I K't! I i B 1 LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. Class I CLARK'S FOKEIGN THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY FOURTH SERIES. VOL. XIII. of Biblical EDINBURGH: T. AND T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET. MD COOL XXXV. PRINTED BY MORRISON AND GIBB, FOR T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. LONDON HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO. DUBLIN, .... GEO. HERBERT. NEW YORK, .... SCR1BNKR AND WELFORD. A SYSTEM OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. BY F ft A N Z DELITZSCH, D. D., M PKOFKSSOR OF THEOLOGY. LF.IPSIC. ham flu (SECON'D EDITION, THOROUGHLY REVISED AND ENLARGED,) BY THE REV. ROBERT ERNEST WALLIS, PHIL. Dn. SKNIOR PRIKST-VTCAR OF WEIJ.S CATHEDRAL, AND INCUMBENT OF CHRIST CHURCH, COXLEY, SOMERSET. Of THE UNIVERSITY i SECOND ENGLISH EDITION. OF 1 Absit ut ideo credamus ne rationem accipiamus sive quaeramus." AUGUSTINCS. EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET. ilDCCCLXXXV. -B 6 , f 6" GENERAL TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. THE translator is assured that nothing is needed on his part to commend this remarkable work to the philosophical student of theology in England, beyond an apology for the imperfections of the English garb in which it appears. The great and growing interest of the subject, and the profound and exhaustive learning which the author 1 has brought to bear upon its treatment, had made the translation of this book a desideratum to many, who only knew it by casual refer- ence and quotation, long before this attempt was contemplated. But the hope that such a work would fall into thoroughly competent hands was indulged in vain, when, by the enterprise of the publishers of the Foreign Theological Library, the pre- sent translator was encouraged to do what he could to supply the need. The result of his endeavour is here presented to the English biblical student as a mine of wonderful depth and fertility, which will well repay those who have the courage to pierce through a somewhat unattractive surface. 1 The subjoined testimony of Dr Fuerst to the deserved reputation of Dr Delitzsch, may not .be uninteresting to the English student : Extract from the Preface to FuersCs Hebrew Concordance. "Non possum quin publice gratum meum animum testificer Fr. Delitzschio Phil. Dr. adolescent! doctrina disciplinaque prsestantissimo, cujus vivo literarum amore et adjutrice consuetudine non paucse de disquisiticnibus meis interioribus ac reconditis maturuerunt. Prseclara ejus in literis biblicis ac judaicis eruditio quam jam coinpluribus operibus satis luculente cornprobravit, eum, quamquam in rebus theologicis prorsus a me dissentientem, socium atque adjutorem mihi adjuuxit, quern in literis rabbinicis ac talmudicis antea auditorem et discipulum habuisse merito glorior ** JULIUS FUERSTIUS. " LIPSLE, Idibus Juniis 1840." 197514 vi TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. The peculiar difficulties with which the translator has had to contend, were not unanticipated by the learned author him- self, and may therefore be reasonably pleaded in bar of severe criticism on the way in which the task has been accomplished. Dr Delitzsch, in a courteous reply to a communication in which he had been informed of the intention to translate his book, says : " You are right: that book of mine greatly resists trans- lation into English; it is full of newly-coined words and daring ideas; and both its form and substance are most elaborately involved." This witness is profoundly true; and should it approve itself so to the reader in the course of his perusal of the following pages, it is hoped that he will indulgently remember this testimony. Any attempt to criticise the work itself, the translator con- ceives to be beyond his province. He contents himself, there- fore, with briefly reminding the reader, that in giving all the author's views and statements without comment or qualification, he does not pledge himself to their indiscriminate adoption or approval. His desire has been, as far as he was able, to convey the writer's thoughts, in English which should as nearly as possible be equivalent to the original. WELLS, Dec. 30, 18G& PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. WHEN } in the summer session of 1854, I proposed a course of Biblical Psychology, I was compelled to discontinue it before beginning the middle division, because unforeseen circumstances had laid me under the necessity of limiting the number of hours appropriated to these lectures. Invited from many quarters to complete the fragment, I laboured ceaselessly onward ; and thus appeared this book, wherein I discharge to my dear hearers of that time, a debt which, as I venture to hope, they had not forgotten. My preparations for the subject are so old, that as early as the year 1846 I was endeavouring to arrange them. In a Latin dissertation upon the elements of man's nature sketched out at that time, but suppressed I proposed to myself an answer to the fundamental question : Whether the soul, so far as it is distinguished from the spirit, belongs by its nature to matter or to spirit ? This question I proposed to consider apart from the ecclesiastical doctrine of dichotomy that had become prevalent, which, moreover, I defended in my Theology of Biblical Prophecy (1845), and in both editions of my Com- mentary on Genesis (1852 and 1853). 1 That dissertation, indeed, is absolutely right in maintaining the essential unity of soul and spirit ; but it suffers from the great defect, that it does not do justice to the substantial difference between the two that is everywhere presupposed in the Holy Scripture. If this de- fect be not remedied, the psychologic mode of speech and matter generally in the Holy Scripture will be an obscure and formless chaos. The key of biblical psychology is found in the solution of the enigma: How is it to be conceived, that spirit and soul can be of one essence, and yet be distinct sub- 1 The first edition of the System of Biblical Psychology (1855) comes between the second (1853) and third (1860) editions of the Commentary on Genesis. vii viii PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. stances? It was not until I was enlightened upon this ques- tion that my confused materials of biblical psychology formed themselves as if spontaneously into a systematic unity. My problem was an historical one, standing indeed in a wholly different internal attitude to the psychologic views of the Holy Scripture, from that in which it stands say to those of Plato or of the Indian Vedanta. In seeking exegetically to ascertain these views, and to combine them into a whole which should correspond to their own internal coherence, I proceeded from the auspicious assumption, that whatever of a psychologic kind Scripture presents will neither be self-contradictory, nor be so confused, childish, and unsatisfactory, as to have any need to be ashamed in view of the results of late anthropologic researches. This favourable assumption has, moreover, per- fectly approved itself to me, without my having feared to con- sider the psychologic statements of Scripture in any other than their own light. For while the Scripture testifies to us of the fact of redemption, which is the revealed secret of human history and the universe, it gives us also at the same time disclosures about the nature of man, which, as well to speculative investi- gation into the final causes and connections of things, as to natural and spiritual self-contemplation, manifest themselves to be divine suggestions. So far, perhaps, the book before us may claim some consideration from inquirers into natural science and philosophy from such, that is, as are not dissembling views of the same kind as were lately frankly avowed by Carl Vogt. But especially would I commend my work to the exami- nation of all those who are interested in the controversy on the fundamental question of psychology at issue between the Giin- therish school and its opponents. For years the works of Anton Gunther were my favourite study; and a book by a friend of his, J. H. Pabst, who preceded him into eternity on July 28, 1838, entitled Der Mensch und seine Geschichte (1830), which first called my attention to Gunther, even attained the im- portance of a turning-point in my course of theological training. Nevertheless I could never make the view of Gunther my own, on the essential distinction between the human soul and spirit, however I might have wished, and that for biblical and experi- mental reasons, which I have explained in this book in several places. The human soul gives life to the body by means of PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. IX natural energies which appertain to matter, but the human soul itself is not the substance of these natural powers. The now greatly extended literature of the psychologic controversy, which is raging in the Roman Catholic Church, a controversy which has lately exploded in the face of all the world in the Allgemeine Zeitung, has not been, I regret to say, very familiar to me. In general, in the immensely wide range of psychological literature, a great deal that is deserving of consideration, both old and recent, has undoubtedly escaped me. But I have read many writings also that were known to me which I have not spoken of, because they were of no use to me ; for an exegetically careful, intelligent, and liberal probing into the depths of Scripture, an investigation which in the church creed has its restraining barrier, but yet not its circum- scribing measure, this just mean between a false bondage and a false freedom craving after novelty, is a virtue not so fre- quently found in the literature of theology. I have striven after this virtue; and as I seek at no point to overstep the limit of the church's judgment up to the pre- sent time, without at the same time assuring myself that I am abiding in harmony with the scripturally sound creed of my church, I shall not be blamed for some theosophic sy m pathies, espe- cially as I have reduced what Jacob Bohme taught about God's sevenfold nature to the more biblical conception of the divine glory (doxd), and, moreover, have only so far appropriated it as it commended itself to me on biblical grounds. It was immediately in the light of this conception that the solution of the psycho- logical problem occurred to me. In it (scil. this conception) hitherto unduly neglected, and, as Weisse (Philosophische Dog- matik, i. 617) not at all too strongly expresses it, emptied of soul and life as it was under the hands of dogmatic philosophy there are still to be found undiscovered treasures of knowledge. I have still much to say to courteous readers. But I shrink from bringing myself any longer personally in the front of my book. In deeply conscious acknowledgment of its imperfection, but yet with a grateful retrospect to the enjoyment I have found in the inquiry, I resign it to the not less merciful than strict criticism of the divine Fire (1 Cor. iii. 11-15). FR. DELITZSCH. ERLANGEN, September 1855. