[Footnote 155: Continence was regarded as the condition laid down by G.o.d for the resurrection and eternal life. The sure hope of this was for many, if not for the majority, the whole sum of religion, in connection with the idea of the requital of good and evil which was now firmly established. See the testimony of the heathen Lucian, in Peregrinus Proteus.]

[Footnote 156: Even where the judicial attributes were separated from G.o.d (Christ) as not suitable, Christ was still comprehended as the critical appearance by which every man is placed in the condition which belongs to him. The Apocalypse of Peter expects that G.o.d himself will come as Judge (see the Messianic expectations of Judaism, in which it was always uncertain whether G.o.d or the Messiah would hold the judgment).]

[Footnote 157: Celsus (Orig. c. Celsum, V. 59) after referring to the many Christian parties mutually provoking and fighting with each other, remarks (V. 64) that though they differ much from each other, and quarrel with each other, you can yet hear from them all the protestation, "The world is crucified to me and I to the world." In the earliest Gentile Christian communities brotherly love for reflective thought falls into the background behind ascetic exercises of virtue, in unquestionable deviation from the sayings of Christ, but in fact it was powerful. See the testimony of Pliny and Lucian, Aristides, Apol. 15, Tertull Apol. 39.]

[Footnote 158: The word "life" comes into consideration in a double sense, viz., as soundness of the soul, and as immortality. Neither, of course, is to be separated from the other. But I have attempted to shew in my essay, "Medicinisches aus der altesten Kirchengesch" (1892), the extent to which the Gospel in the earliest Christendom was preached as medicine and Jesus as a Physician, and how the Christian Message was really comprehended by the Gentiles as a medicinal religion. Even the Stoic philosophy gave itself out as a soul therapeutic, and aesculapius was worshipped as a Saviour-G.o.d; but Christianity alone was a religion of healing.]

[Footnote 159: Heinrici, in his commentary on the epistles to the Corinthians, has dealt very clearly with this matter; see especially (Bd. II. p. 557 ff.) the description of the Christianity of the Corinthians: On what did the community base its Christian character? It believed in one G.o.d who had revealed himself to it through Christ, without denying the reality of the hosts of G.o.ds in the heathen world (1 VIII. 6). It hoped in immortality without being clear as to the nature of the Christian belief in the resurrection (1 XV.) It had no doubt as to the requital of good and evil (1 IV. 5; 2 V. 10; XI. 15: Rom. II. 4), without understanding the value of self-denial, claiming no merit, for the sake of important ends. It was striving to make use of the Gospel as a new doctrine of wisdom about earthly and super-earthly things, which led to the perfect and best established knowledge (1 I. 21: VIII. 1). It boasted of special operations of the Divine Spirit, which in themselves remained obscure and non-transparent, and therefore unfruitful (1 XIV.), while it was prompt to put aside as obscure, the word of the Cross as preached by Paul (2. IV. 1 f). The hope of the near Parousia, however, and the completion of all things, evinced no power to effect a moral transformation of society We herewith obtain the outline of a conviction that was spread over the widest circles of the Roman Empire "Naturam si expellas furca, tamen usque recurret."]

[Footnote 160: Nearly all Gentile Christian groups that we know, are at one in the detachment of Christianity from empiric Judaism; the "Gnostics," however, included the Old Testament in Judaism, while the greater part of Christians did not. That detachment seemed to be demanded by the claims of Christianity to be the one, true, absolute and therefore oldest religion, foreseen from the beginning. The different estimates of the Old Testament in Gnostic circles have their exact parallels in the different estimates of Judaism among the other Christians; cf. for example, in this respect, the conception stated in the Epistle of Barnabas with the views of Marcion, and Justin with Valentinus. The particulars about the detachment of the Gentile Christians from the Synagogue, which was prepared for by the inner development of Judaism itself, and was required by the fundamental fact that the Messiah, crucified and rejected by his own people, was recognised as Saviour by those who were not Jews, cannot be given in the frame-work of a history of dogma; though, see Chaps. III. IV. VI. On the other hand, the turning away from Judaism is also the result of the ma.s.s of things which were held in common with it, even in Gnostic circles.

Christianity made its appearance in the Empire in the Jewish propaganda.

By the preaching of Jesus Christ who brought the gift of eternal life, mediated the full knowledge of G.o.d, and a.s.sembled round him in these last days a community, the imperfect and hybrid creations of the Jewish propaganda in the empire were converted into independent formations.

These formations were far superior to the synagogue in power of attraction, and from the nature of the case would very soon be directed with the utmost vigour against the synagogue.]

