genesia they should be judges of the twelve tribes of Israel, could not merely denote in a figurative sense their participation of glory in that state. If the author, by the christological idea of the transformation of the world, had got beyond the dualism between the abstract present and the abstract future world, he would likewise have got beyond this difficulty. But this idea appears to him, in its concrete fulness, only as a 'monstrous representation,' p. 521. When it is further said (p. 529), that the views of Jesus respecting 'the abrogation of the Mosaic law' are so different from those of Paul, that what the former regarded as not ceasing till His glorious advent or second coming to renew the earth, the latter believed he might abrogate in consequence of the first advent of the Messiah on the old earth,' we must here especially distinguish between abrogating or taking away (Abschaffung) and raising—a lifting to a higher position (Aufhebung); secondly, between a religious and a national raising (Aufhebung); thirdly, between the centre and the periphery of the coming æon (aiv péλλwv), if we are to take a correct view of the subject. Christ Himself resolved to know nothing of an abrogation (Abschaffung), but only of a raising or elevation (Aufhebung) of it—a realization of the typical law in the life of the spirit. Paul also, in this sense, found the Old Testament again in the New, and he, as little as Christ, abrogated the outward law, whose religious validity he impugned, in its national perpetuity. Lastly, as regards the new æon, Christ represented Himself as its principle and centre, and could not therefore attribute a religious validity to the law within the New Testament circle of His agency, that is, for the unfolding of this æon. The complete raising (Aufhebung) of the ancient legal conditions cannot take place till the future æon has gained its full periphery, which will be at the second coming of Christ. Consequently the passage in Matt. v. 18 may decidedly be understood to mean that the law would continue to exist in all its types, even to an iota (though in many modifications of form), till it should attain in the new world a complete living reality; or the law would eternally remain, and indeed, as far as it has not yet become life, will it remain as law, so that it cannot vanish entirely in the legal form till the perfecting of the life. It is clear, therefore, that no religious validity of the law before the second advent of Christ, and no special abrogation of it after that event, was appointed. Rather must every 'jot and tittle' of the law be eternally realized, according to its original ideality. The relation of Jesus to the heathen must be explained by distinguishing between the economy of His earthly ministry and the economy of His Spirit. The difference in His treatment of the Gentile centurion (Matt. viii. 5) and of the Canaanitish woman (Matt. xv. 24) is sufficiently established. That centurion was (according to Luke vii. 3) a friend of the synagogue, and probably a proselyte of the gate. In his case, therefore, the spiritual conditions were present for the communication of miraculous aid. But in the Canaanitish woman these conditions were very questionable. At all events, it was requisite that the organ of theocratic faith should be fully unfolded in her, before Christ vouchsafed her a miraculous word. Besides, we must not overlook that intercession was made by the Jews when they saw the economical reluctance of Jesus. The history of the ministry of Jesus in Samaria will come later under consideration. 4. Strauss cites (vol. ii. p. 291) the well-known passages in which prophecies of the sufferings of the Messiah are found, and then goes on to affirm, that in these passages nothing whatever is said of Christ's sufferings, and closes with the assertion, 'If Jesus in a supernatural manner, by virtue of His higher nature, had found in these passages a pre-intimation of particular traits of His sufferings,—since such a reference is not the true sense of those passages, the spirit in Jesus would not have been the spirit of truth, but a lying spirit.' Exactly in the same way he deals with the predictions of the resurrection, and in p. 323 repeats his unfortunate assertion, 'If a supernatural principle in Jesus, a prophetic spirit, had caused Him to find in these passages a pre-intimation of His resurrection,—since in none of them could such a reference really exist,—the spirit in Him could not be the spirit of truth, but must have been a lying spirit. These assertions need no refutation; we only adduce them as historical notices. Just so, the tendency of the critic to decide the question according to the popular representations which existed probably in the time of Christ, in reference to the sufferings of the Messiah, whether the Messiah announced His own death beforehand or not. If in the lifetime of Jesus it was a Jewish representation that the Messiah must die a violent death, there is every probability that Jesus would receive this representation into His own convictions, and communicate it to His disciples, etc; on the other hand, if that representation had not been current among His countrymen before His death, it would still be possible,' etc. Lastly, we here class the question, whence did Jesus, if He foresaw His own death, know for certain whether Herod would not anticipate the priests' party, or who could assure Him that the hierarchy would not succeed in one of their tumultuary attempts at murder, and that, without being delivered to the Romans, He would lose His life in some other way than by the Roman punishment of crucifixion? We need not rise to the height on which Jesus stands in order to learn how to estimate the true nature of such questions. Who, for example, gave Napoleon the assurance that he would not die of the plague, when he went to Egypt with a presentiment of his future greatness? What assurance had Julius Cæsar in the storm at sea, that he could utter such bold words of confidence, that he would not perish in the waves? There were at that time no means of insuring against the murderous disposition of a Herod and the stoning by Jewish fanatics; and thus it always remains a mystery in what way great men have been assured. 