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. THE reason why I so long resisted the general wish for a second edition of my Biblical Psychology, will be found in the book itself. I wanted first to ascertain whether the substantial view of the book approved itself to me anew. When this had been the case, however, I was bound to yield to that wish with the less hesitation, in consideration of the numerous studies of language and history that I have stored in this book indepen- dently of that fundamental view, to which I have now con- siderably added, studies in a more rigid historical apprehension of the nature of my undertaking. I therefore beg all my readers carefully to distinguish the unassailable historical matter that is here placed before them, from that which is submitted to them for examination, and especially from those merely individual attempts to arrange it in general consistency with the scriptural view of God and the world ; and to combine it systematically, agreeably with the suggestions of the Bible. He who in this behalf desires to form a competent estimate of my work, must first occupy a similar dogmatic, or, which is the same thing, ecclesiastical position to mine. That critics who are unprepared to answer the question, What is the Son of man? and who pare down the holy truths of faith in which they were baptized, and on account of which they are called Christians, nay, evangelical Christians, for the greater glorification of their scientific integrity, that such critics should be able to find no enjoyment in rny book, is wholly natural ; and that the exact critics, who have no taste for a gnosis exercised in biblical paths, and the materialist critics, who know of no other induction than one which is calculated by atoms, should reject my book as a senseless production, is neither more nor less than might be expected. x PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. XI I rejoice in another estimate on the part of those who regard everything earnest and without duplicity not merely the book of nature, but also the book of the Holy Scripture as the attestation of a divine revelation, and w r ho acknowledge the ground upon which I build (not without taking heed HOW I build) as the one that endures for ever. If my building on this ground should prove a failure, it is after all a first attempt, which still perhaps may supply many stones for a more solid and newer edifice. It is always something gained, that the doctrinal material of biblical psychology here at length more completely and successfully than formerly appears organically articulated, as is required by the idea of science. And if even many developments slip in, which appear to lose themselves in what is fanciful, and can pretend to no de- monstrative force, a reproach which no science will escape, if it be concerned with the invisible, the spiritual, it is a fault that may be easily atoned for by the instructive com- munications of most manifold contents presented in connection therewith. In such readers, thankful, and yet critically examining and sifting, the book has not hitherto been deficient. And if I thank those who, as Noack and Strobel, have considered it intelligently, although unfavourably, and have not despatched it with an arrogantly brief notice, or still more arrogantly ignored it altogether, I am doubly and treblv indebted to those who, as v. Hofmann, J. P. Lange, Schubart, Werner, and v. Zezschwitz, have submitted it to a more or less severe but still friendly criticism. But I have been deeply ashamed of the very favourable consideration which President Dr. K. F. Goschel and General-Major v. Rudloff have devoted to my work. These two honourable veterans, grown grey in the noblest service, have prosecuted the examination of it step for step in special writings. The one is no more among those who live in this world, from whom he was removed on the 22d September in this year, in the seventy-seventh year of his age ; but as the church above and the church below form an undivided living unity, my grateful greeting will find its way to him above. And how deeply I know how to esteem the loving service which the other has rendered to my work, this revision will, I hope, show him, for which the delightful study Xll PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. of his work lias supplied me with an abundance of fertile suggestions. But otherwise, moreover, clear friends, such as Besser, Biesenthal, v. Harless, Luthardt, J. Schubring, v. Strauss, by epistolary, others by oral communication of their critical observations, have rendered service to my work, especially " my Elberfeld Critic," whose critical annotations, communicated to me by the goo f dness of the mission-inspector, Dr Fabri, sug- gested to me rich material for the revision and elaboration of my views of biblical psychology. And although my book should even contain but little that is good originating from myself, yet care is taken that the reader should be made aware of the communications of such others as might partly dissent as to principles, partly might positively correct what has been written. Important inquirers, such as Molitor, Hamberger, R. v. Raumer, Fleischer, Tischendorf, have afforded such contributions. Moreover, there are not wanting extracts from rare books. There is found here the complete draught of the biblical psychology of C. Bartholinus, which I discovered at the library at Nordlingen in a compilation, where I had pre- viously not looked for it; and passages important to the history of science from other writings : moreover, an extract from a mediaeval manuscript, entitled das leben der minnenden sele, which is transferred from the library of Dr. Biesenthal into mine. As only a few pages of the book have remained with- out improvement and enrichment, its extent, in spite of the unequally crowded print, has grown by four sheets. The relation of the soul to the spirit will be found even now also conceived as secondary, but everywhere more clearly and simply expressed. The relation of the dosca to the personal nature of God is represented, as I hope, more convincingly, as well exegetically as speculatively (i. Sec. 3., IV. Sec. 6). The distinction of nature and substance, which in the first edition was assumed, is now discussed (ii. Sec. 4). The trichotomic fundamental text, 1 Thess. v. 23 (n. Sec. 4), and that of creationism, Heb. xii. 9 (n. Sec. 7), are searchingly con- sidered. And equally so, the interpretation of the foundation texts of the conscience, Rom. ii. 15 (in. Sec. 4); of the relation of the soul to the blood, Lev. xvii. 14 (iv. Sec. 11) ; and of the antinomy of the spirit and the flesh unabolished in this PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. Xlll world, Rom. vii. (v. Sec. 6), are investigated anew. The just claim of biblical psychology to be called a science (Proleg. Sec. 2) ; the ideal pre-existenre of the historically actual (i. Sec. 2) ; the similitude of God, and not merely of the Logos in man (n. Sec. 2); the dualism of spirit and matter (n. Sec. 4) ; the distinction between a wider and a narrower conception of irvevpa (iv. 4, 5, v. 6) ; tlie fundamentally of the will (iv. 7); the priority of the spirit over the soul (iv. b); the conception in the evangelical history of the Kenosis (v. 1); the importance to the history of redemption of the Descent into Hell (vi. 3); the actual reality, in the sense of Scripture, of the conjuration of the dead, 1 Sam. xxviii. (VI. Sec. 5) are all established anew, with reference to the objections that have been advanced. Language, as a psychological manifestation, is better appreciated than before, as well in accordance with Scripture as experience (iv. 4, 10) ; the nature of the dream is more sharply defined, and its biblical name explained (iv. Sec. 14) ; and more atten- tion is directed, in the region of extraordinary phenomena of the life of the soul, to the individual degrees and conditions of prophecy (iv. 14, v. 5). The earlier view of the psychologic matter of fact of possession (iv. 16), and the view of the re- lation of the resurrection-corporeity to the present one (vii. 1), are justified. Many psychologic definitions of relation, as soul, power, and matter (iv. 9), person (I) and nature (iv. 2), heart and brain (iv. 12), are newly examined, and the history of the views referring to them enlarged upon. In this manner the revision is extended to every paragraph. The substantial views, and the arrangement of the material, are nevertheless first and last the same. To the doings of the later physiology, empirical psychology, and medical psychology, I have referred in this second edition, as compared with the former, not more frequently, but rather more seldom, because I have gained the experience, that the representatives of this school of inquiry do not quite approve of seeing themselves named by a theologian of my tendency. And such references might, besides, easily be misunderstood, as though biblical views ought to be modelled according to the results of natural science (precarious though they are), or the latter according to the former. Yet they were not always to be avoided. But my task is one wholly uncon fused with that xiv PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. of these inquirers. The book whose answers to the questions respecting the source, the operations, the conditions, and destinies of the soul I have undertaken to discover, is not the book of nature, but the book of Scripture ; and I have written for those to whom the answers of this book of books are not indifferent, and who know not merely a natural world of ex- perience, but also one that does not give place to that, in reality of self-conviction. Thanks be to God for the capacity bestowed once again to accomplish this work. May He bless it, to the stimulating of further labours in this field of biblical psychology. Should it, moreover, be impossible entirely to solve the problems which meet us here, still the Creator of all things is to be glorified, that He has granted to the human soul the capacity of raising itself above itself by self-investigation, and with the necessity for this investigation has imparted the blissful pleasure that proceeds therefrom. FR. DELITZSCH. ERLANGEN, Mid-November 161. CONTENTS, PROLEGOMENA. PAGE SEC. I. History of Biblical Psychology, .... 3 II. Idea of Biblical Psychology, .... 12 III. Method of Biblical Psychology, .... 