CHAPTER III

THE COMMON FAITH AND THE BEGINNINGS OF KNOWLEDGE IN GENTILE CHRISTIANITY AS IT WAS BEING DEVELOPED INTO CATHOLICISM[162]

-- 1. _The Communities and the Church._

The confessors of the Gospels, belonging to organised communities who recognised the Old Testament as the Divine record of revelation, and prized the Evangelic tradition as a public message for all, to which, in its undiluted form, they wished to adhere truly and sincerely, formed the stem of Christendom both as to extent and importance.[163] The communities stood to each other in an outwardly loose, but inwardly firm connection, and every community by the vigour of its faith, the certainty of its hope, the holy character of its life, as well as by unfeigned love, unity and peace, was to be an image of the holy Church of G.o.d which is in heaven, and whose members are scattered over the earth. They were further, by the purity of their walk and an active brotherly disposition, to prove to those without, that is to the world, the excellence and truth of the Christian faith.[164] The hope that the Lord would speedily appear to gather into his Kingdom the believers who were scattered abroad, punishing the evil and rewarding the good, guided these communities in faith and life. In the recently discovered "Teaching of the Apostles" we are confronted very distinctly with ideas and aspirations of communities that are not influenced by Philosophy.

The Church, that is the totality of all believers destined to be received into the kingdom of G.o.d (Didache, 9. 10), is the holy Church, (Hermas) because it is brought together and preserved by the Holy Spirit. It is the one Church, not because it presents this unity outwardly, on earth the members of the Church are rather scattered abroad, but because it will be brought to unity in the kingdom of Christ, because it is ruled by the same spirit and inwardly united in a common relation to a common hope and ideal. The Church, considered in its origin, is the number of those chosen by G.o.d,[165] the true Israel,[166] nay, still more, the final purpose of G.o.d, for the world was created for its sake.[167] There were in connection with these doctrines in the earliest period, various speculations about the Church: it is a heavenly aeon, is older than the world, was created by G.o.d at the beginning of things as a companion of the heavenly Christ;[168] its members form the new nation which is really the oldest nation,[169] it is the [Greek: laos ho tou agapemenou ho philoumenos kai philon auton],[170] the people whom G.o.d has prepared "in the Beloved,"[171]

etc. The creation of G.o.d, the Church, as it is of an antemundane and heavenly nature, will also attain its true existence only in the aeon of the future, the aeon of the kingdom of Christ. The idea of a heavenly origin, and of a heavenly goal of the Church, was therefore an essential one, various and fluctuating as these speculations were. Accordingly, the exhortations, so far as they have in view the Church, are always dominated by the idea of the contrast of the kingdom of Christ with the kingdom of the world. On the other hand, he who communicated knowledge for the present time, prescribed rules of life, endeavoured to remove conflicts, did not appeal to the peculiar character of the Church. The mere fact, however, that from nearly the beginning of Christendom, there were reflections and speculations not only about G.o.d and Christ, but also about the Church, teaches us how profoundly the Christian consciousness was impressed with being a new people, viz., the people of G.o.d.[172] These speculations of the earliest Gentile Christian time about Christ and the Church, as inseparable correlative ideas, are of the greatest importance, for they have absolutely nothing h.e.l.lenic in them, but rather have their origin in the Apostolic tradition. But for that very reason the combination very soon, comparatively speaking, became obsolete or lost its power to influence. Even the Apologists made no use of it, though Clement of Alexandria and other Greeks held it fast, and the Gnostics by their aeon "Church" brought it into discredit.

Augustine was the first to return to it.

The importance attached to morality is shewn in _Didache_ cc. 1-6, with parallels[173]. But this section and the statements so closely related to it in the pseudo phocylidean poem, which is probably of Christian origin, as well as in Sibyl, II. v. 56, 148, which is likewise to be regarded as Christian, and in many other Gnomic paragraphs, shews at the same time, that in the memorable expression and summary statement of higher moral commandments, the Christian propaganda had been preceded by the Judaism of the Diaspora, and had entered into its labours. These statements are throughout dependent on the Old Testament wisdom, and have the closest relationship with the genuine Greek parts of the Alexandrian Canon, as well as with Philonic exhortations. Consequently, these moral rules, the two ways, so aptly compiled and filled with such an elevated spirit, represent the ripest fruit of Jewish as well as of Greek development. The Christian spirit found here a disposition which it could recognise as its own. It was of the utmost importance, however, that this disposition was already expressed in fixed forms suitable for didactic purposes. The young Christianity therewith received a gift of first importance. It was spared a labour in a legion, the moral, which experience shews, can only be performed in generations, viz, the creation of simple fixed impressive rules, the labour of the Catechist.

