for its chief object to defend from the beginning its character, as a specific divine revelation, against any possible corruptions and perversions; but it, first of all, would have had to unwind the swaddling bands of a prosaic Ebionitism before it became etherialized, passing through the Pauline tendency into the spiritual gnosis of John; a process, for which, according to that theory, a full century was needed. We should not then find at first any common organism, spreading itself out on various sides in the fullness of a rich life, but only a small series of differing phenomena, mutually dissolving each other. But, now, history shows that great epochs (e. g., the Reformation) wake up the mind in all directions, and call out different tendencies at one stroke; though they may occur in a relative succession, yet they follow one another so rapidly that we can comprise them in a synchronistic picture. Thus, De Wette says [Wesen des Christl. Glaubens. Basil, 1846, p. 256]: “A more exact acquaintance with the New Testament documents shows us that the primitive Christianity here described had already run through three stadia of its development; that at first (according to the representation of the first three Gospels, particularly that of Matthew) it is a Jewish Christianity; then, with the Apostle Paul, it comes into conflict with the Jewish particularism ; until at last, in John, it wholly overcomes its antagonism with the law." It must also be conceded, that in the course of this historical process, now one, and now another, of the tendencies preformed in primitive Christianity, obtains the leading influence; and that a series of centuries not yet closed is necessary, in order that what has actually been revealed in principie may be worked over in all its relations to the individual and to society at large. Thus the Pauline type of Christianity remained for a long time a hidden treasure in the vineyard of the Lord, until in the period of the Reformation it was seen in its full significancy. So, too, the more recent philosophy of religion. has recurred to the profound spiritual vision of John. Lastly, in respect to the striking contrast between the apostolic times and the post-apostolic-so much less productive in the sphere of doctrines, it is not unnatural that a period of stagnation should succeed one in which men's souls were thoroughly aroused in all directions; and to this there are also analogies in history, e. g., that of the Reformation. Besides this, it has been remarked that the office of the post-apostolic times was not so much to form doctrines as to build up the church; next, with the period of apologetics, commences the real work in the elaboration of the doctrinal system. Comp. Dorner, ubi supra, p. 130 sq.

§ 19.

CULTURE OF THE AGE AND PHILOSOPHY.

Souverain, Le Platonisnee déovilé, Amst. 1700; in German, über den Platonismus der Kirchenväter, mit Anmerkungen von Löffler, 2 edit. 1792. In reply: Keil, De Doctoribus veteris Ecclesiæ, Culpa corruptæ per Platonicos Sententias Theologiæ liberandis, Comment. xii. (in his Opusc. Acad. Pars. II). Fichte, Im., De Philosophia Nova Platonicæ Origine, Berol. 1818, 8. Ackermann, Das Christliche im Plato und in der Platonischen Philosophie, Hamb. 1835. Dähne, A. F., Geschichtliche Darstellung der Judisch-Alexandrinischen Religionsphilosophie, in 2 parts, Halle, 1834. F. C. Baur, Das Christliche des Platonismus, oder Socrates und Christus, Tübingen, 1887. Gfrörer, Kritische

Geschichte des Urchristenthums, vol. i; also under the title: Philo und die Alexandrin ische Theosophie, 2 parts. Stuttgart, 1831. By the same: Das Jahrhundert des Heils, 2 parts. Stuttg. 1836 (zur Geschichte der Urchristenthums). Georgii, über die neuesten Gegensätze in Auffassung der Alexandrinischen Religionsphilosophie, insbesonders des Jüdischen Alexandrinismus, in Mlgens Zeitschrift für Historische Theologie, 1839, part 3, p. 1, ss. part 4, p. 1, ss. Tennemann, Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. vii. Ritter, vol. iv. p. 418. Schleiermacher, Geschichte der Philosophie, p. 154, ss. [Ritter, Die Christliche Philos. (1858), i. Kapitel 2 and 3. Susemihl, Genetische Entwicklung d Platon. Phil. 1855. Plato contra Athcos; x. Book on Laws, by Tayler Lewis, New York, 1845; cf. President Woolsey, in Bib. Sacra, 1845. Cæsar Morgan, The Trinity of Plato and Philo. F. Robiou, de la Philos. chez les Romains, 6 articles in the Annales de la Philos. Chrét. Paris, 1857, '8. R. Ehlers, Vis atque potestas quam Philosophia Antiqua imprimis Platonica et Stoica in Doctrina Apologetarum Seculi II. habuerit. Cöttin. 1859.]