19 APPENDIX. Caspar Bartholinus' First Sketch of a Biblical Psy- chology, . ..... 26 I. THE EVERLASTING POSTULATES. SEC. I. The False Pre-existence, . . . .41 II. The True Pre-existence, . . . .46 III. The Divine Archetype, ..... 55 APPENDIX. Letters of Molitor on Jacob Bourne's Doctrine of a Nature in God, . . . . . 65 II. THE CREATION, SEC. T. Man as the Object of the Six Days 1 Work, . . 71 II. The Divine Likeness in Man, .... 78 III. The Process of Creation, . . . .81 IV. The False and the True Trichotomy, . . .103 V. The Origin of the Psyche in an Ethical Point of View, . 119 VI. The Difference of Sex, . . . . .124 VII. Traducianisin and Creationism, .... 128 APPENDIX. R. von Rautner on the Fundamental Import of the names " Geist " and " Seek," . . .143 III. THE FALL. SEC. I. The Sin of the Spirit and the Sin of the Flesh, . , 147 II. The Ethico-Physical Disturbance, . . .151 III. Shame and Fear, . . . . .154 IV. Conscience and Remoteness from God, . . . 159 V. The Promise and Faith, . . . .170 APPENDIX. From Pontoppidan's Mirror of Faith, . . .176 IV. THE NATURAL CONDITION. SEC. I. Personality and the " I," . . . .179 II. Personal Life and Natural Life, . . . 185 III. Freedom, . . . . . .191 XVI CONTENTS. PAGE SEC. IV. The Trip! icity of the Spirit, . . . 196 209 222 241 247 258 V. Nous, Logos, Pneunia, VI. The Seven Powers of the Soul, VII. The Established View of the Capacities of the Soul. VIII. The Beginning and Development of the Threefold Life, IX. The Twofold Aspect of the Soul, X. The Body as the Sevenfold Means of Self Representa tion to the Soul, .... XI. Soul and Blood, .... XII. Heart and Head, .... XIII. Within>the Body the Intestines and the Kidney.*, XIV. Sleeping, Waking, Dreaming, XV. Health and Sickness, .... XVI. Natural and Demoniacal Sickness, 266 281 292 813 324 337 345 360 XVII. Superstition and Magic, APPENDIX I. Passages from the Physics of Comenius, . . 373 II. Theses on Fire and Light, Soul and Spirit. By Jul. Hamberger, .... 370' V. THE REGENERATION. SEC. I. The Divine-Human Archetype, .... 381 II. The New Life of the Spirit, . . . .393 III. The Conscious and Unconscious Side of the Work of Grace, ...... 401 IV. The Actus Directi and Refexi of the Life of Grace, . 407 V. The Three Forms of the divinely wrought Ecstasy, and the Theopneustia, ..... 41? VI. The Unabolished Antinomy, .... 433 APPENDIX I. Luther's Trichotomy, .... 460 II. Upon the "Spirit of the Mind." A. From H. TV. Clemens' Work on the Powers of the Soul, . 462 J5. From a Mediaeval Tractate entitled Das Leben der Minnende Sctle, . . . . .464 VI. DEATH. SEC. I. Soul and Spirit in the midst of Death, . . .467 II. The True and the False Immortality, . . . 473 III. Future Life and Redemption, .... 479 IV. The False Doctrine of the Sleep of the Soul, . . 490 V. The Phenomenal Corporeity and Investiture, . . 499 VI. The Relation of the Souls of the Righteous to the Cor- poreity of Christ, ..... 513 VII. The Relation of Souls to their Soulless Corporeity, . 520 APPENDIX. Johann Heinrich Ursirius on the Intermediate State of Souls, . . . . . 526 VII. RESURRECTION AND CONSUMMATION. SEC. I. Spirit and Soul in the Act of Resurrection, . . 535 II. The Metempsychosis, ..... 545 III. The Doctrine of Restoration, . . . .547 IV. Progress in Eternity, ..... >55 APPENDIX. From a Sermon of the Author's on Rom. viii. 18-23, . 559 PROLEGOMENA. 11 A Deo discas quod a Deo habeas, aut nee ab alio, si nee a Deo.'* TERTULLIANUS (De Anima). HISTOKY OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. SEC. I. JIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY is no science of yester- day. It is one of the oldest sciences of the church. As early as the second century, we find, in the litera- ture of the period, a book irepl -t/ri^TJ? Kal crco/mro? YI (read KOI) 1/009, by Melito of Sardis, 1 of which Eusebius and Jerome make mention ; and early in the beginning of the third century, the work composed by Tertullian in his Mon- tanist days, De Animd, as 'the first ecclesiastical attempts to supersede the Plicedo of Plato, and Aristotle's three books, irepl ^rvxflS' The work of Tertullian comprises all the leading dogmas on the subject of psychology, and pursues the his- tory of the soul from its eternal source and temporal mode of origination, through its present duration and fundamental con- ditions, into the state beyond the grave. Tertullian's treatise, De censu animce adversus Hermogenem, wherein he maintained against his opponent the divine and immaterial derivation (census) of the soul, is unfortunately lost to us. This loss is greatly to be deplored, because the writings of a teacher so able and so rarely endowed as Tertullian, are still an inexhaustible mine of profound knowledge. The tract irepl ^f%^9, addressed to Tatian by Gregory Thaumaturgus, the pupil and friend of Origen, 2 is a worthless and probably a spurious performance. Hence, therefore, Melito and Tertullian must be regarded as the only worthy inaugurators of the psychological literature of the church. In the fourth century its foundations were strengthened 1 According to Rufinus, its title runs, De anima et corpore et mente; according to Jerome, as in the Syriac version of Eusebius' Eccl. Hist., only De anima et corpore. See Cureton, Spicilegium Syriacum, p. 96, and the splendidly rhetorical passage there quoted from it, p. 53. * See Mohler, Patroloyie, i. G53. S 4 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. I. by the abundant psychological elements contained in the works of the three great Cappadocians, especially in those of Gregory of Nyssa (and among them more particularly his dialogue, Trepl tyvxTJs /cal avacrrdaeajs TT/JO? rrjv a^\5 avOpcoTrov, based on the Aristotelian plan, and the Libri tres de statu animce, directed against Faustus Regiensis by Claudianus Mamercus (Mamer- tus), the special purpose of which is to prove that the soul is neither corporeal nor local ; in the sixth century, the treatise of Cassiodorus, De anima, in twelve chapters, beginning from the meaning of the word, and the conception of the soul, and closing with its future condition ; in the seventh century, the commentary of Johannes Philoponus on Aristotle's work on the soul, which appeared in Venice 2 in 1535, edited by Trin- cavelli. Moreover, to this catalogue belong the Theophrastus of the converted Platonist Aeneas of Gaza, finally edited by Boissonade 1836, being a dialogue on the immortality of the soul (about 490) ; and at the close of the patristic age, the fourth book of the dialogues of Gregory the Great, treating de ceternitate animarum (593-4). In addition to these, when we name the numerous writings on the Hexaemeron, and especially on the creation of man (e.g. those of Lactantius and Anastasius of Sinai), and the many writings upon the resur- 1 Edited by Chr. F. Matthaei, Halle 1802-8. The treatise taken up into the editions of the works of Gregory of Nyssa, ^rspi -^v^q xl ecvxardasM^ is the second and third chapter of this work of Nemesius. 2 The Ao%ott vtpl -^VMS published by Tarinus.with Origen's Philocalia (Paris 1619), and by Caspar Earth, with Mamercus' three books, De statn animas (Zwickau 1655), are excerpta from Philoponus. See Creuzer's Es'say, Scliriften Chrintlicher Philosophen uber die Seele, in his German writings, sec. iii. vol. ii. SEC I.] HISTORY OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 5 rection, beginning with Justin Martyr or (if liis treatise pre- served in fragments be considered spurious) with Athenagoras; finally, the multitude of Christologic and Soteriologic mono- graphs, which entered upon psychologic problems, it is plain that the ancient church had a psychological literature that claims respect no less for its extent than for its substance. When, in the middle ages, Christian science became more systematic, and the most distinguished teachers confessed, after Augustine's example, that in the knowledge of one's self is the starting-point of all knowledge, the subject of psychology be- came a fundamental element of the Summa, or the complete doctrine. But psychology was treated of by scholars of all kinds in specific treatises also, not only by the specially scholastic, but by the natural philosophers and the mystics, partly in the form of commentaries on Aristotle's three books on the soul, as by Alexander of Hales, Peter de Alliaco, and others ; partly in independent monographs, as by Erigena, William of Champeaux, Hugo of St Victor, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, and others, a long list which closed in the fifteenth century with the Viola animce sen de natura homims of Kaymund Sabunde, an abridgment in the form of a dialogue of his great work on natural theology, which is in some sort the keystone of the whole scholastic literature. From these works there is still much to be learnt even in the present day ; for with the dialectic mode of thought there was associated in those times a calm introverted contemplativeness, and a living experience almost elevated into ecstasy. But in general it is their reproach that their minds ran more in Aristotelian than in biblical modes of thought ; in addition to which, it was an inconvenience, that as the readers of Aristotle did not under- stand his works in their original language, they were in a great measure dependent upon the Mohammedan translators and interpreters. Even in Dante's Divina Commedia the psycho- logic terminology is Aristotelian ; for in Dante's estimation Aristotle is the master of those who know (il maestro di color die sanno). There runs, indeed, also through the literature of the middle ages, a strong tendency towards freedom from this dependent relation. Combining Plato with Aristotle, there is the attempt to read immediately in the Book of Nature, and to draw out of the depth of the soul's consciousness ; but men did not 6 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. I. see their way to a free and undivided reference to the teaching of Holy Scripture ; and even had they wished to draw from that source immediately, their ignorance of its language would not allow them to appeal to it at first-hand. It was only by means of the Eeformation that a really free scriptural inquiry on all sides became possible. Psychology could then bring its traditional store of knowledge into the light of Scripture, and thus it advanced into a new phase. Contemporary with Budaeus, Erasmus, and Yives, who were esteemed the triumvirate of science, the German Reformation had, moreover, as its representative a humanist of the highest rank ; and the three books of Vives, De anima et vita (1538), which aim at simplifying the traditional Formulas, 1 appeared almost at the same time as Melancthon's Commentarius de anima (1540), the first compendium of psychology written in