The sayings of the Sermon on the Mount were not of themselves sufficient here. Those who in the second century attempted to rest in these alone and turned aside from the Judaeo-Greek inheritance, landed in Marcionite or Encrat.i.te doctrines.[174] We can see, especially from the Apologies of Aristides (c. 15), Justin and Tatian (see also Lucian), that the earnest men of the Graeco-Roman world were won by the morality and active love of the Christians.

-- 2. _The Foundations of the Faith._

The foundations of the faith--whose abridged form was, on the one hand, the confession of the one true G.o.d, [Greek: monos alethinos theos],[175]

and of Jesus, the Lord, the Son of G.o.d, the Saviour[176] and also of the Holy Spirit, and on the other hand, the confident hope of Christ's kingdom and the resurrection--were laid on the Old Testament interpreted in a Christian sense together with the Apocalypses,[177] and the progressively enriched traditions about Jesus Christ ([Greek: he parodosis--ho paradotheis logos--ho kanon tes aletheias] or [Greek: tes paradoseos--he pistis--ho kanon tes pisteos--ho dotheisa pistis--to kerygma--ta didagmata tou christou--he didache--ta mathemata], or [Greek: to mathema]).[178] The Old Testament revelations and oracles were regarded as pointing to Christ; the Old Testament itself, the words of G.o.d spoken by the Prophets, as the primitive Gospel of salvation, having in view the new people, which is, however, the oldest, and belonging to it alone.[179] The exposition of the Old Testament, which, as a rule, was of course read in the Alexandrian Canon of the Bible, turned it into a Christian book. A historical view of it, which no born Jew could in some measure fail to take, did not come into fashion, and the freedom that was used in interpreting the Old Testament,--so far as there was a method, it was the Alexandrian Jewish--went the length of even correcting the letter and enriching the contents.[180]

The traditions concerning Christ on which the communities were based, were of a twofold character. First, there were words of the Lord, mostly ethical, but also of eschatological content, which were regarded as rules, though their expression was uncertain, ever changing, and only gradually a.s.suming a fixed form. The [Greek: didagmata tou christou] are often just the moral commandments.[181] Second, the foundation of the faith, that is, the a.s.surance of the blessing of salvation, was formed by a proclamation of the history of Jesus concisely expressed, and composed with reference to prophecy.[182] The confession of G.o.d the Father Almighty, of Christ as the Lord and Son of G.o.d, and of the Holy Spirit,[183] was at a very early period in the communities, united with the short proclamation of the history of Jesus, and at the same time, in certain cases, referred expressly to the revelation of G.o.d (the Spirit) through the prophets.[184] The confession thus conceived had not everywhere obtained a fixed definite expression in the first century (c.

50-150). It would rather seem that, in most of the communities, there was no exact formulation beyond a confession of Father, Son and Spirit, accompanied in a free way by the historical proclamation.[185] It is highly probable, however, that a short confession was strictly formulated in the Roman community before the middle of the second century,[186] expressing belief in the Father, Son and Spirit, embracing also the most important facts in the history of Jesus, and mentioning the Holy Church, as well as the two great blessings of Christianity, the forgiveness of sin, and the resurrection of the dead ([Greek: aphesis hamartion, sarkos anastasis][187]). But, however the proclamation might be handed down, in a form somehow fixed, or in a free form, the disciples of Jesus, the (twelve) Apostles, were regarded as the authorities who mediated and guaranteed it. To them was traced back in the same way everything that was narrated of the history of Jesus, and everything that was inculcated from his sayings.[188] Consequently, it may be said, that beside the Old Testament, the chief court of appeal in the communities was formed by an aggregate of words and deeds of the Lord;--for the history and the suffering of Jesus are his deed: [Greek: ho Iesous hupemeinen pathein, k.t.l.]--fixed in certain fundamental features, though constantly enriched, and traced back to apostolic testimony.[189]

