the unseen world and other essays-第18节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


y；　or　destroyed　in　the　night　of　some　future　barbarian　invasion；　we　should　still　here　possess　the　secret　of　the　wonderful　impression　which　Jesus　made　upon　those　who　heard　him　speak。　Added　to　the　Essenian　scorn　of　Pharisaic　formalism；　and　the　spiritualized　conception　of　the　Messianic　kingdom；　which　Jesus　may　probably　have　shared　with　John　the　Baptist；　we　have　here　for　the　first　time　the　distinctively　Christian　conception　of　the　fatherhood　of　God　and　the　brotherhood　of　men；　which　ultimately　insured　the　success　of　the　new　religion。　The　special　point　of　originality　in　Jesus　was　his　conception　of　Deity。　As　Strauss　well　says；　〃He　conceived　of　God；　in　a　moral　point　of　view；　as　being　identical　in　character　with　himself　in　the　most　exalted　moments　of　his　religious　life；　and　strengthened　in　turn　his　own　religious　life　by　this　ideal。　But　the　most　exalted　religious　tendency　in　his　own　consciousness　was　exactly　that　comprehensive　love；　overpowering　the　evil　only　by　the　good；　which　he　therefore　transferred　to　God　as　the　fundamental　tendency　of　His　nature。〃　From　this　conception　of　God；　observes　Zeller；　flowed　naturally　all　the　moral　teaching　of　Jesus；　the　insistence　upon　spiritual　righteousness　instead　of　the　mere　mechanical　observance　of　Mosaic　precepts；　the　call　to　be　perfect　even　as　the　Father　is　perfect；　the　principle　of　the　spiritual　equality　of　men　before　God；　and　the　equal　duties　of　all　men　toward　each　other。

＇20＇　〃The　biographers　＇of　Becket＇　are　commonly　rather　careless　as　to　the　order　of　time。　Each　。。。。　recorded　what　struck　him　most　or　what　he　best　knew；　one　set　down　one　event　and　another；　and　none　of　them　paid　much　regard　to　the　order　of　details。〃Freeman；　Historical　Essays；　1st　series；　p。　94。


How　far；　in　addition　to　these　vitally　important　lessons；　Jesus　may　have　taught　doctrines　of　an　ephemeral　or　visionary　character；　it　is　very　difficult　to　decide。　We　are　inclined　to　regard　the　third　gospel　as　of　some　importance　in　settling　this　point。　The　author　of　that　gospel　represents　Jesus　as　decidedly　hostile　to　the　rich。　Where　Matthew　has　〃Blessed　are　the　poor　in　spirit；〃　Luke　has　〃Blessed　are　ye　poor。〃　In　the　first　gospel　we　read；　〃Blessed　are　they　who　hunger　and　thirst　after　righteousness；　for　they　will　be　filled〃；　but　in　the　third　gospel　we　find；　〃Blessed　are　ye　that　hunger　now；　for　ye　will　be　filled〃；　and　this　assurance　is　immediately　followed　by　the　denunciation；　〃Woe　to　you　that　are　rich；　for　ye　have　received　your　consolation！　Woe　to　you　that　are　full　now；　for　ye　will　hunger。〃　The　parable　of　Dives　and　Lazarus　illustrates　concretely　this　view　of　the　case；　which　is　still　further　corroborated　by　the　account；　given　in　both　the　first　and　the　third　gospels；　of　the　young　man　who　came　to　seek　everlasting　life。　Jesus　here　maintains　that　righteousness　is　insufficient　unless　voluntary　poverty　be　superadded。　Though　the　young　man　has　strictly　fulfilled　the　greatest　of　the　commandments；to　love　his　neighbour　as　himself；he　is　required；　as　a　needful　proof　of　his　sincerity；　to　distribute　all　his　vast　possessions　among　the　poor。　And　when　he　naturally　manifests　a　reluctance　to　perform　so　superfluous　a　sacrifice；　Jesus　observes　that　it　will　be　easier　for　a　camel　to　go　through　the　eye　of　a　needle　than　for　a　rich　man　to　share　in　the　glories　of　the　anticipated　Messianic　kingdom。　It　is　difficult　to　escape　the　conclusion　that　we　have　here　a　very　primitive　and　probably　authentic　tradition；　and　when　we　remember　the　importance　which；　according　to　the　〃Acts；〃　the　earliest　disciples　attached　to　the　principle　of　communism；　as　illustrated　in　the　legend　of　Ananias　and　Sapphira；　we　must　admit　strong　reasons　for　believing　that　Jesus　himself　held　views　which　tended　toward　the　abolition　of　private　property。　On　this　point；　the　testimony　of　the　third　evangelist　singly　is　of　considerable　weight；　since　at　the　time　when　he　wrote；　the　communistic　theories　of　the　first　generation　of　Christians　had　been　generally　abandoned；　and　in　the　absence　of　any　dogmatic　motives；　he　could　only　have　inserted　these　particular　traditions　because　he　believed　them　to　possess　historical　value。　But　we　are　not　dependent　on　the　third　gospel　alone。　The　story　just　cited　is　attested　by　both　our　authorities；　and　is　in　perfect　keeping　with　the　general　views　of　Jesus　as　reported　by　the　first　evangelist。　Thus　his　disciples　are　enjoined　to　leave　all；　and　follow　him；　to　take　no　thought　for　the　morrow；　to　think　no　more　of　laying　up　treasures　on　the　earth；　for　in　the　Messianic　kingdom　they　shall　have　treasures　in　abundance；　which　can　neither　be　wasted　nor　stolen。　On　making　their　journeys；　they　are　to　provide　neither　money；　nor　clothes；　nor　food；　but　are　to　live　at　the　expense　of　those　whom　they　visit；　and　if　any　town　refuse　to　harbour　them；　the　Messiah；　on　his　arrival；　will　deal　with　that　town　more　severely　than　Jehovah　dealt　with　the　cities　of　the　plain。　Indeed；　since　the　end　of　the　world　was　to　come　before　the　end　of　the　generation　then　living　（Matt。　xxiv。　34；　1　Cor。　xv。　51…56；　vii。　29）；　there　could　be　no　need　for　acquiring　property　or　making　arrangements　for　the　future；　even　marriage　became　unnecessary。　These　teachings　of　Jesus　have　a　marked　Essenian　character；　as　well　as　his　declaration　that　in　the　Messianic　kingdom　there　was　to　be　no　more　marriage；　perhaps　no　distinction　of　sex　（Matt。　xxii。　30）。　The　sect　of　Ebionites；　who　represented　the　earliest　doctrine　and　practice　of　Christianity　before　it　had　been　modified　by　Paul；　differed　from　the　Essenes　in　no　essential　respect　save　in　the　acknowledgment　of　Jesus　as　the　Messiah；　and　the　expectation　of　his　speedy　return　to　the　earth。