Germany. He frequently gave lectures upon it before immense audiences, and published it anew in 1552 under the title, Liber de anima. Even here also, Aristotle, whom Me- lancthon could read in the original as none of the scholastics could, is the highest authority next to Scripture, but its chains are nevertheless broken ; and although many psychologic writ- ings of the scholastics surpass that of Melancthon in fulness and depth of thought, it is superior to them all in a more elegant learning, and a sounder, a more liberal, and a more serene spiritual luminousness. As in Wittenberg, so also in other German universities during the sixteenth and seventeenth cen- turies, psychology was studied, and disputations were held on psychological questions with peculiar interest. The Collegium psycliologicum, edited by John Conrad Dannhauer in his twenty-fourth year, at Altorf (1627), consists of seven such academical disputations. The internal progress of the science, however, was not so considerable as it might have been. The period in question was deeply conservative, and was satisfied with what was already known and dogmatically formulated. In matters on which the creed of the church had not yet decided, men clung too anxiously to views anciently established and maintained by the majority of orthodox teachers, and had no 1 Vives is in favour of unity of the soul : Anima humana inferiores omnes vita sua continet. Humana mens spiritus est t per quem corpus, cui est amnexus, vivit, aptus cognitioni Dei. SEC. I.J HISTORY OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 7 eyes to see clearly and without prejudice the rays of tru^h which shone outside the range of their own confessions of faith. Many a truth, sound, as rightly understood, was rejected on account of possible and actual heretical consequences : as, for instance, the trichotomy of human nature. Many a psycho- logically significant statement of Scripture as, for instance, upon the intermediate state between death and the resurrec- tion was not done justice to. Mysticism, theosophy (with its master Jacob Bohme, 1 incomparably and divinely taught, not- withstanding all the errors into which he was hurried by his zeal against the dead orthodoxy and the miserable ignorance of natural science that then prevailed), the science of medi- cine, which acknowledged the authority of Scripture, and chemistry (represented especially by Paracelsus 2 and John Baptista von Helmont, investigators 3 who, in their daring originality, not unfrequently forestalled the lapse of centuries) : these, in their more liberal movement, anticipated many a con- clusion which has since been undeniably established by scrip- tural investigation and knowledge. At that time it was an ad- ditional misfortune for psychology as a science of the church, that the method of systematizing was so prevalent, and the habit of searching for the testimony of Scripture rather by reference to individual texts than to the general scope and harmony of Scripture, a habit which, above all, changed the analogia fidei from a rule of scriptural interpretation into a measure of what Scripture contained. But Caspar Bartholinus (ob. 1629), the celebrated teacher of medicine and theology in the University of Copenhagen, drew out, in his Manuductio ad veram Psyclw- logiam e sacris literis, a sketch of biblical psychology in which, although only slightly put together in an ungraceful style, and deficient in just exegetic basis, there may neverthe- 1 To this place specially belongs his Psychologia vera, or Forty Questions about the Soul, and Psychologic supplementum: Das umgewandte Auge is on the same subject (vol. vi. of the collected works in the new edition of Schiebler). ' See Preu, System of Medicine of Theophrastus Paracelsus, 1838, in which also the psychology of the great reformer of medical science is exhi- bited in excerpta from his works. 3 In his psychological writings, says Spiess (John Baptista van Hel- mont's System of Medicine (1840), sec. 53), Helmont exhibits himself in his greatest depth and peculiarity ; and he not seldom succeeds in forcing his way into all the clearness of which so difficult a subject is capable. 8 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. I. less be discerned, in the courage which breaks through the customary formalities of scholasticism, some signs of promise in that province of thought. 1 An entirely new era of scriptural investigation commenced with John Albert Bengel (ob. 1752). Hitherto scriptural inquiry had almost exclusively served for the apologetico- polemical proof of truth already acknowledged. Now men began, as well ,of free will as of divine necessity, to devote themselves to the Scriptures, that they might bring the know- ledge already possessed into the light anew, and deepen and extend it. Oetinger's Inquisitio in sensum communem (1752), and the Fundamenta Psychologies ex sacra Scriptura collecta (1769) of Magnus Friedrich Roos, were fruits of this healthy revolution, as also were several psychological treatises of Chr. Aug. Crusius (who among the Saxons trod in the footsteps of the above scriptural inquirers of Wurtemburg), viz. upon superstition, upon magic, and generally upon man's relation to the spirit-world. 2 All these are only preludes to a biblical psychology ; even the tract of Roos 3 itself, which has become very rare, brings together the texts of Scripture treating of ^V^T), Trvevjjia, /capbia without any principle, and in this lexicon- like and mechanical method neither formally nor actually satis- fies the problem of biblical psychology. But the fundamental maxim, ita accedere ad scripturam ut nullum prcestruatur sys- tema, gives, notwithstanding, to this little volume an air of living freshness which enables it to contrast advantageously 1 "With respect to him, see Tholuck's Martyrs of the Lutheran Church of all ranks before and during the time of the Thirty Years' War (1859), p. 234. According to Michaud's Bibliographic Universelle, torn. iii. (Paris 1843), p. 193, the Manuductio appeared in Copenhagen in 1618-9 ; but I have failed to discover or to gain any intelligence of this edition : it is not even in the possession of the Library at Copenhagen. Subsequently, however, I found that the Manuductio is adopted into the Systema Physi- cum, which appeared at Hanover in 1628. It is from this compilation that I have given it in the appendix to these Prolegomena, only omitting some trifling and unessential matters. 2 They are enumerated in my Biblico-prophetical Theology (1845), p. 140. 8 It has now appeared in a German translation (by Cremer of Unna), under the title of Grundzilge der Seelenlehre aus heiliger Schrift, Stuttgart, at Steinkopf's, 1857. Compare the notice by Sprinkhardt in Reuter's Repertorium, 1858, pp. 41-45. SEC. I.] HISTORY OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 9 with writings of such low rationalistic views as the Psychology of the Hebrews of Friedr. Aug. Carus (published in 18(H), after the author's death), and as Ge. Fr. Seiler's Animadversiones ad Psycliologiam Sacram (1778-1787), which is not much higher in its view than the former. 1 And for this reason it has not been without influence. For, as the result of the Fundamenta Psyclwlogica of Roos, appeared not only Stirm's extremely careful researches in anthropologic exegesis in the Tubinger Zeitschrift fiir Theologie, 1834, but also J. T. Beck's Umriss der biblischen Seelenlehre, 1843, the first attempt to reduce biblical psychology into a scientific form, and to promote its claim to an articulated relation and an independent existence in the organism of entire theology. The author treats (1) of the soul-life of humanity as Nephesch (soul); (2) how it is dis- tinguished from Ruach (spirit) ; (3) how it is comprehended in the Leb (heart). We do not misapprehend the propriety of this threefold division ; nay, we thankfully acknowledge, that by its means Beck has succeeded in throwing light on many aspects of the subject of biblical psychology; but probably there would be few readers who would not gather from the compendiums of Roos and Beck the impression that this vast scaffolding is not sufficient to provide for all the varied abundance of the subject, and that there needs another less abstract principle of division to articulate it in a living manner, and to separate it intelligently. The historical method leads more surely to such a result. An excellent little compendium by J. G. F. Hauss- mann, Die Biblisclie Lehre vom Menschen (1848), adopts this course, adhering in other respects to Beck. It begins with the origin of man, and ends with the new humanity and its perfec- tion, a biblical anthropology, which in respect of psychology and somatology stands in the relation of the whole to its parts. Along with these two treatises of Beck and Hauss- 1 The Biblical Anthropology of Franz Oberthiir (Professor of Dogmatic in Wurzburg), (vol. i. edit. 2, 1826 ; vols. ii.-iv. 1808-1810 : according to the author's design, the second part of his dogmatics) misleads by its title, but deserves no sort of consideration at all. Equally misleading by its name is Grohmann's Anthropologie des alien und neuen Testaments, in Nasse's Zeitschrift fiir die Anthropologie, 1824, iii. It is a survey of the Old and New Testament history, " according to anthropologic points of view." 10 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. L mann may be named the monographs of Gust. Friedr. Oehler, Veteris testamenti sententia de rebus post mortem futuris (1846) ; of Heinr. Aug. Hahn, Veteris testamenti sententia de natura hominis (1846) ; and, by way of a copious collection of the materials of biblical psychology, the work of Bottcher, De inferis rebusque post mortem futuris (1846). Moreover, also, those por- tions of the Schriftbeweis of J. Chr. K. von Hofmann which trench upon biblical psychology (especially in the doctrine of the creation and the last things), with which are to be compared the kindred sections on prophecy and its fulfilment (especially sees. iii. and iv.), as also with the Christian Ethics of G. Chr. Ad. von Harless, 1 and the full, carefully executed, but rather critically negative than positively constructive portion of Ge. Ludw. Hahn's Theologie des Neuen Testaments, which bears on the subject of anthropology (vol. i. pp. 385-475). Moreover, the compendiums of anthropology and psychology by G. H. von Schubert (1842, edit. 2), of Christian Heinr. Zeller (edit. 2, 1850), of Jos. Beck (edit. 4, 1852), and of Karl Phil. Fischer (1850), to which was added not long ago the Seelenlehre of G. Mehring (1857), a work rich in substantial knowledge, but not yet noticed as it deserves ; all breathe a biblical spirit. These labours, and what the three veterans. Jos. Ennemoser (ob. 