RELATIONS OF NEW TESTAMENT SCIENCE 577 



So, too, we shall fail to understand the more conservative, the 

 Petrine type of Christianity, if we frame our ideas of popular Judaism 

 exclusively on the basis of that which, after the extermination of 

 priestly hierocracy and zealot nationalists, and the extrusion of 

 Christianity, carried reactionary Pharisaism to unimpeded control. 

 The doctrine of vicarious atonement is so far from being a Pauline 

 innovation, that in its simpler form, the application of Isaiah LIII to 

 the suffering of Jesus, we only come across it once in all the Pauline 

 Epistles, and that is not where Paul is giving his own doctrine, but 

 the teaching "received" by him at his conversion, "how that Christ 

 died for our sins according to the Scriptures." The doctrine of the 

 atonement is pre-Pauline. In the simple, non-ethical form of sub- 

 stitutionary expiation it is a doctrine of IV Maccabees, of I Peter and 

 perhaps of I John; but Paul does not so much as refer to the Isaian 

 Suffering Servant. Needless to say, it plays no part in the message 

 of Jesus. Yet it is so great a factor in Christianity that Ritschl can 

 say: The doctrine of the atonement is the Gospel. Paul superim- 

 poses upon it his " moral view" by adding the conception of mystical 

 death and resurrection with Christ; but its origin is Petrine. 



Almost as much might be said of what we used to designate the 

 "higher Christology " of Paul, which has two roots, the apocalyptic 

 and speculative or cosmological, both tinctured by Hellenism. 

 There is not the slightest consciousness in Paul's epistles of any 

 occasion for defending his Logos doctrine for such it is in all but 

 the name against Ebionite conceptions in the mother-church. 

 He argues strenuously against a kind of Arianism which commits 

 the illogical compromise of assigning to the Son a place among 

 angels, principalities, and powers, where he is neither human nor 

 divine; but there is no sign that Paul's doctrine of the divinity of 

 Christ was obnoxious to the Twelve, nor even that his assumption 

 of Christ's preexistence as Second Adam gave offense. On the con- 

 trary his bloody persecution of the Way, "even unto foreign cities," 

 seems already to presuppose a cult Paul could honestly consider as 

 violating the prohibition of Deut. xui, against teaching to serve other 

 gods." Again we must say the doctrine of divine sonship is not 

 derived from Paul's cosmology and Wisdom doctrine, but vice versa. 

 The order is first the gospel of Jesus the Son of God, second the 

 Synoptic superimposition from apocalyptic sources of the Son of 

 Man, third the Pauline Second Adam in opposition to a type of 

 Arianism before Arius, merging into the Johanninc Logos doctrine. 



Gunkel's Schopfung und Chaos was one of the epoch-making books 

 to teach us not to judge Judaism as it was in the days of Jesus and 

 Paul by documents of the Rabbinic period, expurgated and altered 

 by censors whose special object was to prove that Christian ideas 

 never had the slightest justification in the authentic and orthodox 



