are genuine that is to say, written by those whose names they bear. These are, first, the four great Epistles of Paul, Romans (except the last two chapters), I. and II. Corinthians and Galatians, written by the great apostle to the Gentiles between A. D. 54 and 59, and the Apocalypse, written by the apostle John, A. D. 68. All the other books are spu rious that is, not written by the persons to whom they are ascribed. They all owe their origin to some definite dogmatic or theological aim, or as the Germans express it, tendenz, whence this theory of New Testament criticism is often called the Tendenz theory.

Almost immediately after the death of Jesus his followers were divided into two increasingly divergent and growingly hostile parties. On the one side stood the Jewish Christians, clinging to the Mosaic Law, and even seeking, many of them, at least, to impose it upon Gentile converts to Christianity. On the other the Gentile Christians. At the head of the first party stood all the original apostles without exception, Peter being the most prominent, and at the head of the other Paul. That is to say, there were, almost from the first, two divergent and hostile parties among Christians,- the Petrine and the Pauline and two very different forms of the gospelPetrinism and Paulinism. This conflict continued beyond the lifetime of all the original apostles, except possibly John. Finally, being pressed by the attacks of heretics, and seeing the value and indeed the necessity of unity, various irenic or conciliatory overtures were made on both sides. All the books of the New Testament, spurious and genuine alike, were written with one or another of these aims they were either Petrine, Pauline, or mediating. Of the Synoptic Gospels, Matthew is the oldest, and the only one written before the destruction of Jerusalem, A. D. 70. It is Petrine in tendency, yet upon the whole contains the most trustworthy account of the life and sayings of Jesus. Luke is decidedly Pauline in tendency, was written after A. D. 70, and is less trustworthy. Mark is later than either, a bare compilation from them, and not entitled to be regarded as an independ

ent source at all. The book of the Acts is an irenic document of later date. Then come the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistles to the Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, Phillippians, and those of Peter and James. The latest books of the New Testament are the so-called Pastoral Epistles of Paul and the Fourth Gospel, all written well into the 2d century, the last not earlier than 170-180 A. D. All these are irenic or mediating, from one side or the other.

I have not stated thus, in briefest outline, the main points of the Tübingen criticism of the New Testament hooks, in order to combat or even to discuss them. That is a task for which I am by no means competent. Moreover, it has already been done, and well done. A part of the results of this school, generally in a much modified form, have been adopted, and now form a part of the productive capital of Christian scholarship. Much more has been effectually refuted, notably the theory respecting the Fourth Gospel, to which our own Dr. Abbot gave the final death-blow a few years since. As a system it has become altogether obsolete in the country where it originated.

It is not at all my intention to oppose the results of this criticism. On the contrary, I propose in this lecture to plant myself precisely upon one of its most characteristic positions - that the genuine New Testament that is to say, the collection of documents actually written by contemporaries of Jesus consists of but five books, the four great Epistles of Paul and the Apocalypse. These are the only really contemporary documents referring to the origin of Christianity that we have. Taking this most extreme position of the destructive criticism, and putting the Apocalypse aside as not to our present purpose, we are to suppose, for this lecture, the whole New Testament, save these Epistles, to be blotted out of existence, and our inquiry is to be, What kind of a portraiture of Christ is to be obtained from these four Epistles? What kind of an idea of him,- of his person, of his life, of his mission, should we get if all our knowledge must be drawn from these four books alone? We will admit the most ex

treme position that any reputable critic ever took regarding the documents of our faith, and inquire What then? What remains to us of the Christ?

It is to be borne in mind that the Epistles of Paul were designed for a practical purpose they were written to particular churches, and to meet particular exigencies in those churches. They were not written for the purpose of telling us of the nineteenth century about Christ. Much of what they do teach us, therefore, we shall expect to be taught not directly, but simply by implication, which fact, however, if the implication be clear and fair, does not in any degree impair the value of the evidence. Still one remark more. whole question of inspiration is to be laid aside, and these four Epistles are to be regarded as carrying simply the authority of Paul as a contemporary and competent human witness. They give us, so far as they go, what Paul thought and believed about his Master.