1854), Christoph. Ad. von Eschenmauer (ob. 1852), and G. H. von Schubert (ob. 1860), in the course of a long life of unceasing effort and rich in experience, have accomplished for experimental psychology and its history, supply such abounding materials for biblical psychology, that in the neces- sary process of rigid sifting, it has some difficulty to avoid being choked. The three last inquirers have in common the tendency to the profoundest depths of thought. The most spiri- tual and the finest of their works is von Schubert's Geschichte der Seele, in two vols. (4th edit. 1850), of which the compen- dium Der Menschen und Seelen Kunde is only an abridgment, and to which the book Ueber die Krankheiten und Storungen der Menschlichen Seele (1845), together with the 3d vol. on the 1 Both Harless and Hofmaim dispute the possibility of a system of biblical psychology ; but, nevertheless, the works of both the one and the other are substantially on subjects connected with biblical psychology, and are concerned in the reducing to system of views of the same science. More on this matter in the following section. SEC. I.] HISTORY OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. Il Gescldchte der Natur (3d edit. 1855), and the Symbolik des Traums (edit. 3, 1S40), 1 do in some measure belong as supple- ments. The above-named works of investigators, both theo- logical and untheological, deserve our gratitude, as having ren- dered to biblical psychology a help not yet fully estimated. To this science also C. F. Goschel has afforded (apart from his speculative writings) welcome service, in his work on the profound fulness of meaning of the creative writings of Dante Alighieri. 2 Yet, nevertheless, when in the year 1855 this very work appeared, the System der biblischen Psychologic, theo- logy was constrained to bear testimony to her own poverty, to the effect that, since the new era of scriptural interpretation that began with Bengel, the books of Roos and Beck had been the only attempts, with all the present exegetical resources, to establish anew a science whose necessity had been acknow- ledged as early as the first Christian centuries. At the present time, when after long delays I am for the second time putting forth my system of biblical psychology, the number of fellow- labourers in this field are seen to be most gratifyingly upon the increase. Besides the really valuable treatment of single portions and aspects of biblical psychology by v. Zezschwitz (Profangrdcitdt und biblischer Sprachgeist, 1859), Schoberlein ( Ueber das Wesen der geistlichen Natur und Leiblichkeit, in the Annual Register of German Theology, 1861), and others whom we shall have occasion to name further on, the entire scien- tific material of the subject is carefully elaborated anew, with critical reference to my treatment of it, in special writings of Goschel (Der Mensch nach Leib, Seele, und Geist diesseits und jenseits, 1856) and v. Rudloff (Die Lehre vom Menschen nach Geist, Seele, und Leib, 1858). Grateful for the positive instruction and critical suggestions received from these and many other sources, I am attempting the subject once more. 3 Newly published by F. H. Rancke, 1862. 2 Especially deserving of consideration are the following works : Dante AUghierfs Unterweisung iiber Weltschopfung und Weltordnung diesseits und jenseits, 1842 ; Dante Alighieri's Osterfeier in Zwillings-gestern des Himm- lischen Paradieses, 1849 ; and the Easter gift in a similar way, everywhere pointing to Dante, Zur Lehre von den letzten Dingen, 1850. 12 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. II. IDEA OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. SEC. II. SOME well-known scriptural students of late have denied to biblical psychology the capability of verifying itself. Harless, in the preface -to the fourth edition of his Ethics, avows, that while he has no fear at all of exact study of the so-called ma- terialism in the field of psycho-physiology, yet, on the other hand, he greatly dreads the idealism and spiritualism, upon whose misty foundation such frequent and continued attempts have been made to rear a sound psychology ; and in this behalf he refers to Cams' Psyche, and Ennemoser's Geist des Menschen in der Natur, as works in which he could place no real confidence. " I believe," he continues, " that our theologians would do well to concern themselves very little about this department of material investigation, which has only by a pro cess of unauthorized abstraction come to be considered as if it were important of itself, and entirely distinct from the spirit. It is this circumstance which has prevented me from receiving the same pleasure that others have done from the late attempts to construct systems of biblical psychology. 1 For Scripture seems to me to occupy the same position in questions of psychology as in those of cosmogony. In each it is a finger-post directing attention to the position of the world, as to the position of the soul in questions of redemption ; we must neither expect in connection with one nor the other natural description and natural knowledge, not because it could not have been given us in the Scripture, but because it was not intended to be given us. The meaning of its symbols is reserved for that scrutiny to explain, which, not in words and names, but in the facts of nature, toils after the understanding of the sacred hints in the sweat of its brow." In accordance with this, Hofmann says in the second as well as in the first edition of his Schriftbeweis : 2 "A biblical 1 The preface is of the year 1849. Probably he means Beck's Umriss der Isiblischen Seelenlelire. I am not aware of any System der biblischen Pftyrhologie that had then appeared. Mine did not come out till 1855. a I. p. 248, edit. 1 (1852) ; i. p. 284, edit. 2 (1857). SEC. II.] IDEA OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 1 3 anthropology and psychology have been got together, but without finding any justification for it in Scripture, of which Harless rightly says that we must not expect from it natural description and natural knowledge, because it was not intended to be given there. That presumed science is based merely upon such Scripture texts as do not teach what the nature of man is, but on the hypothesis that it is understood what kind of crea- ture is meant when man is spoken of, declare his relation or deportment towards God. " It has been replied," he adds in the second edition, with direct reference to me, 1 " that the Scrip- ture does nevertheless give almost in its first sections disclosures which are deliberately anthropologic and psychologic, when it narrates the process of man's creation ; and it cannot but be worth the trouble to bring together even its anthropological and psychological assumptions, since they could not be so trivial as to be understood of themselves, nor so inconsequent and unconnected as to be capable of no scientific organization. But in respect of these disclosures, they only serve the purpose of rightly defining in a general way the relation to God and to the world, without the knowledge of which there can un- doubtedly be no anthropology and psychology corresponding to the reality ; and as to the presumptions, no one doubts that they can be harmonized together, but without being justi- fied in the expectation that they will form a scientific whole, since they only come to light in proportion as they are used for the expression of facts, which, while they touch on the anthro- pologic and psychologic region, themselves belong to another. A biblical psychology is just as little of a psychologic system as a biblical cosmology is a cosmologic system ; and if it be Pound practicable also to call it theological instead of biblical, it will moreover be permitted to say that there is a theological 1 Referring to p. 181 of the first edition of this book of mine. I have struck out in that place the words that I have here quoted from Hofmann, so as not to repeat myself. R. "Wagner, in the Evang. K. Z. (1857), col. 189, and in his treatise Der Kampf um die Seek vom Standpunkl der Wissenschaft (1857), p. 119, approves of them. But when he says (p. 114), u Biblical anthropology and psychology is the section of theology which chiefly comes into consideration in the references to physiology," BO, on the other side also, he agrees with me in acknowledging the scien- tific claim of biblical psychology, and rightly, as Fabri, in the Evang. K. Z* 1857, Nos. 96, 97, has proved in my defence. 14 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. II psychology only in the same sense as a theological cosmology may be spoken of." And thus the task which I propose to myself would be at the outset a failure, because it would be impracticable. This, however, is by no means the case. The problem, as I under- stand it, is not at all touched by those objections. For that all that Scripture tells us on the spiritual and psychical constitu- tion of man is in harmony with the work and the revelation of redemption, which are the special burthen of Scripture, we deny so little, that we gather from it rather the idea of biblical psychology as distinguished from the empirical and the philo- sophical psychology of natural science. But what Scripture says to us in pursuance of that its great design for the salvation of man, is far more than is admitted by those two writers. For, from the announcement upon the substance of man's nature as it was created which we read in Gen. ii. 7, and which Harless places at the head of his Ethics, there runs throughout Scripture a many-linked chain of assertions upon the pneumato-psychical nature and life of man of declarations which touch the most important fundamental questions of psychology, and throughout depend upon similar fundamental views, and are of such rich import that even Hofmann devotes to these announcements considerable portions of his Schriftbeweis. For all the great questions How is man's soul related to his spirit ? How is man's spirit related to God's Spirit 1 Is the substance of man's nature trichotomic or dichotomic f How is man distinguished as Nature and as Ego ? all these and many other psychologic questions are there attempted to be answered from Scripture ; while, nevertheless, it is maintained that Scripture teaches nothing upon the whole subject. Now, therefore, whether it be called teaching or not, Scripture certainly gives us, on all these questions, the announcements which are necessary to a fundamental knowledge of salvation ; and these announcements are to be exegetically investigated are, because they are of a psychological nature, to be psychologically weighed are to be rightly adjusted, so that they may cohere among themselves, and with the organism of the personal and historical