could be no more useful analysis for the student of Jeremiah. Avoiding the extremes of Graf, who too much depreciates the LXX., and of Workman, who unduly exalts it, he claims that each difference between LXX. and Hebrew must be separately examined, and so arrives at the following just, and, if not novel, yet always independent, conclusions. Though it is obvious that the Greek translator had a bad MS. which confounded letters and had grave omissions, he himself was not blameless, as is chiefly evident from the fact that he frequently gives translations not of the very Hebrew words, but of their synonyms, changes due partly to his ignorance and partly to his free use of the text. On the other hand, he frequently supplies a better reading where the Hebrew is wholly unsuitable, or in need of a slight alteration; some of his additions are justified by their necessity and their style; many of his omissions are of obvious glosses. His method of translation as well as his ignorance of many phrases is illustrated in detail; and in general Kuenen's conclusions on these points, and of the infrequency of changes introduced by the translator for theological reasons, are confirmed. Professor Giesebrecht then treats of the passages omitted in the LXX., which amount to one-eighth of the whole book, and of its very few additions to the Hebrew text. Of the latter he finds that only in twenty-three cases, all very small, has the LXX. the better and older material. Of the former a good many are glosses, probably of later date than the LXX. ; but from this we must not infer that the LXX, has a better text behind it in every single case where it is briefer. Where the translator had difficulties and we have already seen that often he was ignorant— there he contracted or omitted. It can be proved that he did so with single words; he may have been equally remiss with whole sentences. He was further tempted to compress, by the redundant style of Jeremiah; he left out synonyms and shortened parallels. But it is often impossible to decide whether an omission is due to him or to the text from which he worked. This appears not to have been very good; nor is it any proof of its greater purity that it has none of the "doublettes" which appear in the Hebrew, for these may have come into the Hebrew text after the LXX. version was made. Such is the course of this careful and judicious analysis. further words need be added on its value to the student, both as a statement of the whole case between the LXX. and the Massoretes on the book on which they most differ, and as an independent and clearer proof of the conclusions of the best critics. GEORGE ADAM SMITH. Studien zur Topographie des Nördlichen Ostjordanlandes. Von D. Frants Buhl, Professor, Leipzig. Leipzig: Georg Böhme. Edinburgh and London: Williams & Norgate. M. 1. Price, In twenty quarto pages Professor Buhl, who has himself travelled on the East of the Jordan, gives a lucid description of the natural features of the land between the Yarmuk and Hermon, collects all the references to it in history up to Trajan's constitution of the province of Arabia in 106 A.D.; and then discusses the proposed identifications of several ancient cities, adding one or two of his own. The physical description and historical summary contribute nothing new. They are clear, full, correct. It is interesting to note that so great an authority on the Old Testament agrees with most critics in believing the accounts of Moses' campaign against Bashan "hardly compatible with the older sources" (p. 7). To me it still seems probable that such eastern conquests took place before Israel's crossing of the Jordan, for the geographical reasons I have stated in my Historical Geography (575 ff. 664); and I note that Professor Buhl emphasises Josh. xiii. 13, a contribution from a very ancient source, as proof that the conquest of Eastern Palestine took place at least at a very early date. Professor Buhl thinks, "without doubt," that Pompey founded the league of the Decapolis. Surely, when we consider both the character of other city leagues and the fact that the earliest occurrence of the name Decapolis is late in the following century, it is more probable that the league arose long after Pompey, and by the native efforts of the contracting towns. On p. 11 n. 2 Professor Buhl identifies Fik above the Lake of Galilee with Afeka of the Onomasticon, but denies that it represents any Old Testament town. Tesil, S.W. of Nawa, he identifies with the Tharsila of the Onomasticon, as well as the Tharsila which the LXX. substitute for the Massoretic Tirṣa in 2 Kings xv. 14. He rightly disputes the identity of Kasphôn or Kasphôr of 1 Macc. v. 26 with Hasfin. He argues well for the identification of the two cities which Eusebius declares bore in his day the name of Asteroth-Karnaim with El-Merkez and Muzeirib respectively. The latter, he thinks, was most probably the Old Testament town of the name, Gen. xiv., etc., as well as the Karnain of 1 Macc. v. Very successful is the identification of the Ephron of 1 Macc. v. Guided by a suggestion of Grätz, who identifies it with the Gefrun of Polybius, Buhl places it in the modern Wady Gafr in northern Gilead. GEORGE ADAM SMITH. La Pensée Religieuse dans le Nouveau Testament: Étude de Théologie Biblique. Par Georges Fulliquet, Docteur des Sciences, Pasteur à Lyon. Paris, Fischbacher. 8vo, pp. 500. THIS is another volume devoted to the study of New Testament theology. The main title, La Pensée Religieuse dans la Nouveau Testament, is chosen purposely by the author to intimate to his readers that what interests him in this study is less the bearing of its results upon dogmatic theology than their bearing upon the religious life. This intimation is made good on every page of the book. Scholasticism is our author's bête noire. Theology, or pensée religieuse (to use his own phrase), has no interest for him, save as it is seen to issue from or to issue in spiritual experience. His attitude towards theology in its relation to spiritual experience reminds one in many respects of the Ritschlian school-though there is little trace of direct influence. A new work on New Testament theology challenges comparison with its predecessors, and especially with its more recent predecessors. We miss in M. Fulliquet's work the conciseness and lucidity of Bovon's Théologie du Nouveau Testament (issued by the same publishing firm), the perfect mastery of material which gives its delightful orderliness and simplicity to Beyschlag's expositions, and the thorough exegetical preparation which distinguishes Wendt's Lehre Jesu. (Our author is well acquainted with Weiss, Beyschlag, Weizsäcker, Pfleiderer, and Holsten, but has evidently not consulted