The authority which the Apostles in this way enjoyed, did not, in any great measure, rest on the remembrance of direct services which the twelve had rendered to the Gentile Churches: for, as the want of reliable concrete traditions proves, no such services had been rendered, at least not by the _twelve_. On the contrary, there was a theory operative here regarding the special authority which the twelve enjoyed in the Church at Jerusalem, a theory which was spread by the early missionaries, including Paul, and sprang from the _a priori_ consideration that the tradition about Christ, just because it grew up so quickly,[190] must have been entrusted to eye-witnesses who were commissioned to proclaim the Gospel to the whole world, and who fulfilled that commission. The _a priori_ character of this a.s.sumption is shewn by the fact that--with the exception of reminiscences of an activity of Peter and John among the [Greek: ethne], not sufficiently clear to us[191]--the twelve, as a rule, are regarded as a _college_, to which the mission and the tradition are traced back.[192] That such a theory, based on a dogmatic construction of history, could have at all arisen, proves that either the Gentile Churches never had a living relation to the twelve, or that they had very soon lost it in the rapid disappearance of Jewish Christianity, while they had been referred to the twelve from the beginning. But even in the communities which Paul had founded and for a long time guided, the remembrance of the controversies of the Apostolic age must have been very soon effaced, and the vacuum thus produced filled by a theory which directly traced back the _status quo_ of the Gentile Christian communities to a tradition of the twelve as its foundation. This fact is extremely paradoxical, and is not altogether explained by the a.s.sumptions that the Pauline-Judaistic controversy had not made a great impression on the Gentile Christians, that the way in which Paul, while fully recognising the twelve, had insisted on his own independent importance, had long ceased to be really understood, and that Peter and John had also really been missionaries to the Gentiles. The guarantee that was needed for the "teaching of the Lord" must, finally, be given not by Paul, but only by chosen eye-witnesses. The less that was known about them, the easier it was to claim them. The conviction as to the unanimity of the twelve, and as to their activity in founding the Gentile Churches, appeared in these Churches as early as the urgent need of protection against the serious consequences of unfettered religious enthusiasm and unrestrained religious fancy. This urgency cannot be dated too far back. In correspondence therewith, the principle of tradition in the Church (Christ, the twelve Apostles) in the case of those who were intent on the unity and completeness of Christendom, is also very old. But one pa.s.sed logically from the Apostles to the disciples of the Apostles, "the Elders," without at first claiming for them any other significance than that of reliable hearers (Apostoli et discentes ipsorum). In coming down to them, one here and there betook oneself again to real historical ground, disciples of Paul, of Peter, of John.[193] Yet even here legends with a tendency speedily got mixed with facts, and because, in consequence of this theory of tradition, the Apostle Paul must needs fall into the background, his disciples also were more or less forgotten. The attempt which we have in the Pastoral Epistles remained without effect, as regards those to whom these epistles were addressed.

Timothy and t.i.tus obtained no authority outside these epistles. But so far as the epistles of Paul were collected, diffused, and read, there was created a complex of writings which at first stood beside the "Teaching of the Lord by the twelve Apostles", without being connected with it, and only obtained such connection by the creation of the New Testament, that is, by the interpolation of the Acts of the Apostles, between Gospels and Epistles.[194]

-- 3. _The Main Articles of Christianity and the Conceptions of Salvation. Eschatology._

1. The main articles of Christianity were (1) belief in G.o.d the [Greek: despotes], and in the Son in virtue of proofs from prophecy, and the teaching of the Lord as attested by the Apostles; (2) discipline according to the standard of the words of the Lord; (3) baptism; (4) the common offering of prayer, culminating in the Lord's Supper and the holy meal, (5) the sure hope of the nearness of Christ's glorious kingdom. In these appears the unity of Christendom, that is, of the Church which possesses the Holy Spirit.[195] On the basis of this unity Christian knowledge was free and manifold. It was distinguished as [Greek: sophia, sunesis, episteme, gnosis (ton dikaiomaton)], from the [Greek: logos theou tes pisteos], the [Greek: klesis tes epangelias] and the [Greek: entolai tes didaches] (Barn. 16. 9, similarly Hermas). Perception and knowledge of Divine things was a Charism possessed only by individuals, but like all Charisms it was to be used for the good of the whole. In so far as every actual perception was a perception produced by the Spirit, it was regarded as important and indubitable truth, even though some Christians were unable to understand it. While attention was given to the firm inculcation and observance of the moral precepts of Christ, as well as to the awakening of sure faith in Christ, and while all waverings and differences were excluded in respect of these, there was absolutely no current doctrine of faith in the communities, in the sense of a completed theory, and the theological speculations of even closely related Christian writers of this epoch, exhibit the greatest differences.[196] The productions of fancy, the terrible or consoling pictures of the future pa.s.s for sacred knowledge, just as much as intelligent and sober reflections, and edifying interpretation of Old Testament sayings. Even that which was afterwards separated as Dogmatic and Ethics was then in no way distinguished.[197] The communities gave expression in the cultus, chiefly in the hymns and prayers, to what they possessed in their G.o.d and their Christ; here sacred formulae were fashioned and delivered to the members.[198] The problem of surrendering the world in the hope of a life beyond was regarded as the practical side of the faith, and the unity in temper and disposition resting on faith in the saving revelation of G.o.d in Christ, permitted the highest degree of freedom in knowledge, the results of which were absolutely without control as soon as the preacher or the writer was recognised as a true teacher, that is, inspired by the Spirit of G.o.d.[199] There was also in wide circles a conviction that the Christian faith, after the night of error, included the full knowledge of everything worth knowing, that precisely in its most important articles it is accessible to men of every degree of culture, and that in it, in the now attained truth, is contained one of the most essential blessings of Christianity. When it is said in the Epistle of Barnabas (II. 2. 3); [Greek: tes pisteos hemon eisn boetho phobos kai hupomone, ta de summachounta hemn makrothumia kai enkrateia; touton menonton ta pros kurion hagnos, suneuphrainontai autois sophia, sunesis, episteme, gnosis], knowledge appears in this cla.s.sic formula to be an essential element in Christianity, conditioned by faith and the practical virtues, and dependent on them. Faith takes the lead, knowledge follows it: but of course in concrete cases it could not always be decided what was [Greek: logos tes pisteos], which implicitly contained the highest knowledge, and what the special [Greek: gnosis]; for in the last resort the nature of the two was regarded as identical, both being represented as produced by the Spirit of G.o.d.