facts of redemption. And here at once is a system ; to wit, a system of biblical psychology as it lies at the foundation of the system of the facts and the revelation of salvation ; and such a system SEC. II.] IDEA OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 15 of biblical psychology is so necessary a basis for every biblical summary of doctrine, that it may be rightly said of the doc- trinal summary which Hofmann's Schriftbeweis seeks to verify by Scripture, that from the beginning to the end, from the doctrine of the creation to the doctrine of the Last things, a special psychologic system, or (if this expression be objected to) a special complex of psychological representations, absolutely supports it. What Scripture says to us of cosmology, may certainly appear insufficient to originate a system of biblical cosmology ; but assuredly it says to us infinitely more about man's soul and spirit than about Orion and the Pleiades. And I would not assert that Scripture offers to us no natural know- ledge of the soul ; I believe it rather to the honour of God's word, to be compelled to maintain the contrary. For, for ex- ample, that the substance of man's nature is dualistic, i.e. that spirit and body are fundamentally of distinct origin and nature that is surely a natural knowledge, a dogma in the faith of which, in spite of all remonstrances of rigid natural investiga- tion, we live and die. And although what Scripture gives us to ponder in such statements as Gen. ii. 7 and 1 Cor. xv. 45 may be called only suggestions, still a biblico-psychological in- vestigation must be justified which takes the course indicated by these hints. Or are we to leave these hieroglyphs to the so- called accurate investigation f I hold this, no less than Harless does, in fitting honour ; but the meaning of these hieroglyphs lies beyond the limit placed to experiment and calculation. It is possible to labour in the sweat of the brow even without the scalpel or the microscope. Even historical problems are not to be solved otherwise than in the sweat of the brow ; and our pro- blem is an historical one, only with the distinction arising from the fact that we stand in a different inward relation to the holy Scripture from that in which we do say to the Vedas or to the Avesta. We desire to bring out exegetically the views of Scrip- ture, on the nature, the life, and the life-destinies of the soul as they are defined with a view to the history of salvation ; and, in accordance with that inevitable requirement which we must impose upon our thinking when it is engaged on the subject of Scripture, to reduce it into systematic harmony. This harmony is only to be the scientifically intercepted reflection of the real harmony in which these representations subsist of themselves. 16 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. II. The risk which we run is not that of seeking to verify something which is impossible, but of substituting for that objective cer- tainty of inward consistency, a feigned consistency, of the exist- ence of which we have persuaded ourselves. For a systematizing of the iwaterial of biblical psychology is certainly not practicable, without the endeavour to unfold many a merely indirect scrip- tural saying, and to draw connecting lines here and there between individual points, according to the scriptural meaning. But as the Scripture is no scholastic book of science, this is more or less essential in every science that is based upon it as a foundation. Should we not always be successful in this task of construction in hitting the sense of Scripture, it will be just as little argu- ment against the claims of the material of biblical psychology to scientific treatment, as it would be against the claims of Homeric psychology, that the inquirers in that region 1 con- tradict one another on some important points. The task which I propose to myself is practicable ; for under the name of biblical psychology I understand a scientific representation of the doctrine of Scripture on the psychical constitution of man as it was created, and the ways in which this constitution has been affected by sin and redemption. There is such a doctrine in Scripture. It is true that on psychological subjects, just as little as on dogmatical or ethical, does Scripture comprehend any system propounded in the language of the schools. If it taught in such a way, we should need as little to construct psychology from it as we should dogmatics and ethics. But still it does teach. If it proceeds upon fundamental views whose accuracy it absolutely takes for granted ; if it narrates or predicts facts about which we should know nothing, or nothing certain, were they not testified to us by it ; if the most manifold natural and supernatural conditions of the inner life of man find therein a self-evidence which admits no suspicion of self-deception or distortion ; if it represents to us, in the way of consolation and warning, 1 The Homeric psychology has found representatives in Wagner, in his PxycMoyia Homerica (Paris 1833) ; v. Nagelsbach, in his lately edited Homeric Theology (1840) by Autenrieth (1861) ; Grotemeyer, in his Pro- f/ramm. Homers Grundansicht von der Seek (Warendorf 1854) ; and others. The extent of this literature, which began with Halbkart's obsolete Psychologia Homerica (1796), is discreditable to biblical theologians. SEC. II.] IDEA OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 17 the influence of superhuman powers, both good and evil, on the human life of the soul, all this is so, and its purpose is, for our instruction, assuredly not to afford us an unfruitful learning, and to satisfy unspiritual curiosity (and neither in- deed is this the purpose of theologically scientific doctrine), but to promote our salvation. But the science has the duty of bringing to light the materials of doctrine latent in the Scrip- tures, of collecting that which is scattered there, of ex- plaining that which is hard to be understood, of establishing that which is doubtful, and of combining the knowledge thus acquired into a doctrinal whole, consistent and compact. The formal possibility of the accomplishment of such a task is guaranteed by the undeniable unity of character pre- vailing in the doctrinal materials of psychology placed before us in Scripture. Or are the psychological assumptions and inferences of the biblical writers not in harmony with them- selves ? We maintain thorough fundamental agreement, with- out thereby excluding manifold individualities of representation and mode of speech ; for in their essential spiritual unity the special writers have each their characteristic stamp. The passion for system exaggerates this. Its game is an easy one. How little is required to imitate it ! Learned treatises would prove that the Elohist and Jehovist of the Pentateuch, that the author of the book of Job and of the words of Elihu, that David and Solomon, psychologically differ from one another ; even although the science for that purpose should be that of conceiving straw and bringing forth stubble. But let the first page of the Holy Scripture be only read, and the last compared with it ; and not until the reader has felt himself transported with wonder at the majestic harmony of the word of God from Alpha to Omega, let him tell of the peculiarities of individual writers in the midst, of this divine-human concert. That which is peculiar does not concern the fundamental views. There is a clearly defined psychology essentially proper to the Holy Scripture, which in like manner underlies all the bibli- cal writers, and intrinsically differs from that many-formed psychology which lies outside the circle of revelation. 1 There- 1 Thus we judge with Schbberlein, in his notice of v. Rudloff, Studien u. Kritiken (1860), p. 145, which in appropriate words comes to the defence of biblical psychology ; and therefore we have, on scientific ground, the B 18 PROLEGOMENA. LSEC. II. fore the problem of biblical psychology may be solved as one problem. We do not need, first of all, to force the biblical teaching into unity ; it is one in itself. The biblical psychology thus built up is an independent science, which coincides with no other, and is made superfluous by no other in the organism of entire theology. It is most closely allied with so-called biblical theology, or (since what is accustomed to be most unaptly so called is rightly occupied, partly in the history of salvation, and partly in the history of revelation), with dogmatics. Biblical, or, as may be said, theological psychology (to distinguish it from the physical- empirical and philosophic-rational science), pervades the entire material of dogmatics, determining all the phases of man's psychical constitution, conditioned upon those facts and rela- tions momentous to the history of salvation which form the substance of dogmatics. But it asserts in all these associations its own peculiarity, in that it considers all that is common to it with dogmatics only so far as it throws light or shadow into the human soul, draws it into co-operation or sympathy, and affords explanations upon its obscurities. Much which is only incidentally dealt with in dogmatics, is in psychology, which herein is subsidiary to it, a main feature : for example, the relation of the soul to the blood, as material to the doctrine of the atonement ; and the question, as important to the doctrine of original sin, whether the soul is propagated per traducem or not : as, on the other hand, the scriptural doctrines of the tri-unity of God, of the good and evil angels, of the divine- human personality of Christ, which in dogmatics are principal matters, are only so far treated of in psychology as they are connected with the formation of the divine image in man, with the good and evil influences of the spiritual world upon him, and with the restoration of the true human nature. The new relation of God to humanity in Christ, which is the centre of entire theology, is also the centre of psychology as well as of dogmatics. Dogmatics have to do with analyzing and systematizing the believing consciousness of this new relation which rests on and in the Scripture. Psychology, on the con- trary, has to do with the human soul, and forth from the soul, right, which the critic in the Literar. Centralblatt, 1855, No. 45, refuses to iu>, to speak of the Scriptures almost entirely as of one subject. SEC. III.] METHOD OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 19 with the constitution of human nature, which is the object and subject of this new relation. From this conception of our science which we are still as ever convinced, resists the fiery trial of criticism we turn now to the method of realizing it. METHOD OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. SEC. III. SINCE the Holy Scripture regards man not from the physio- logic point of view of nature's laws, but everywhere as in definite ethico-historical relations, we shall adopt the historical mode, and prosecute the history of the soul from its eternal antecedents to its everlasting ultimate destiny. Thus conceived of, the matter of psychology divides itself into the following seven heads : 1. Eternal Presuppositions. 