I. Paul's teaching respecting the person of Christ.

The

1. The Christ of Paul is a preëxistent being. It is presupposed in Gal. iv. 4: When the fulness of the time came, God [ižanéoreiler] sent forth his Son, born of a woman. 'Eğan. sent forth from himself. The word used implies a personal existence of the Son with God before the sending and before the birth. Compare Rom. viii. 3: "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending [réuwas] His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, etc.", where the connection and ring of the passage suggests the same thought, though it is not necessarily implied in the word, as in the other case. Compare also Rom. i. 3, 4: Jesus Christ, born of the seed of David according to the flesh, declared to be the Son of God with power. 2 Cor. v. 16. But in 2 Cor. viii. 9 it is not only implied but taught. "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might become rich." There never was a time in his earthly career when Jesus could have been called rich; no time when he could be said

to have become poor save when he left a previous glorious estate to enter for a time upon earthly existence. Note also the terms in which Paul states it. "For ye know." That is to say, he states it not as a matter of his own opinion simply, but as one of commonly known and accepted belief. The preëxistence of Jesus was therefore a part of the commonly accepted tradition of the Christian world before 59 A. D., or less than thirty years after the crucifixion.

2. Christ a Jew by birth and of Davidic descent. Gal. iv. 4 born under the law. Rom. ix. 5: Of whom (the Jews) is Christ according to the flesh-note the addition according to the flesh, implying that in another sense he is not a Jew. Rom. i. 3: born of the seed of David according to the flesh.

3. Christ of gentle character. 2 Cor. x. 1: "I, Paul, entreat you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ." Compare Matt. xi. 29, 30.

4. Christ a sinless being. 2 Cor. v. 21: "Him who knew no sin God made to be sin in our behalf."

5. Christ a being of superhuman dignity. This is of course implied in his preëxistence, but might be so without regard to that. Paul expressly distinguishes him from men. Gal. i. 1: "Paul, an apostle, not from men, neither through a man, but through Jesus Christ." i. 12: "For neither did 1 receive it [the gospel which I preach] from a man, nor was I taught it, but through revelation of Jesus Christ." He says things of him which are true neither actually nor potentially of the human race as a whole, or of any member of it. For example, his application to him of the term Son of God in an entirely unique and exclusive sense, quite distinct from that in which all men are naturally children of God, or that in which all are called to become so spiritually, and through Christ are destined to become so. As applied to Jesus it indicates a natural, essential relation to God, a superhuman dignity possessed by no other being in the universe. See Rom. i. 4, viii. 32; Gal. iv. 4; 2 Cor. i. 19. Other expressions whereby Paul ascribes to Christ's person a superhuman

nature and dignity are such as these: He is the head of every man (1. Cor. xi. 3); the image of God (2 Cor. iv. 4). 1 Cor. viii. 6: "To us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him." What man could be thus associated with the Infinite God in the creation and salvation of the world, as Christ is here? 1 Cor. iii. 11: "Other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." Christ, the foundation upon which not only may, but must, be built the superstructure of the spiritual life and character of all men. These are not human attributes and dignities. They are superhuhuman.

6. Jesus Christ is as distinctly represented as a being subordinate to and dependent upon God. 1 Cor. iii. 23: Christis God's. xi. 3: The head of Christ is God. Also the numerous passages in which God is said to have raised him from the dead. For example, Rom. viii. 11, x. 9; 1 Cor. vi. 14; 2 Cor. iv. 14; xiii. 4. Paul never represents the resurrection as an event accomplished by Christ's own power.

II. Paul's testimony to certain historical events in the earthly life of Christ.

1. His death by crucifixion, burial and resurrection on the third day. All these points, save the mode of death, are testified to very explicitly in one passage, 1 Cor. xv. 3-8: "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; that he was buried, that he hath been raised on the third day, according to the Scriptures; that he appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve; then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep; then he appeared to James; then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one born out of due time, he appeared to me also." The method of death, by crucifixion, is frequently alluded to. For example, 2 Cor. xiii. 4; Gal. iii. 1. The most important point here is, of course, the resurrection.