2. The conceptions of Christian salvation, or of redemption, were grouped around two ideas, which were themselves but loosely connected with each other, and of which the one influenced more the temper and the imagination, the other the intellectual faculty. On the one hand, salvation, in accordance with the earliest preaching, was regarded as the glorious kingdom which was soon to appear on earth with the visible return of Christ, which will bring the present course of the world to an end, and introduce for a definite series of centuries, before the final judgment, a new order of all things to the joy and blessedness of the saints.[200] In connection with this the hope of the resurrection of the body occupied the foreground[201]. On the other hand, salvation appeared to be given in the truth, that is, in the complete and certain knowledge of G.o.d, as contrasted with the error of heathendom and the night of sin, and this truth included the certainty of the gift of eternal life, and all conceivable spiritual blessings.[202] Of these the community, so far as it is a community of saints, that is, so far as it is ruled by the Spirit of G.o.d, already possesses forgiveness of sins and righteousness.

But, as a rule, neither blessing was understood in a strictly religious sense, that is to say, the effect of their religious sense was narrowed.

The moralistic view, in which eternal life is the wages and reward of a perfect moral life wrought out essentially by one's own power, took the place of first importance at a very early period. On this view, according to which the righteousness of G.o.d is revealed in punishment and reward alike, the forgiveness of sin only meant a single remission of sin in connection with entrance into the Church by baptism,[203] and righteousness became identical with virtue. The idea is indeed still operative, especially in the oldest Gentile-Christian writings known to us, that sinlessness rests upon a new creation (regeneration) which is effected in baptism;[204] but, so far as dissimilar eschatological hopes do not operate, it is everywhere in danger of being supplanted by the other idea, which maintains that there is no other blessing in the Gospel than the perfect truth and eternal life. All else is but a sum of obligations in which the Gospel is presented as a new law. The christianising of the Old Testament supported this conception. There was indeed an opinion that the Gospel, even so far as it is a law, comprehends a gift of salvation which is to be grasped by faith [Greek: nomos aneu zugou anankes,[205] nomos t. eleutherias],[206] Christ himself the law;[207] but this notion, as it is obscure in itself, was also an uncertain one and was gradually lost. Further, by the "law" was frequently meant in the first place, not the law of love, but the commandments of ascetic holiness, or an explanation and a turn were given to the law of love, according to which it is to verify itself above all in asceticism.[208]

The expression of the contents of the Gospel in the concepts [Greek: epangelia (zoe aionios) gnosis (aletheia) nomos (enkrateia)], seemed quite as plain as it was exhaustive, and the importance of faith which was regarded as the basis of hope and knowledge and obedience in a holy life, was at the same time in every respect perceived.[209]

_Supplement_ 1.--The moralistic view of sin, forgiveness of sin, and righteousness, in Clement, Barnabas, Polycarp and Ignatius, gives place to Pauline formulae; but the uncertainty with which these are reproduced, shews that the Pauline idea has not been clearly seen.[210] In Hermas, however, and in the second Epistle of Clement, the consciousness of being under grace, even after baptism, almost completely disappears behind the demand to fulfil the tasks which baptism imposes.[211] The idea that serious sins, in the case of the baptised, no longer should or can be forgiven, except under special circ.u.mstances, appears to have prevailed in wide circles, if not everywhere.[212] It reveals the earnestness of those early Christians and their elevated sense of freedom and power; but it might be united either with the highest moral intensity, or with a lax judgment on the little sins of the day. The latter, in point of fact, threatened to become more and more the presupposition and result of that idea--for there exists here a fatal reciprocal action.