5. As to the question on the relation between the obscurer predictions of the death of Jesus in John and the more explicit ones in the synoptic Gospels, as Hasert has treated it in his work, Ueber der Vorhersagungen Jesu von seinem Tode und seiner Auferstehung (On the predictions by Jesus of Ilis death and resurrection), the previous question is of importance, to what times those single predictions belong. As these chronological data must first be distinctly explained in the sequel, we must return to this question respecting the said predictions. The gradual development of the foreseeing as well as of the predicting is indicated by the relation between Mark viii. 31 and x. 33, 34, or Luke ix. 22 and xviii. 32.1 1 [The literature of this, as indeed of all the topics connected with the life of Christ, is given by Hase in his Leben Jesu. Renan throughout represents Jesus as rather passively moulded by His age than determining His own character and life; and regarding His idea of His work, he says, p. 121: Beaucoup de vague restait sans doute dans sa pensée, et un noble sentiment, bien plus qu'un dessein arrêté, le poussait a l'œuvre sub SECTION IX. THE MIRACLES OF JESUS. We have seen that Christ had decided on a mission in the world which was designed to form a great means of communication (Vermittelung) between the mystery of His glorious spiritual life, and the darkened, sickly, disharmonized world, which was not in a state to bear an unconditional unfolding of His glory. As one special form of this intervention for the purpose of incorporating the power of Christ with the world, we have, last of all, pointed out Miracles. By this reference of miracle to the means of communication, so as to place it under the same point of view as the evangelical parables and the founding of the New Testament kingdom of God, it is distinctly indicated that we apprehend miracles, first of all, on a side which forms a decided opposite to that in which it gives so much trouble to the critics who represent the culture of our age.' The miracles of Jesus appear, indeed, as very great events, extraordinary, unheard-of, and almost incredible, if we compare them with the course of the old dispensation of the world (alten Weltäon); and this is the common view. But if we measure them according to their number, appearance, and importance, by the infinite fulness of the power of Christ's life, a saving power which restores the whole sinful world even to the resurrection, we must regard them as indeed small beginnings of the revelation of this living power, in which it comes forth as secretly, modestly, and noiselessly as His doctrine in His parables; and we learn the meaning of Christ's saying, by which he led His disciples to estimate this misunderstood phase of His miracles, 'Ye shall do greater works than these' (John xiv. 12). But Christ's miracles served in manifold ways to reveal His life-power to the world in subdued forms of operation. When Christ in these separate acts displays His agency, He lets Himself down to the sensuous level of the world, which only by these examples of His deepest lime qui s'est realisée par lui, bien que d'une manière fort différente de celle qu'il imaginait.' Some valuable remarks on the apologetic significance of the plan of Jesus are made by Young in 'The Christ of History,' pp. 44 ff., and by Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, p. 207.—Ed.] universal agency can gain a perception of that agency itself. He places Himself first of all on a line with the wonder-workers, the exorcists of His time, while He has begun the great work of saving the world, and of expelling the evil spirits from the whole world. By healing the feet of a paralytic, He had to prove that He had previously healed his heart by the forgiveness of his sins. By His wonderful, single operations, which powerfully affected the souls of men, He gradually aroused the perception of the susceptible for contemplating the great, eternal miracle which appeared in His own life. But for profane minds the Saviour of the world retired behind the wonder-worker. Often has it been attempted to find in the miracles of Jesus an ostentatious display of Christianity. But a time must come when men will learn to regard them as acts of the humility of Christ. Still, much of the wonderful that is from beneath must be set aside, before the wonderful from above is entirely acknowledged as the first interposition of Christ's eternal life-power for the world. For this power is holy even as the spiritual light of Christ, as His title of Messiah, and as His blessedness in the vision of God; therefore, it veils itself to the captious, while it unveils itself to the susceptible, and even that measure of it which has become manifest in miracle, appears to them as too much. But we must not misapprehend either the one side or the other of the miracles in which this power finds its medium of communication to men. We might speak of these extraordinary operations of Christ's life without employing the word miracle to designate them, and in doing so, clear the way to some extent for those who always imagine that the facts of the kingdom of God are dependent on the designations affixed to them, or on the later definitions of these designations. If, for example, we should call them, in accordance with the phraseology of the Gospels, spiritual primordial powers (dvváμes) or religious primordial phenomena (τέρατα οι σημεία), we should have the advantage of representing them with these names in their relation to their living origin, the originator of the new dispensation (Aeon), and so have designated them as the natural, necessary, and perfectly rational expressions of a new power. But these facts are still, as to their specific nature, rightly designated by the word miracle (Wunder); namely, when the miracle is regarded as a perfectly VOL. 11. G |