No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Background of Modern Historical Study of Christianity
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Extract
At the midpoint of the nineteenth century, the historical reconstruction of Christianity which had been made by Baur had come to dominate critical scholarship in the form popularized by the Tűbingen school generally. In Germany Zeller, Schwegler, Hausrath, Köstlin, Volkmar and Hilgenfeld were the distinguished heirs of Baur's views. His representative in Holland was Scholten. In French criticism Baur's influence was felt in the work of Colani, Scherer, and Havet. In Great Britain, Samuel Davidson expounded Tűbingen criticism, which was also to be found in the anonymous work later acknowledged by W. R. Cassels. Indeed the Tűbingen theology was reflected, although in a considerably modified form, in the work of Holsten and Pfleiderer long after the direct influence of the school had waned.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of Church History 1935
References
1 Supernatural Religion. An Inquiry into the Reality of the Divine Revelation, 3 vols., 7 edd. 1874–1879Google Scholar. Lightfoot replied in articles in The Contemporary Review, later publishing his essays as a book.
2 See Kattenbusch, , Die deutsche evangelische Theologie seit Schleiermacher (Giessen, 1924), pp. 45ff.Google Scholar
3 Attention should te called also to the critical work on the gospels, the major point of which was the discovery of the priority of Mark. The most notable contribution was Weisse, 's Die evangelische Geschichte kritisch und philosophisch bear beitet, 2 vols., 1838.Google Scholar
4 See Riddle, , “Factors in the Development of Modern Biblical Study,” Church History, II (1933):4:211–262, especially 214ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 E. g., Astruc's criticism of the Pentateuch, the work of Herder, the development of Introduction by Michaelis, Semler, Eichhorn, Bleek, de Wette and Credner; Bretsehneider's questions about the Fourth Gospel.
6 Nash, , The History of the Higher Criticism (New York, 1900), p. 159, note 1.Google Scholar
7 Les Apotres (1866)Google Scholar, S. Paul (1867)Google Scholar, L'Antichrist (1873)Google Scholar, Les Evangiles (1877)Google Scholar, L'Eglise Chrétienne (1879)Google Scholar, Marc Aurele (1880).Google Scholar
8 The important work of Berger, especially his later books, such as his history of the Vulgate (1893) shows the superiority of textual and linguistic study; his book on the Tűbingen school (1876) shows his awareness of historical and theological issues.
9 A beginning had been made earlier in the ability to read texts. Akerblad's work on the Rosetta Stone goes back to 1802, as does Grotefend's on Persian texts. By 1832 Champollion had well laid the basis for the study of hieroglyphic. Ability to read cuneiform was not far advanced until 1846, when Rawlinson published the Darius Behistun inscription.
10 The Old Testament in The Jewish Church (1881)Google Scholar; The Religion of the Semites (1889).Google Scholar
11 Note the sub-title, “ein religionsgeschichtlicher Vergleich.”
12 Apparently it is in this stream of influence that the work of B. Weiss, “liberal” in character, and the thoroughly conservative work of Zahn belong.
13 In England, it may be added, the desire for a system was met in the work of F. D. Maurice, Caird, and Martineau.
14 The interesting story of this movement is told by Sabatier, in Modernism (London, 1908)Google Scholar and by Tyrrell, in Christianity at the Crossroads (London, 1910).Google Scholar
15 The details of this story are related in a typical instance in the late Professor B. W. Bacon's autobiographical sketch in Form, V.'s Contemporary American Theology, 1st series (New York, 1932).Google Scholar
16 See Carlfelt, C. G., “A Recent Theology and Theologians in Sweden.” The Augustana Quarterly, XIV (1935): 14–39.Google Scholar