Though the peculiar character of Christianity can not be understood, if it is considered, not as an actual revelation of salvation, but merely as a new system of philosophy, yet, on the other hand, it must be admitted that, in its forms of thought, it attached itself to what was already in existence, though it filled it with its new and quickening spirit, and thus appropriated it to itself.' This was especially the case with the Alexandrian culture, which was principally representel by Philo.' This already appears in some of the New Testament writings, especially in the doctrine concerning the Logos,' although in the most general outlines; but afterward it exercised a decisive influence upon Christian speculation.*

1 "It is a thoroughly unhistorical and untenable assumption, that the primitive Christianity was unphilosophical, and, as such, undogmatic, and that it had to be indebted to the world for the faculty of philosophizing and of forming dogmas." Lange Dogmatik, p. 41. But it is also historically true that, before Christianity created a new philosophy by its own living energies, it attached itself to the prevalent forms of thought, and that so far the world did "hasten before" the church in the process of forming doctrines. Comp. Lange, 1. c. p. 42, and Gieseler, Dogmengesch. 44, sq. [Gieseler here defends the early Christian teachers in making use of philosophy; 1. Because the times demanded a philosophical treatment of Christianity. 2. That this became injurious only when these philosophical opinions were held to be matters of faith, and not speculations. 3. The Christian philosophers did not intentionally, but unconsciously, introduce philosophical postulates into the Christian system.]

.

Comp. Grossmann, Quæstiones Philoneæ, Lips. 1829. Theile, Christus und Philo, in Winer's und Engelhardt's kritisches Journal, vol. ix. part 4, p. 385. Scheffer, Quæst. Philon, Sect. 2, p. 41, ss. Lücke, Commentar zum Joh. i. p. 249. (Comp. § 41 on the Logos.) Editions of Philo: Turnebus (1552), Höschel (1613), the Parisian (1640), * Mangey (1742), Pfeiffer (5 vol. Erl. 1820), Richter, 1828-'30; Tauchnitz's edition, 1851, sq. Compare the Commentary to Philo's book, De Opificio Mundi, by J. G. Müller, Berlin, 1841. [Philo Judæus, transl. in Bohn's Ecclesl, Library, by Yonge, 4 vols.] Edw. von Muralt, Untersuchungen über Philo in Beziehung auf die der

(Petersburger) Akademie gehörigen Handschriften, 1840. [Creuzer in the Studien n. Kritiken, 1831. M. Wolff, Die Philon 'sche Philos, Lpz. 1849; 2d ed. 1858. Philonis Judæi Paralipomena Armena, Venet. 1826; ibid. Sermones Tres, ed. Venet. 1832. Articles on Philo, in Christ. Rev. 1853; North British, 1855; Eclectic (Lond.) Nov. 1855; Journal of Class. and Sacred Philol. 1854. Comp. also Michel Nicholas, Des Doctrines Religieuses des Juifs pendant les deux Siècles antérieurs à l'éré chrétienne, Paris, 1860. S. Klein, Le Judaisme, ou la Verité sur le Talmud. Paris 1859. Lutterbeck, Neutestamentliche Lehrbegriffe, i., p. 393-437.]

'That which was a mere abstract and ideal notion in the system of Philo became a concrete fact in Christianity-a spiritual and historical fact in the sphere of the religious life; on this account "it is alike contrary to historical truth, to deny the influence of the age upon the external phenomena and the didactic development of the gospel, and to derive its internal origin and true nature from the age.”—Lücke, 1. c. Comp. Dorner, 1. c. Introd. p. 21, ss.

Much of that which was formerly (from the time of Souverain) called "the Platonism of the Fathers," is by modern research reduced to this, "that the general influence exerted by Platonism was the stronger and more definite influence of the general heathen culture." Baumgarten-Crusius, Compendium, i. p. 67. Comp. Gieseler, Dogmengesch. p. 44. Thus the charge of Platonism often brought forward against Justin M. is found on closer examination to be untenable; comp. Semisch, Justin der M. ii. p. 227, ss. It appears more just in the case of the Alexandrian theologians, especially Origen. But here, too, as well as in reference to the partial influence exerted by Aristotelianism and Stoicism upon certain tendencies of the age, it ought not to be overlooked, that during this period “philosophy appears only in a fragmentary way, and in connection with theology." Schleiermacher, 1. c. p. 154; comp. also Redepenning, Origenes (Bonn, 1841), vol. i. p. 91, ss. [Comp. Fr. Michelis, Die Philos. Platons in ihrer inneren Beziehung zur geoffenbarten Wahrheit. 1 Abth. Münster, 1859.]