Wendt.) From a scientific point of view there is a certain looseness in La Pensée Religieuse-looseness in the framework of the book, and looseness in the exposition. At the same time, it has merits of its own, as a popular and readable exposition of what has been achieved in the department of New Testament theology; more readable, indeed, than some works of higher scientific pretensions. And this service, it must be conceded, the author has rendered he has been at pains to make it plain that the modern investigation of "the religious thought in the New Testament" carries with it great gains for the spiritual life of the Christian disciple. There is a warm religious glow in M. Fulliquet's pages which reminds the reader that his author is a Christian teacher, who would persuade men of the wonderfulness of the Christian experience which gives birth to the Christian thought of the New Testament. The first section of the book is entitled "Introduction,” and extends to fifty pages. A good deal in this section has only a slight bearing on what follows in the book, but it is interesting as an indication of the author's own theological position. The old doctrine of the plenary inspiration of the Bible is declared to be no longer tenable (sable mouvant de l'inspiration litterale is one of the phrases used). With the authority of the Bible-at least its authority as handled by our fathers-no longer available, another basis must be found on which to rest the argument for Christianity. This our author finds in ethical experience, which vouches for Christianity-the worth of the Gospel, of the Christian life, and of salvation by Christ. He cites Immanuel Kant in this connection, but he seems more familiar with another author he names on the same page, A. Vinet. In another chapter, entitled "The Christian Foundation and the Foreign Form," a distinction is drawn between what is essential in Christianity, and the varying forms it assumes to suit the peculiar needs of different ages. The Gospel, as preached at first, was preached to Jews, and naturally there is much in the New Testament which is merely Jewish form, and not eternally valid (e.g., the doctrine of expiation by blood). Later the Gospel was preached to the Greeks, to whose handling of the Christian faith we owe such ontological doctrines as that of the Trinity. (The metaphysical theology of the "Creeds" finds as little favour with our author as with Harnack and Hatch.) After a reference to scholastic theology, the Reformation theology is shown to have its "foreign form." It had its intimate connection with the Renascence movement. As the scholars of the Renascence delighted to appeal to the ancient classics, so did the Reformation theologians appeal to texts of Scripture, and seek for their doctrines le cachet d'antiquité. To this appeal to the mere letter of Scripture texts did they owe (e.g.) their forensic doctrine of justification. Such preliminary discussions, including also the chapter on miracles, are not strictly an "introduction "introduction" to what follows in the book; they are rather personal explanations. One feature of this volume which is emphasized in the Introduction is the importance of keeping the study of the religious thought of the New Testament in close contact with the personality and experience of which the religious thought is the reflection. It is only through the personality and experience of Jesus, our author justly contends, that the teaching of Jesus can be rightly understood. And what is true of the teaching of Jesus is true of that of Paul and John. This insistence upon the connection of religious thought and the life which lies behind it might be singled out as the special feature of this new study in New Testament theology. The book is divided into four main sections: I. The Christ. II. The Historical Conception of Christianity. III. The Psychological Conception of Christianity. IV. The Mystical Conception of Christianity. A brief indication of the contents of these sections may be useful. I. The Christ (Chapters: 1. The unique Son of the Father. 2. The Reformer of Israel. 3. The Spiritual Life. 4. The Salvation of the world). In pursuance of his aim to link thought with life, our author fixes upon the holiness of Jesus as the central feature of His life. But while holiness may be the central feature of His life as viewed by others, what our author is really in search of is the central spiritual experience of Jesus. For want of clear thinking in his own mind, the author makes a false start, and lands himself in a strange position. Surely the consciousness of His sonship with the Father was a central spiritual experience of Jesus; yet according to our author, it is only after reflection on His own sinlessness, on the sin of others, and the sense of moral obligation involved in the fact of sin, that Jesus reaches the knowledge of God His Father, and the recognition of His Father's love. In an attempt to derive the religious thought of Jesus from His experience, one would naturally expect a discussion of Christ's consciousness of Himself as the Messiah. But that is passed by, and we have little more than the statement that Jesus recognised Himself to be the Messiah. In spite of our author's emphasis upon "personality and moral experience," he gives us little help towards understanding the inner world of the Son of God and Son of man. There is a pretty full treatment of the various aspects and stages of the life of Jesus, but just what we desiderate is absent, and that which the author's own words lead us to expect-a fresh insight into that Mind that created the religious thought of Christianity. M. Fulliquet holds that at the time Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount, He anticipated a great national reformation as the result of His influence, and that it was only towards the close of His ministry that the thought of death was borne in upon Him. The following sentences will indicate how Jesus interpreted the significance of His death. "Thus the man who will find himself in presence of the accomplished fact of the death of Jesus will thereby recognise the odious and tragic character of sin, he will comprehend the moral misery which must be his as long as he submits himself to the influence of the Prince of this world, he will be impelled to throw off the oppressive tyranny, and to demand from Jesus the secret of the spiritual life which He has brought to the world. Thus by the fact of His death, posterity will be rendered able to do that which His contemporaries failed to do-to desire ardently deliverance from sin and to seek eagerly spiritual life. Thus, the work of Jesus will become possible; His influence is assured; it Vol. V.-No. 2. L |