translated into a new condition. Body and soul are redeemed together; and in such a way that not only the elect portion of mankind, but the whole world is completely transformed in a great catastrophic event.”

129 _Neutestamentliche Theologie,_ vol. ii., 1897, pp. 175-187.

130 W. Heitmüller, _Taufe und Abendmahl bei Paulus,_ 1903, 56 pp.

131 How unwilling theology was to draw this inevitable inference is to be seen from the works of Weinel and Heitmüller. They refuse to go beyond the statement that the sacraments stand in sharp opposition to the real “religion” of Paul, and think that they have solved the problem by asserting that the Apostle of the Gentiles did not notice the contradiction. Weinel remarks, “Paul himself is quite unconscious of the problem raised by the collision of the ‘physical’ doctrine of redemption of the Mysteries with the ethical doctrine of Christianity.” Heitmüller says, “These views of baptism and the Lord’s Supper stand in unreconciled and unreconcilable opposition with the central significance of faith for Pauline Christianity, that is to say, with the purely spiritual, personal view of the religious relation which stands in the foreground of Pauline religious life and religious thought.”

132 William Wrede, _Paulus,_ 1904, 113 pp. (In the series entitled “Religionsgeschichtliche Volksbücher.”)

133 In the sense of the Messiah.—TRANSLATOR.

134 How far Wrede was consciously influenced by Kabisch, and how far he has the sense of creating something new, is not quite evident. He reckons the book among the “very important studies on special points,” to which he refers in the bibliography, but he does not quote it.

135 C. von Dobschütz, _Probleme des apostolischen Zeitalters_ (“Problems of the Apostolic Age,” 1904, 138 pp.), does not enter in detail into the question regarding the genesis of the Pauline view of the law, although he treats Jewish Christianity and Gentile Christianity with some fulness.

136 See the present writer’s _Von Reimarus zu Wrede, eine Geschichte der Leben-Jesu-Forschung_ (1906, 418 pp.). On Wrede, pp. 327-347. (English translation, “The Quest of the Historical Jesus.” A. and C. Black, London, 2nd ed., 1911. On Wrede, pp. 328-348.)

137 This thesis of Wrede’s called into being a new literature upon Paul and Jesus which attacked Wrede chiefly on the score of his one-sidedness.

P. Kölbing, _Die geistige Einwirkung der Person Jesu auf Paulus,_ 1906 (“The Spiritual Influence of the Person of Jesus on Paul”). Adolf Jülicher, _Paulus und Jesus,_ 1907, 72 pp. Arnold Meyer, _Wer hat das Christentum begründet, Jesus oder Paulus?_ 1907, 104 pp. (“Who founded Christianity, Jesus or Paul?”) Wilhelm Walther, _Pauli Christentum, Jesu Evangelium,_ 1908, 51 pp. Johannes Weiss, _Paulus und Jesus,_ 1909, 72 pp. _Christus: Die Anfänge des Dogmas,_ 1909, 88 pp. (“Christ: The Beginnings of Dogma”).

138 Martin Brückner, _Die Entstehung der paulinischen Christologie,_ 1903, 237 pp.

The work appeared some months before Wrede’s _Paulus,_ but the author, who had the opportunity of personal intercourse and the interchange of ideas with him, was acquainted with his method and fundamental views. As he is also an independent thinker, his work represents not only a supplement but a real advance.

139 Viz. the Jewish conception of the Messiah.—TRANSLATOR.

140 William Olschewski replies to Wrede and Brückner in his thoughtful but obscure and heavily written dissertation, _Die Wurzeln der paulinischen Christologie_ (1909, 170 pp.) (“The Roots of the Pauline Eschatology”). He thinks that the origin of Christianity which they suggest does not explain the “characteristic and peculiar connexion of Christology with Pneumatology,” and insists that in the Damascus vision is to be found the sufficient reason for “the intimately organic fusion” of the conception of Christ with that of the Spirit which operates through Him. In any case he holds it to be “false in principle and method to try to derive the roots of the Pauline Christology from the Jewish Apocalyptic Christology.”