_Supplement_ 2.--The realisation of salvation--as [Greek: basileia tou theou] and as [Greek: aphtharsia]--being expected from the future, the whole present possession of salvation might be comprehended under the t.i.tle of vocation ([Greek: klesis]) see, for example, the second Epistle of Clement. In this sense _gnosis_ itself was regarded as something only preparatory.

_Supplement_ 3.--In some circles the Pauline formula about righteousness and salvation by faith alone, must, it would appear, not infrequently (as already in the Apostolic age itself) have been partly misconstrued, and partly taken advantage of as a cloak for laxity. Those who resisted such a disposition, and therefore also the formula in the post-Apostolic age, shew indeed by their opposition how little they have hit upon or understood the Pauline idea of faith: for they not only issued the watchword "faith and works" (though the Jewish ceremonial law was not thereby meant), but they admitted, and not only hypothetically, that one might have the true faith even though in his case that faith remained dead or united with immorality. See, above all, the Epistle of James and the Shepherd of Hermas; though the first Epistle of John comes also into consideration (III. 7: "He that doeth righteousness is righteous").[213]

_Supplement_ 4.--However similar the eschatological expectations of the Jewish Apocalyptists and the Christians may seem, there is yet in one respect an important difference between them. The uncertainty about the final consummation was first set aside by the Gospel. It should be noted as highly characteristic of the Jewish hopes of the future, even of the most definite, how the beginning of the end, that is, the overthrow of the world-powers and the setting up of the earthly kingdom of G.o.d, was much more certainly expressed than the goal and the final end. Neither the general judgment, nor what we, according to Christian tradition, call heaven and h.e.l.l, should be described as a sure possession of Jewish faith in the primitive Christian period. It is only in the Gospel of Christ, where everything is subordinated to the idea of a higher righteousness and the union of the individual with G.o.d, that the general judgment and the final condition after it are the clear, firmly grasped goal of all meditation. No doctrine has been more surely preserved in the convictions and preaching of believers in Christ than this. Fancy might roam ever so much and, under the direction of the tradition, thrust bright and precious images between the present condition and the final end, the main thing continued to be the great judgment of the world, and the certainty that the saints would go to G.o.d in heaven, the wicked to h.e.l.l. But while the judgment, as a rule, was connected with the Person of Jesus himself (see the Romish Symbol: the words [Greek: krites zonton kai nekron], were very frequently applied to Christ in the earliest writings), the moral condition of the individual, and the believing recognition of the Person of Christ were put in the closest relation. The Gentile Christians held firmly to this. Open the Shepherd, or the second Epistle of Clement, or any other early Christian writing, and you will find that the judgment, heaven and h.e.l.l, are the decisive objects. But that shews that the moral character of Christianity as a religion is seen and adhered to. The fearful idea of h.e.l.l, far from signifying a backward step in the history of the religious spirit, is rather a proof of its having rejected the morally indifferent point of view, and of its having become sovereign in union with the ethical spirit.

-- 4. _The Old Testament as Source of the Knowledge of Faith._[214]

The sayings of the Old Testament, the word of G.o.d, were believed to furnish inexhaustible material for deeper knowledge. The Christian prophets were nurtured on the Old Testament, the teachers gathered from it the revelation of the past, present and future (Barn. 1. 7), and were therefore able as prophets to edify the Churches; from it was further drawn the confirmation of the answers to all emergent questions, as one could always find in the Old Testament what he was in search of. The different writers laid the holy book under contribution in very much the same way; for they were all dominated by the presupposition that this book is a Christian book, and contains the explanations that are necessary for the occasion. There were several teachers, e.g., Barnabas, who at a very early period boasted of finding in it ideas of special profundity and value--these were always an expression of the difficulties that were being felt. The plain words of the Lord as generally known, did not seem sufficient to satisfy the craving for knowledge, or to solve the problems that were emerging;[215] their origin and form also opposed difficulties at first to the attempt to obtain from them new disclosures by re-interpretation. But the Old Testament sayings and histories were in part unintelligible, or in their literal sense offensive; they were at the same time regarded as fundamental words of G.o.d. This furnished the conditions for turning them to account in the way we have stated. The following are the most important points of view under which the Old Testament was used. (1) The Monotheistic cosmology and view of nature were borrowed from it (see, for example, 1 Clem.). (2) It was used to prove that the appearance and entire history of Jesus had been foretold centuries, nay, thousands of years beforehand, and that the founding of a new people gathered out of all nations had been predicted and prepared for from the very beginning.[216] (3) It was used as a means of verifying all principles and inst.i.tutions of the Christian Church,--the spiritual worship of G.o.d without images, the abolition of all ceremonial legal precepts, baptism, etc. (4) The Old Testament was used for purposes of exhortation according to the formula _a minori ad majus_; if G.o.d then punished and rewarded this or that in such a way, how much more may we expect, who now stand in the last days, and have received the [Greek: klesis tes epangelias]. (5) It was proved from the Old Testament that the Jewish nation is in error, and either never had a covenant with G.o.d or has lost it, that it has a false apprehension of G.o.d's revelations, and therefore has, now at least, no longer any claim to their possession. But beyond all this, (6) there were in the Old Testament books, above all, in the Prophets and in the Psalms, a great number of sayings--confessions of trust in G.o.d and of help received from G.o.d, of humility and holy courage, testimonies of a world-overcoming faith and words of comfort, love and communion--which were too exalted for any cavilling, and intelligible to every spiritually awakened mind. Out of this treasure which was handed down to the Greeks and Romans, the Church edified herself, and in the perception of its riches was largely rooted the conviction that the holy book must in every line contain the highest truth.