2. Creation and Propagation. 3. Fall. 4. Present Constitution. 5. Re- generation. 6. Death and Intermediate State. 7. Resurrec- tion and Perfection. Since psychology after this manner proceeds from eternity, and passing through time turns back again to eternity, there will not be wanting to it a completed unity ; but the successful accomplishment of our task will de- pend on our not losing sight in any wise of the distinction between psychology and dogmatics. Our source is the Holy Scripture, in union with empirical facts which have a biblical relation, and require biblical examination. The Old and New Testament concern us equally ; for the Old Testament, which is more directed to the creation and nature, i.e. to the origin of things and their external manifestation, gives us disclosures which the New Testament at once takes for granted ; the New Testament, on the other hand, affords us, on the ground of the incarnation of the Son of God, far deeper and more accurate knowledge of the nature of God, and of the ethical relations of man to the invisible as to the visible world ; and, moreover, it is there that we first learn to understand rightly the beginnings of man in the light of the clearly and specially revealed last things. We 20 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. Ill, must carefully consider this difference of the two Testaments, and in general the gradation of the revelation ; and we must take pains to distinguish between what Scripture designedly teaches, and what it adopts without close discussion, as the psychologic view generally received in antiquity, or current among the Semitic tribes, or become stereotyped in language, in order to attribute to it its peculiar doctrinal value in ac- cordance with its character of revelation. Finally, it is not sufficient, by way of adducing proofs, to pick out individual texts from Scripture ; but there is necessary, generally, inspection and inquiry into the entire scope of Scripture, that we may not fall back into the faults which made the ancient manner of referring to Scripture proofs, un historical, one-sided, and frag- mentary. Moreover, we must guard ourselves against the self- deception of interpolating speculative thoughts suggested by Scripture, or physiologic notices foreign to it, in Scripture itself. To interpret into Scripture the circulation of the blood, or the importance of the cerebral system to the activity of the soul, would be just as foolish as to reject such new discoveries be- cause no scriptural statements imply any reference to them. It is the peculiarity of revelation to accommodate itself to the degree of cultivation of every age, and to speak, not the language of the school, but the language of life. This observation is just, but it must not be pressed too far. It is incompatible with the purpose of revelation to make use of an absolutely inadequate means of representation, and incompatible with its truthfulness to base itself upon false presumptions. How, for example, could Gen. i. be a divine revelation, if the substance of what is revealed were limited to the fact that the world is a created work of divine power and wisdom, and if all the rest were mere pageantry, not to be received by physical science ? a low view, which has already been refuted in individual instances of im- portance by physical science itself ! It is just the same with the psychological presuppositions of Scripture. From the standpoint of our present empirical knowledge they appear unsatisfactory, because, as in the case of what Scripture says on astronomical subjects, they are here or there only gathered from the external form of the phenomenon ; but, never- theless, they are not false : they only become so when the form of the revelation, borrowed from the modes of repre- SEC. III.] METHOD OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 21 sentation and expression of daily life, is regarded as belonging to its substance. Thus, for example, he who would reproach the Scripture, that it always places the soul in immediate rela- tion with the blood, and not with the nerves, would be just as unjust as another would be foolish if he read in Scripture of electricity, magnetism, and such like things, or perhaps of the nervous fluid, abandoned as it is (I do not raise the question how rightly) by modern physiology. Of all these things Scrip- ture can say nothing, since the Holy Ghost speaks there with a human tongue; and human representation and language had not in those times any ideas and words for those things. But we should deeply wrong the Scripture, if we thought that the glory of its psychologic representations must grow paler and paler in the daylight sunshine of the present day, and that biblical psychology is perhaps such as the psychology of Homer nothing but a fragment of the history of the training of the human spirit, of only antiquarian value! Certainly, Scripture must forego the honour of having anticipated physical research in discoveries which have been made by sections and vivisections, and all kinds of experiments on animal bodies ; but the honour of Scripture consists in the fact, that it offers us a knowledge just at that point where the knowledge of physical research (which, without it, is more physiologic than psychologic) hope- lessly fails, unless man's impulse of knowing allows itself to be hushed up by idle promises of an undefined future. The path of knowledge of experimental physical investigation advances from without, inward, and has there before it a limit beyond which it cannot now or ever pass. The mode of evidence of the revelation, which gives itself to the internal experience, goes, on the other hand, from within, outward, and has no other bounds than those which it places to itself in accordance with man's attainment in culture and need of salvation. 1 Natural investigation, for example, can tell us most accurately how, by means of a purely optical process, the forms of the outer world 1 " Where is the rule and the measure," cries to us, on the other hand, Noack, in his Psyche, vol. iii. 1860, p. 330, " whereby this way of evi- dence of the revelation which gives itself to the internal experience is to be judged?" We answer: In the trial of its genuineness, which only the real and genuine one can really undergo, and in the essential harmony of the internal experiences of faithful Christians of all times and of all places. 22 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. III. come in contact with the retina expanded on the background of the eye ; but here it must stop : it can go no further ; for how, by the further agency of the optic nerve and of the brain, the image becomes a perception of this it can never tell us anything. It is absolutely impossible to show how, by means of the brain, irritation of the nerve of sensation is transformed into perception; how thence into the thought-product of perceptions; how thence into the self-consciousness that overrides and pene- trates the entire physico-psychical mechanism. The final im- pulses of the process of life, the Subject which, by means of the nervous system, stands in reciprocal relation with the outer world, and, as it were, superintends this telegraphic apparatus ; the existence of the spiritual dignity and infinite perfectibility which distinguishes man from the brute ; these are things of too inward a character ever to be arrived at in the sensuous region of firmly grasped physical investigation. Its method proceeds from without inwards, and there strikes upon insurmountable limits, which it is compelled to acknowledge, if it would not fall into conceptions which by the laws and the necessity of thought would lead ad absurdum. Divine revelation, on the other hand, takes the reverse way : it begins at that which is innermost in man the spirit ; expands itself thence over the psychical life, and has no further interest in anatomizing the marvellous edifice of the bodily organs of that life (although the sacrificial worship promoted their study in brute bodies), since for it this present corporeity, degraded to sin and death, is a Karapyovfjievov. But as far as late experimental research has actually revealed to us the secrets of human bodily life, its results agree with the disclosures of Scripture about spirit and soul, far removed from favouring a materialism which is opposed to Scripture ; for, as a late opponent of the folly of the materialistic view of the world has with only too much truth observed, it is not the actual results of physical investigation, but the hypotheses grafted on to them, and arrived at from quite a different source, which imply the denial 1 of every 1 F. Fabri, in hia letters against materialism, 1856, and Evang. K. Z. 1857, col. 1069. " Where the question is about the fundamental views of a man, from which are built up his moral and spiritual views, there ia primarily placed in the scale a factor which lies outside the domain of ' strict demonstration,' viz. the will of man." SEC. III.] METHOD OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY. 23 nobler religious truth, and even of the substantiality and reality of the spiritual altogether. Our task reminds us not to leave unconsidered many of those results attained by means of the dissecting knife and the microscope ; for biblical psychology has not alone to bring out the psychologic aspects of Scripture, but also to show, in the face of later science, that, so far as they are well-founded and fairly-balanced presumptions of the revelation of salvation, there is due to them a continually better established claim to subsistence and authority on our consciousness. In these inevitable references to late physical science, and especially to physiology, we shall make it our duty to use the strictest care ; and we believe, therefore, that we have no occasion to fear lest any one of the modern philosophers whom we shall name should be able to point out to us that we have not understood him, although he possibly might have to complain that we have not applied what he has said, as he himself intended it. But are we on that account to abstain from all references ? Scientific theology has been lately admonished by a physical philosopher 1 for resting great hopes upon such rotten supports and in such troubled waters as the results of natural inquiry. And with reason. But neither has it any ground for entertaining great apprehensions. The book of nature and the book of Scrip- ture are precisely two books which from the beginning were intended to be compared with one another. And if the student of nature asks the theologian or himself as a Christian, How readest thou? the theologian must also in return ask the stu- dent of nature, How readest thou? The reciprocity of this question has indeed almost ceased. It tends, however, to the honour of theology, that its interest in the book of Scripture is inseparable from its interest in the book of nature, just as it adds discredit to the later physical science, that for the most part it scarcely concerns itself about the book of Scripture, and establishes a yawning gulf between the two divine records. Theology cannot treat it in like manner, for the two books have as their author the one God, from whom the science itself is named. Therefore it cannot refrain from collating the two books, and, moreover, the exegesis of the two books. And it is this which is required in the nature of the problem itself, 1 Kud. Wagner, in Der Evang. K. Z. 1857, col. 367. 