(c) Schmid (ii. pp. 212-217 [E. T. 413-416]) treats of the doctrines of our Epistle in the appendix to his representation of the Petrine doctrinal system, while he brings forward many right, but in no respect exhaustive, considerations as to the connection of the two; and in consequence of a mistaken conception of the eπiyvwσis emphasized in it, he ascribes to the Epistle an Alexandrian colouring, which must stamp it as intermediate between the Petrine and the Johannean systems. While Lechler (p. 191 f.) and Lutterbeck (pp. 179-182) do not go beyond a few unimportant remarks, which give a result unfavourable to its authenticity, Messner (pp. 154-170) has dealt with the doctrinal system of our Epistle in the sense of Schmid in the greatest detail; while, on the other hand, van Oosterzee, p. 30, has mainly sought to prove the relationship of its doctrinal system with that of First Peter. On the side of the Tübingen school, Schwegler (ii. pp. 495-517) has enrolled our Epistle in the history of the development of the Roman Church, and reckoned it along with the pretended Gospel of Mark recommended by him, and the Clementine Recognitions, which represent the complete conclusion of peace. He declares its dogmatic character to be Petrine, and finds Philo's writings to be diligently used in it, although, to be sure, the proof for this adduced by him cannot prove anything (comp. Immer, p. 493 f.). Baur, on the other hand, only asserts that Christianity is conceived of in it theoretically as ἐπίγνωσις, practically as ἀγάπη or ȧperý, and thus Paulinism and Jewish Christianity were united, in which was shown the tendency of the doctrinal system of the Catholic Church as it was being shaped (p. 297).

(d) The Epistle of Jude, written apparently about the middle of the sixth decade, comes from the brother of James, whom we, § 37, put among the representatives of the early apostolic type of doctrine. It is very natural, on this account, to connect his doctrine with that of this James, and by this Schmid (ii. pp. 140-150 [E. T. 368-374]) and Messner (pp. 99-107) have allowed themselves, in fact, to be misled. In his doctrine of the judgment he is to present a sidepiece to the doctrine of James about the law. But our Epistle neither contains any special doctrine of the judgment, which naturally is spoken of only in his threats against those libertines he is

contending with (whom both regard, but mistakenly, as special false teachers), nor does he show elsewhere any affinity to the Epistle of James beyond the common fundamental principles of Jewish Christianity. Since, now, the Second Epistle of Peter was not only acquainted with the Epistle of Jude, but in its polemic against the libertines (note b) is in great part in harmony with it, their spiritual affinity is thereby established on both sides. In this Epistle there are shown, to be sure, although its method of teaching is rooted in the Old Testament, hints even of the Pauline method in contradistinction from the Epistles of Peter. Yet we shall ever have a right to reckon the otherwise small results, which the Epistle of Jude furnishes to biblical theology, incidentally with the representation of doctrine of the Second Epistle of Peter (comp. Immer, p. 491). Lechler (p. 170 f.) and Lutterbeck (p. 176 f.) have contented themselves with establishing its Jewish-Christian character in general. Reuss has, by the way, made use of both our Epistles as sources for Jewish-Christian theology (i. book iv.). Van Oosterzee has included the Epistle of Jude, § 31, among the doctrinal systems allied to the Petrine. Schwegler has dealt with it only by way of appendix (i. pp. 518-522), in order to prove a tendency to recommend the apostolic tradition, which would be put strangely enough in the mouth of an unknown individual, for whom only the claim was made for the honour to be the brother of the honoured head of the Jewish Christians.

§ 113. The Johannean Apocalypse

The third monument of this period, in which the inner dangers and the external troubles required a re-quickening of the flagging hope in the nearness of the Parousia, is the Apocalypse (a). This comes apparently from the Apostle John; but it must in any case be considered, without reference to the other Johannean writings, as a witness of the early apostolic Jewish Christianity of this period (b). The prophetic character of the book renders it more difficult to estimate its biblical theological value, but it does not lessen that value (c). In the former conceptions of its method of

doctrine, the question above all else has been discussed, whether any antithesis to Paulinism is uttered in it (d).

(a) At the beginning of the seventh decade stands in any case the sole prophetic writing of the New Testament, though the historical references of the Apocalypse may point to the year 68, or more correctly the year 70. In it once again, to the doubts and anxieties on account of the delay of the Parousia, which emerged at this time (§ 111, a; 112, b), there was opposed the most energetic announcement of its immediate nearness. The author in a series of visions has in part received the assurance that it is at hand; he partly sees in striking images itself, its foretokens, and the process of the final consummation beginning with it. He even undertakes to point out the signs of the time after the method of the Jewish Apocalypse, and to indicate within his historical field of vision its milestones, by which one may count the steps which the development of the last times must take till the final catastrophe. Everything, moreover, in this period recalls it. In the Church, Christian life has sunk low, and heathenish Libertinism misleads her by its false prophecy, which professes to be deep wisdom (comp. § 112, b, d). Persecutions by

Jews and Christians have affected the Church, but above all is the horror of the time of Nero, which furnished the author with the image, ever before his eyes, of the capital city of the world drunk with the blood of the martyrs. As in the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Second Epistle of Peter, so here too the proclamation of the Parousia is at the same time a powerful call to repentance, as also a powerful declaration

of comfort.