The point mentioned under (5) needs, however, further explanation. The self-consciousness of the Christian community of being the people of G.o.d, must have been, above all, expressed in its position towards Judaism, whose mere existence--even apart from actual a.s.saults-- threatened that consciousness most seriously. A certain antipathy of the Greeks and Romans towards Judaism co-operated here with a law of self-preservation. On all hands, therefore, Judaism as it then existed was abandoned as a sect judged and rejected by G.o.d, as a society of hypocrites,[217] as a synagogue of Satan,[218] as a people seduced by an evil angel,[219] and the Jews were declared to have no further right to the possession of the Old Testament. Opinions differed, however, as to the earlier history of the nation and its relation to the true G.o.d.

While some denied that there ever had been a covenant of salvation between G.o.d and this nation, and in this respect recognised only an intention of G.o.d,[220] which was never carried out because of the idolatry of the people, others admitted in a hazy way that a relation did exist; but even they referred all the promises of the Old Testament to the Christian people.[221] While the former saw in the observance of the letter of the law, in the case of circ.u.mcision, sabbath, precepts as to food, etc., a proof of the special devilish temptation to which the Jewish people succ.u.mbed,[222] the latter saw in circ.u.mcision a sign[223]

given by G.o.d, and in virtue of certain considerations acknowledged that the literal observance of the law was for the time G.o.d's intention and command, though righteousness never came from such observance. Yet even they saw in the spiritual the alone true sense, which the Jews had denied, and were of opinion that the burden of ceremonies was a paedagogic necessity with reference to a people stiff-necked and p.r.o.ne to idolatry, i.e., a defence of monotheism, and gave an interpretation to the sign of circ.u.mcision which made it no longer a blessing, but rather the mark for the execution of judgment on Israel.[224]

Israel was thus at all times the pseudo-Church. The older people does not in reality precede the younger people, the Christians, even in point of time; for though the Church appeared only in the last days, it was foreseen and created by G.o.d from the beginning. The younger people is therefore really the older, and the new law rather the original law.[225] The Patriarchs, Prophets, and men of G.o.d, however, who were favoured with the communication of G.o.d's words, have nothing inwardly in common with the Jewish people. They are G.o.d's elect who were distinguished by a holy walk, and must be regarded as the forerunners and fathers of the Christian people.[226] To the question how such holy men appeared exclusively, or almost exclusively, among the Jewish people, the doc.u.ments preserved to us yield no answer.

-- 5. _The Knowledge of G.o.d and of the World. Estimate of the World._

The knowledge of faith was, above all, the knowledge of G.o.d as one, supramundane, spiritual,[227] and almighty ([Greek: pantokrator]); G.o.d is creator and governor of the world and therefore the Lord.[228] But as he created the world a beautiful ordered whole (monotheistic view of nature)[229] for the sake of man,[230] he is at the same time the G.o.d of goodness and redemption ([Greek: theos soter]), and the true faith in G.o.d and knowledge of him as the Father,[231] is made perfect only in the knowledge of the ident.i.ty of the G.o.d of creation and the G.o.d of redemption. Redemption, however, was necessary, because at the beginning humanity and the world alike fell under the dominion of evil demons,[232] of the evil one. There was no universally accepted theory as to the origin of this dominion; but the sure and universal conviction was that the present condition and course of the world is not of G.o.d, but is of the devil. Those, however, who believed in G.o.d, the almighty creator, and were expecting the transformation of the earth, as well as the visible dominion of Christ upon it, could not be seduced into accepting a dualism in principle (G.o.d and devil: spirit and matter).