141 From the literature we may mention A. Schettler, _Die paulinische Formel “Durch Christus”_ (“The Pauline Formula Through Christ”), 1907, 82 pp. J. Haussleiter, _Paulus,_ 1909, 96 pp. (Lectures, popular.) R. Knopf, Paulus, 1909, 123 pp. Eberhard Vischer, _Der Apostel Paulus und sein Werk,_ 1910, 143 pp. By the same author, _Die Paulusbriefe,_ 1906, 80 pp. A remarkably good, clearly and simply written guide to questions of “Introduction.” Julius Schniewind, _Die Begriffe Wort und Evangelium bei Paulus_ (“The Meaning of the Terms ‘Word’ and ‘Gospel’ in Paul’s Writings”), 1910, 120 pp.

Johannes Müller, _Die Entstehung des persönlichen Christentums der paulinischen Gemeinden,_ 1911, 306 pp. A good analysis of the general contents of Paul’s gospel. The theological system and the mysticism of the Apostle are not explained. The book is the second edition of a study which appeared in 1898 under the title _Das persönliche Christentum der paulinischen Gemeinden nach seiner Entstehung untersucht_ (“An Investigation of the Origin of the Personal Christianity of the Pauline Churches”).

Adolf Deissmann, _Paulus,_ 1911, 202 pp. The book grew out of lectures. The author is opposed to the method of investigation which aims at understanding the “System of Pauline Theology,” and thinks that in following these “doctrinaire interests” it would go further and further astray. For him Paul is primarily “a hero of the religious life” for whom “theology is a secondary matter.” He holds that the Apostle was more a man of prayer and testimony, a confessor and a prophet, than a learned exegete and laborious dogmatist.

His aim is, with the aid of reminiscences of two journeys to the East, to “place the man of Tarsus in the sunlight of his Anatolian home, and in the clear air of the ancient Mediterranean lands,” and he believes that when this is done “what previously tired our eyes, like a set of faded and rubbed pencil sketches, becomes at once plastic and living in its light and shadow.” This hope is by no means realised in his work. It appears here, as was also noticeable in the writer’s earlier _Licht vom Osten_ (“Light from the East”), that he has a high appreciation of local colour and the memorials of ancient civilisation, but when it comes really to explaining the ideas he is not able to draw nearly so much profit from them as he expected. And his contempt for “doctrinaire interests” revenges itself upon his treatment. It is obscure and confused, and does not get at the essence of the thoughts. In regard to Paul’s mysticism Deissmann has applied new catchwords to old psychological considerations, but in nowise contributes to the explanation of it. After Wrede’s _Paulus,_ his book seems a kind of anachronism. It is, besides, not fitting that what professes to be a new view should be presented in the inadequate form of a collection of lectures.

142 Adolf Harnack, _Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte,_ 4th ed., vol. i., 1909, 826 pp. On Paul, pp. 96-107 (3rd ed., 1893).

143 Reinhold Seeberg, _Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte,_ 2nd ed., vol i., 1908, 570 pp. On Paul, 68-78. The first circle of ideas embraces the thoughts regarding flesh and spirit, the power of grace and the strength of sin, Christ and the new creation; the second consists of the formulas which were created in opposition to Jewish Christianity; the third has to do with the mystical body of Christ, in which the natural distinctions between men are abolished. On points of detail there are many discriminating observations. The first edition, of 1895, did not even contain any section on Paul.

The 4th ed. of Loofs’ _Dogmengeschichte_ (1906, vol. i., 576 pp.) does not deal with the Apostle of the Gentiles, any more than the preceding editions.

144 On Kabisch see above, pp. 58-63.

145 A sifting and a survey of results is offered in the closing chapter, “Das religionsgeschichtliche Problem” (448-493) in Bousset’s book, _Die Religion des Judentums im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter,_ 1903 (“The Religion of Judaism in New Testament Times”).

NOTES FOR