How　long；　or　with　what　success；　Jesus　continued　to　preach　the　coming　of　the　Messiah　in　Galilee；　it　is　impossible　to　conjecture。　His　fellow…townsmen　of　Nazareth　appear　to　have　ridiculed　him　in　his　prophetical　capacity；　or；　if　we　may　trust　the　third　evangelist；　to　have　arisen　against　him　with　indignation；　and　made　an　attempt　upon　his　life。　To　them　he　was　but　a　carpenter；　the　son　of　a　carpenter　（Matt。　xiii。　55；　Mark　vi。　3）；　who　told　them　disagreeable　truths。　Our　author　represents　his　teaching　in　Galilee　to　have　produced　but　little　result；　but　the　gospel　narratives　afford　no　definite　data　for　deciding　this　point。　We　believe　the　most　probable　conclusion　to　be　that　Jesus　did　attract　many　followers；　and　became　famous　throughout　Galilee；　for　Herod　is　said　to　have　regarded　him　as　John　the　Baptist　risen　from　the　grave。　To　escape　the　malice　of　Herod；　Jesus　then　retired　to　Syro…Phoenicia；　and　during　this　eventful　journey　the　consciousness　of　his　own　Messiahship　seems　for　the　first　time　to　have　distinctly　dawned　upon　him　（Matt。　xiv。　1；　13；　xv。　21；　xvi。　13…20）。　Already；　it　appears；　speculations　were　rife　as　to　the　character　of　this　wonderful　preacher。　Some　thought　he　was　John　the　Baptist；　or　perhaps　one　of　the　prophets　of　the　Assyrian　period　returned　to　the　earth。　Some；　in　accordance　with　a　generally…received　tradition；　supposed　him　to　be　Elijah；　who　had　never　seen　death；　and　had　now　at　last　returned　from　the　regions　above　the　firmament　to　announce　the　coming　of　the　Messiah　in　the　clouds。　It　was　generally　admitted；　among　enthusiastic　hearers；　that　he　who　spake　as　never　man　spake　before　must　have　some　divine　commission　to　execute。　These　speculations；　coming　to　the　ears　of　Jesus　during　his　preaching　in　Galilee；　could　not　fail　to　excite　in　him　a　train　of　self…conscious　reflections。　To　him　also　must　have　been　presented　the　query　as　to　his　own　proper　character　and　functions；　and；　as　our　author　acutely　demonstrates；　his　only　choice　lay　between　a　profitless　life　of　exile　in　Syro…Phoenicia；　and　a　bold　return　to　Jewish　territory　in　some　pronounced　character。　The　problem　being　thus　propounded；　there　could　hardly　be　a　doubt　as　to　what　that　character　should　be。　Jesus　knew　well　that　he　was　not　John　the　Baptist；　nor；　however　completely　he　may　have　been　dominated　by　his　sublime　enthusiasm；　was　it　likely　that　he　could　mistake　himself　for　an　ancient　prophet　arisen　from　the　lower　world　of　shades；　or　for　Elijah　descended　from　the　sky。　But　the　Messiah　himself　he　might　well　be。　Such　indeed　was　the　almost　inevitable　corollary　from　his　own　conception　of　Messiahship。　We　have　seen　that　he　had；　probably　from　the　very　outset；　discarded　the　traditional　notion　of　a　political　Messiah；　and　recognized　the　truth　that　the　happiness　of　a　people　lies　not　so　much　in　political　autonomy　as　in　the　love　of　God　and　the　sincere　practice　of　righteousness。　The　people　were　to　be　freed　from　the　bondage　of　sin；　of　meaningless　formalism；　of　consecrated　hypocrisy；a　bondage　more　degrading　than　the　payment　of　tribute　to　the　emperor。　The　true　business　of　the　Messiah；　then；　was　to　deliver　his　people　from　the　former　bondage；　it　might　be　left　to　Jehovah；　in　his　own　good　time；　to　deliver　them　from　the　latter。　Holding　these　views；　it　was　hardly　possible　that　it　should　not　sooner　or　later　occur　to　Jesus　that　he　himself　was　the　person　destined　to　discharge　this　glorious　function；　to　liberate　his　countrymen　from　the　thraldom　of　Pharisaic　ritualism；　and　to　inaugurate　the　real　Messianic　kingdom　of　spiritual　righteousness。　Had　he　not　already　preached　the　advent　of　this　spiritual　kingdom；　and　been　instrumental　in　raising　many　to　loftier　conceptions　of　duty；　and　to　a　higher　and　purer　life？　And　might　he　not　now；　by　a