Belief in G.o.d, the creator, and eschatological hopes, preserved the communities from the theoretic dualism that so readily suggested itself, which they slightly touched in many particular opinions, and which threatened to dominate their feelings. The belief that the world is of G.o.d and therefore good, remained in force. A distinction was made between the present const.i.tution of the world, which is destined for destruction, and the future order of the world which will be a glorious "rest.i.tutio in integrum." The theory of the world as an articulated whole which had already been proclaimed by the Stoics, and which was strengthened by Christian monotheism, would not, even if it had been known to the uncultured, have been vigorous enough to cope with the impression of the wickedness of the course of this world, and the vulgarity of all things material. But the firm belief in the omnipotence of G.o.d, and the hope of the world's transformation grounded on the Old Testament, conquered the mood of absolute despair of all things visible and sensuous, and did not allow a theoretic conclusion, in the sense of dualism in principle, to be drawn from the practical obligation to renounce the world, or from the deep distrust with regard to the flesh.

-- 6. _Faith in Jesus Christ._

1. As surely as redemption was traced back to G.o.d himself, so surely was Jesus ([Greek: ho soter hemon]) held to be the mediator of it. Faith in Jesus was therefore, even for Gentile Christians, a compendium of Christianity. Jesus is mostly designated with the same name as G.o.d,[233]

[Greek: ho kurios (hemon)], for we must remember the ancient use of this t.i.tle. All that has taken place or will take place with reference to salvation, is traced back to the "Lord." The carelessness of the early Christian writers about the bearing of the word in particular cases,[234] shews that in a religious relation, so far as there was reflection on the gift of salvation, Jesus could directly take the place of G.o.d. The invisible G.o.d is the author, Jesus the revealer and mediator, of all saving blessings. The final subject is presented in the nearest subject, and there is frequently no occasion for expressly distinguishing them, as the range and contents of the revelation of salvation in Jesus coincide with the range and contents of the will of salvation in G.o.d himself. Yet prayers, as a rule, were addressed to G.o.d: at least, there are but few examples of direct prayers to Jesus belonging to the first century (apart from the prayers in the Act. Joh.

of the so-called Leucius). The usual formula rather reads: [Greek: theoi exomologoumetha dia 'I. Chr.--theoi doxa dio 'I. Chr].[235]

2. As the Gentile Christians did not understand the significance of the idea that Jesus is the Christ (Messiah), the designation "[Greek: christos]" had either to be given up in their communities, or to subside into a mere name.[236] But even where, through the Old Testament, one was reminded of the meaning of the word, and allowed a value to it, he was far from finding in the statement that Jesus is the Lord's anointed, a clear expression of the dignity peculiar to him. That dignity had therefore to be expressed by other means. Nevertheless the eschatological series of ideas connected the Gentile Christians very closely with the early Christian ideas of faith, and therefore also with the earliest ideas about Jesus. In the confession that G.o.d chose[237]

and prepared[238] Jesus, that Jesus is the Angel[239] and the servant of G.o.d,[240] that he will judge the living and the dead,[241] etc., expression is given to ideas about Jesus, in the Gentile Christian communities, which are borrowed from the thought that he is the Christ called of G.o.d and entrusted with an office.[242] Besides, there was a very old designation handed down from the circle of the disciples, and specially intelligible to Gentile Christians, though not frequent and gradually disappearing, viz., "the Master."[243]

3. But the earliest tradition not only spoke of Jesus as [Greek: kurios, soter], and [Greek: didaskalos], but as "[Greek: ho huios tou theou]", and this name was firmly adhered to in the Gentile Christian communities.[244] It followed immediately from this that Jesus belongs to the sphere of G.o.d, and that, as is said in the earliest preaching known to us,[245] one must think of him "[Greek: hos peri theou]." This formula describes in a cla.s.sic manner the indirect "theologia Christi"

which we find unanimously expressed in all witnesses of the earliest epoch.[246] We must think about Christ as we think about G.o.d, because, on the one hand, G.o.d had exalted him, and committed to him as Lord, judgment over the living and the dead, and because, on the other hand, he has brought the knowledge of the truth, called sinful men, delivered them from the dominion of demons, and hath led, or will lead them, out of the night of death and corruption to eternal life. Jesus Christ is "our faith", "our hope", "our life", and in this sense "our G.o.d." The religious a.s.surance that he is this, for we find no wavering on this point, is the root of the "theologia Christi"; but we must also remember that the formula "[Greek: theos]" was inserted beside "[Greek: kurios],"

that the "dominus ac deus," was very common at that time,[247] and that a Saviour [Greek: soter] could only be represented somehow as a Divine being.[248] Yet Christ never was, as "[Greek: theos]," placed on an equality with the Father,[249]--monotheism guarded against that. Whether he was intentionally and deliberately identified with Him the following paragraph will shew.