(b) The oldest tradition, which begins indeed with Justin, ascribes the Apocalypse, quite unanimously, even thus early to the Apostle John. The doubts which emerged later in the church of Alexandria, and made the canonical validity of the Apocalypse a matter of contention for long in the East, spring, one strongly suspects, from a dislike of the contents of the book. The glowing phantasy, and the flaming indignation towards the enemies of the kingdom of God, which characterize the book, correspond to the image of the son of thunder, which the earlier Gospels show us; and there can be no doubt that the fundamental type of his doctrinal views

is that of the early apostolic Jewish-Christian Church. And hence the Tübingen school have rightly blamed for onesidedness the later criticism, which, in the dilemma to ascribe either the Apocalypse or the Gospel and the Epistles to the Apostle John, decides without further trouble for the latter. That dilemma, however, to which they firmly adhere, is yet by no means proved by the evidence (comp. Hase, die Tübinger Schule, Leipzig 1855, pp. 20-30). Biblical theology has as little to settle the justification for that theory as it has to settle the question of authenticity; it has to present the doctrines of the Apocalypse as those of a monument of the early apostolic Jewish Christianity, as these took shape in this post-Pauline epoch; and it has, on the other hand, only to take care that the reference to the doctrinal method in writings, in any case so diverse and so much later, which bear the name of John, does not prejudice a fair appreciation of the peculiar character of our book.

(c) Corresponding to the special task of our book, the doctrine of Christian hope stands in the forefront of its view of doctrine; yet it presents in several other ways the peculiarity of the doctrinal method of the author, since the exhortation running through it refers in many ways to his conception of the Christian salvation, and to the moral motives involved in it. The greatest difficulty in the way of the biblical theological treatment of the book lies in this, that, in conformity with the whole plan of the book, many views full of significance are presented only in images, whose interpretation is not easy, and often it is difficult to show in them with certainty the limits of what is competent to a learned interpretation, and what belongs only to the poetic colouring. The prophetic character of the book, on the other hand, can in no wise diminish its biblical theological value. As surely as visions lie at the basis of the representation of the book,— visions which were to the author the bearers of a divine revelation, so certainly are the seven visions of our book, which are artificially presented, executed in colours evidently borrowed from the study of Old Testament prophecy and our Jewish apocalyptical writings, and advance in systematic order (comp. my Recension von Düsterdieck's Commentar in dem theologischen Literaturblatt von 1860, Nos. 1, 2), a free

literary reproduction of what was given the author to behold on the ground of their revelations of the future. Like every other doctrinal writing of the New Testament, it can, on that account, but reproduce the God-given contents with the stamp of an individual, which shows the special doctrinal view of the author.

(d) By Schmid and Lutterbeck the Apocalypse is drawn on, only incidentally, with a view to a comparison with the representation of the Johannean doctrinal system; Lechler, while he too assumes its apostolicity, has first presented its doctrinal system independently (pp. 19.9-205), and then compared it with the Johannean (pp. 228-232; comp. van Oosterzee, § 49). Messner, on the other hand, who does not hold it to be apostolic (p. 363), has set forth with tolerable fulness its doctrinal system as the last (pp. 365-381), but he has in this confined himself almost entirely to the eschatology and the Christology. The Tübingen school has been the first to set up a more thorough investigation into the whole theological character of our book, and to that school it was the only monument of early apostolic Jewish Christianity of any consequence (comp. Köstlin in his Joh. Lehrbegriff (pp. 482-500). Only a writing which in any case arose before the Pauline period must not be used, with Reuss (i. 4), as a source for the oldest Jewish-Christian theology. Naturally, the Tübingen school finds in it an emphatic antithesis to Paulinism; but however often that may be asserted (comp. yet Immer, pp. 163-169), as little yet are the otherwise very diverse attempts by Baur (pp. 207-230; comp. on the other hand, Ritschl, pp. 120-122) and Schenkel (§ 21) to prove it to be considered successful. The independent representation of the Lehrbegriff der Apocalypse by H. Gebhardt (Gotha 1873 [translated into English, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1878]) rests mainly on the proof of the identity of the author with that of the other Johannean writings (comp. my "Recens." in the Stud. u. Krit. 1874, p. 582 ff.).

§ 114. The Historical Books.

The latest of the documents belonging to this class are the synoptical Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles (a). Their

VOL. II.

L