§ 20.

RULE OF FAITH. THE APOSTLES' CREED.

• Marheineke, Ursprung und Entwicklung der Orthodoxie und Heterodoxie in den ersten 3 Jahrhunderten (in Daub und Creuzer's Studien, Heidelb. 1807, vol. iii. p. 96, ss.) + Möhler, Einheit der Kirche oder Princip des Katholicismus im Geiste der Kirchenväter der ersten 3 Jahrhundorte, Tub. 1825. Vossius, J. G., De Tribus Symbolis Dissertt. Amstel. 1701, fol. King, Lord, History of the Apostles' Creed, with critical observations, 5 edit. Lond. 1738. (Latin translation by Olearius, Lips. 1706, Bas. 1768.) Rudelbach, die Bedeutung des Apostol. Symbolums, Lpz. 1844. Stockmeier, J., über Entstehung des Apostolischen Symbolums, Zür. 1846. [Bishop Pearson on the Apostles' Creed. Witsius, H., Dissertation on what is commonly called the Apostles' Creed. Transl. from the Latin by D. Fraser, Edinb. 1823, Dissert. i.—Heylyn, P., The Summe of Christian Theology, contained in the Apostles' Creed, London, 1673, fol.— Barrow, J., Exposition of the Creed, (Theolog. works, vol. v.) Oxf. 1838, Sect. 1. Meyers, De Symbol. Apostol. Treviris, 1849. Hahn, Bibliothek. d. Symbole. 1842. W. W. Harvey, History and Theology of the Three Creeds, 2 vols., 1855. Articles on the Apostles' Creed, in Mercersburg Review, 1849, and Princeton Review, 1852]

Before scientific theology, under the form of yvwois, developed itself with the aid of philosophical speculation, the faith of the Apostles was firmly and historically established as níoris, by bringing together those elements (σroxeĩa) of Christian doctrine which were accounted essential. The κήρυγμα ἀποστολικόν, the παράδοσις ἀποστολική, was first transmitted by oral tradition, and afterward appeared in a written form.' What is commonly called the Apostles' Creed (apostolic symbol), is most probably composed of various confessions of faith, used by the primitive church in the baptismal service. Though it did not proceed from the Apostles themselves, yet it preserved the principles of apostolic tradition in broad general outlines.'

1

1 Comp. the rules of faith of Irenæus, Adv. Hær. i. c. 10, (Grabe, c. 2.) Tertull. De Virgin. vel. c. 1; De Præscript. Hær. c. 13; Advers. Prax. c. 2. Orig. De Princip. procm. § 4. Münscher edit. by von Cölln, i. 16-19. On the importance of tradition and its relation to Holy Scripture, comp. below § 33 and 37. The rule of faith was not gained by the interpretation of the Scriptures, but taken from the apostolic tradition handed down in the churches." Gieseler, Dogmengesch. p. 50.

The fable about its apostolic origin, mentioned by Rufinus Exposit Symb. Apost. (in Baron. Annal. anno 44. No. 14 [Witsius, l. c. p. 3], was doubted by Laur. Valla, and afterward by Erasmus; some of the earlier Protestants, however, e. g., the Magdeb. Centur. (Cent. I. 1. 2, p. 66), still attached credit to it. Comp. Basnage, Exercitationes Histor. crit. ad annum 44, No. 17. Buddei, Isagoge, p. 441, where the literature is given. Neander (Torrey's) i. p. 306. Marheineke, 1. c. p. 160 [Heylyn, 1. c. p. 8, ss. Barrow, 1. c. 218, 219, Gieseler's Text-Book, i. 80, 152.]

§ 21.

HERESIES.

Ittig, Th. de Hæresiarchis Evi Apostolici, Lips. 1690, 1703, 4. [Burton, Edw., Theolog. Works, vol. iii.: The Bampton Lecture on the Heresies of the Apostolic age. Oxf. 1837. Comp. the Introduction where the literature is given. [Lardner's Hist. of Heresies. Sartori, Die. . . Secten. 1855. J. B. Marsden, Christ. Churches and Sects, 2 vols. 1854, 1859. G. Volkmar, Die Quellen der Ketzergesch. 1855.]

Every departure from the apostolic canon of doctrine was considered, in relation to the church, as aïpɛ015, heresy.' Even in the apostolic age we find false teachers, some of whom are mentioned in the New Testament itself," others in the works of early ecclesiastical writers. Concerning their personal history and doctrine many points are still involved in obscurity, which, in the absence of trustworthy historical evidence, can not be easily and satisfactorily cleared up.

1

• Αίρεσις (from αἱρεῖσθαι), and σχίσμα, were at first synonymous (1 Cor. xi. 18, 19), but in later times the one was used to denote a departure from the faith, the other to designate a disruption in consequence of differences of opinion concerning liturgy, discipline, or ecclesiastical polity. The word aipeous did not originally imply blame; it is used in the New Test, as a voz media; comp. Acts v. 17: xv. 5; xxv. 5. [Burton, 1. e. p. 8.] Ecclesiastical writers themselves call Christianity a secta (Tertull. Apol. i. 1, and in many other places); and even Constantine gives the Catholic church the name aipeois (Euseb. x. c. 5). On the contrary, in Gal. v. 20, the same term is used in connection with spilɛiai, dixooтaoial, etc. comp. 2 Pet. ii. 1 (ψευδοδιδάσκαλοι). Synonymous terms are : ἑτεροδιδασκαλία, 1 Tim. i. 3; vi. 3; pevôúvvμos yvwoɩç, ch. vi. 20; μataloλoyía, ch. i. 6; the adject. alperikós, Tit. iii. 10. Comp. Wetstein, N. T. ii. 147. Suicer Thesaurus, sub voce. On the various etymologies of the German word Ketzer (Ital. Gazzari, whether from Ka@após, or from the Chazares-like bougre from the Bulgares? or even from Katze ?) comp. Mosheim, Unparteiische und gründliche Ketzergeschichte, Helmst. 1746, p. 357, ss. and Wackernagel, Altdeutsches Lesebuch, p. 1675; Jac. Grimm's review of Kling's edition of Berthold's sermons, in the Wiener Jahrb. Bd. xxxviii. On the use which heresies may be to science, Orig. Hom. 9 in Num. Opp. T. ii. p. 296, says: Nam si doctrina ecclesiastica simplex esset et nullis intrinsecus hæreticorum dogmatum assertionibus cingeretur, non poterat tam clara et tam examinata videri fides nostra. Sed idcirco doctrinam catholicam contradicentium obsidet oppugnatio; út fides nostra non otio torpescat, sed exercitiis elimetur. Comp. August. De Civit. Dei xviii. c. 51.

On the different parties in the church of Corinth (which, however, caused only schisms in, but not separations from the church), comp. Schenkel, Dan., de Ecclesia Corinthia primæva factionibus turbata, Bas. 1838. F. Ch. Baur, die Christuspartei. [Neander, History of the Plant. and Train. i. p. 268-282. Billroth, Comment. on the Corinth. transl. by Alexander, i. p. 11. Alexander, W. L., in Kitto, Cyclop. of Bibl. Lit. sub voce.] With respect to the heretics mentioned in the N. T., the attention of critics has chiefly been directed to those alluded to in the Epistle to the Colossians, and in the Pastoral Epistles. Concerning the former (were they theosophic Jewish Essenes, or Jewish Christians?) comp. Schneckenburger in the appendix to his treatise on the Proselytentaufe, p. 213. Böhmer, Isagoge in Epist. a Paulo ad Coloss. datam, 1829, p. 131. Neander, Apostolische Gesch. vol. ii. [History of the Plant, and Train. i. p. 374-381. Alexander, W. L., in Kitto, 1. c. sub voce.] Among the latter, Hymenæus and Philetus only are mentioned by name, as denying the doctrine of resurrection, 2 Tim. ii. 17, 18. [Burton, 1. c. p. 135, ss. Ryland, J. E., in Kitto, 1. c. sub vocc.] But the inquiry relative to the character of these heretics is intimately connected with the critical examination of the epistles themselves. Comp. Baur, F. Ch., die sogenannten Pastoralbriefe des Apostels Paulus, aufs neue kritisch untersucht, Stuttg. 1835. On the other side: Baumgarten, Mich., die Aechtheit der Pastoralbriefe, Berlin, 1837; comp. also the reply of Baur in his treatise: Ueber den Ursprung des Episcopats, Tüb. 1838, p. 14, ss. Comp. also Schwegler, 1. c. and Dietlein, Urchristenthum.