24 PROLEGOMENA. [SEC. III. in the field of biblical psychology. But if, in certain cases, a palpable contradiction appears between the interpretation of Scripture and that of nature, we shall be allowed to point out that, for the present at least, the biblical representations are not yet convicted of absurdity. With the materialism of our days, however, we shall concern ourselves little. Biblical psychology may remit the struggle against this barbarism to the empirical and philosophical science. There are still many other forms of vigorous opposition between the biblical manner of looking at things and the modern consciousness, and these must impar- tially be presented to us. On this account we shall certainly here and there be constrained to adopt an apologetic tone. And if we apply apologetically something of what has been said by natural philosophers in such a way that what they have not abso- lutely meant to say shall further the cause of Scripture, we are sorry to give them this cause of complaint, and we console them beforehand with the assurance that it shall not often happen. For, for the most part, in our apologetic argument for the Scripture, which is associated with the exegetic-historic argu- ment from Scripture, we shall rely partly upon undoubted facts of our own inward life, and partly upon well-attested facts of psychical occurrence without us. In respect of the former, we here upon the threshold make the avowal, that, in order to its right treatment and understanding, biblical psychology pre- sumes above all, that the student has personal experience of that living energy of the word of God which is declared in Heb. iv. 12 to divide asunder the inward man with the sharp- .iess of a two-edged sword. Even that natural philosopher 1 just referred to has not been ashamed to make the good confes- sion : " Only he to whom it is given to apprehend the highest mysteries of revealed religion in full subjective faith, will be able with satisfaction to himself and to his age to philosophize upon the natural phenomena of the life of the soul." Such also is our conviction. That man only who in the way of repentance and of faith in God has returned to himself, is capable of any knowledge about himself which does not stop short at the threshold, and indeed, according to the unalterable law ex fide intellectus, is capable of a knowledge, genuine, rest- ing on sufficient and reasonable grounds, and truly accurate. 1 Rud. Wagner, Der Kampfum die Seek, p. 112. SEC. IlU METHOD OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGT. 25 Nevertheless, we are only here declaring the prerequisite of any intelligent penetration of the material of biblical psychology, and indeed we hereby desire to impress it chiefly upon ourselves as a matter of serious warning. In reference, however, to the well-attested facts of psychical occurrence external to us, there has never perhaps been a time more favourable to biblical psychology, as there has also never been a time that needed it more than the present, which, in features that are constantly becoming more manifest, earns the character of the last days. For the spirit-world, good as well as evil, which for all times has been the background of earthly events, is coming more and more to the front in our times ; the end of the Christian era becoming, according to a divine law in the formation of history, increas- ingly like to its beginning. Powerful and awakening invasions of good spirits into the psychical life of men on the one hand, and on the other, all kinds of magic, even to the summoning up of the dead, are becoming more and more frequent. We would not be deaf to the preaching of repentance by the former pheno- mena, nor blind to the pernicious power of the latter, in which demoniacal influence and human quackery are adversely in- volved. By throwing light from the word of God upon these twofold phenomena, in order to draw from it the power of dis- cerning of spirits as far as is attainable to every man, we are satisfying an increasingly urgent necessity of the present day. In the Holy Scripture we have the solution of these enigmas ; but they are moreover a living commentary on the Scripture, which we must not ignore, if we would not, to our everlasting disgrace, neglect the consideration of the signs of the times. Thus, then, for the second time, we tread anew the road of inquiry, whose plan we thus projected. May God bless our going out and our coming in ! Thanks, moreover, to all those who have equipped us for this second pilgrimage by kindly critical consideration of our first attempt. We acknowledge good-will even in those who have not ignored our undertaking. They will all find their names inscribed here as in a genealogical table. They may all look on themselves as fellow-workers in this second edition; for it is only by mutual assistance that science makes progress. As it is said of the church, There are many members, but one body ; so it may be said of science, There are many labourers, but one labour. APPENDIX. GUIDE TO A TRUE PSYCHOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY, TO BE GATHERED FROM THE SACRED WRITINGS. ATTEMPTED BY GASP. BARTHOLINUS. PROOEMIUM. PHILOSOPHERS have taken credit to themselves, and have almost triumphed in the course of many ages, in respect of human comments upon the nature of the soul, its diversities and faculties, and generally of dreams without sleep, and shadow without substance ; closely written volumes having been published on this argument, to the great damage not only of paper, time, and labour, but also of truth. As soon, however, as we consult the Spirit of God in His oracles and in His most sacred records, it is very manifest that the wisdom of the age has attained to little or nothing of the truth. And how could it be otherwise in so sublime an argu- ment, when those who are wise after the manner of men are blind even to things which lie in their path and are obvious to their senses, and who, as Scaliger says, lick the glass vessel, but never touch the pottage? Wherefore, although in this imbecility of our nature we neither can nor will promise an exact and accurate ^rv^(p\o^iav^ yet we will contribute a compendious introduction, with the hope of making the whole matter more fruitful to others, and of affording both the occa- sion and the subject for its discussion and elaboration. The first foundation, then, of the true doctrine of the human soul, appears as a sacred one in Gen. ii. 7, in these words : " Formavit Dominus Deus hominum pulverera de 22 APPENDIX. 27 terra, et inspiravit in faciem ejus spiraculum vitarum, et fuit homo in animam viventem." Formavit, i.e. He constructed like a potter. Whence Job (x. 9), "Remember that Thou hast made me as the clay;" and Jer. xviii. 2, God is compared to the potter, and man to the clay. The Hebrews will have the Hebrew word ^! written with a double Jod, to signify the twofold formation, earthly and heavenly; for the reason that below, ver. 19 in the same chapter, "1W is found in reference to the construction of other animals with a single Jod, pointing to a single life, and that not immortal. Dominus Deus hominem pulverem. Not only out of the dust of the earth, but man altogether was formed dust out of the earth. For which reason below. Dust thou art (not only " of dust"), and into dust shalt thou return. De terra, or the mud of the earth. Et inspiravit, i.e. He introduced breath with power. "Where some persons are absurd who describe God anthropomorphically, as having blown into Adam's nostrils like one with distended cheeks, the breath or spirit, as if a particle of His own Spirit. In faciem ejus. Thus the LXX. and Vulg. For in and by his countenance, man is chiefly seen, and his various affec- tions, as anger, joy, sadness, etc. Therefore, although the inspiration was communicated to the whole body, yet that body is characterized from the most noble and conspicuous part to wit, the countenance. In other respects, in the largest signifi- cation, aph and anaph mean that by which any kind of a thing is beheld, what and what like it is, except when rpoTry, it is taken for other things. Hence it is taken also for anger or rage ; because chiefly this affection is manifest, and especially in the face. Moreover, it is taken for the nostrils, by which the face is largely characterized ; for an injury to the nose dis- figures the entire face. Mercerus, therefore, takes needless trouble to induce us to understand nostrils as the actual mean- ing in this passage, since it cannot be denied that in many places of Scripture this word implies the countenance. Spiraculum vitarum, doubtless of more than one, and cer- tainly of a twofold life, Heb. D s *n DDC^ (for neschama is the same which in Greek is irvorj, breath, blowing, breathing, respi- ration, and in construction nischmai), which two words placed 28 PROLEGOMENA. conjointly Paul seems to repeat separately, Acts xvii. 25, where he says that God gives to all &)?)z> KOI Trvor]V, i.e. life and breath. Whence Forster, in his Lexicon, infers a distinction between the natural man who eats, drinks, begets, etc., and the spiritual and heavenly man regenerated by faith in Christ, who performs spiritual actions, such as are knowledge of God, love and praise and joy in God, such an one as shall be in perfection in life eternal. Et fuit homo in animam viventem. This is repeated in these words in 1 Cor. xv. 45 : " The first man Adam was made a living soul." And thus in that verse Moses impresses upon us all the causes of man. The efficient cause, the Lord God; the matter, earth ; the form, the breath of lives ; the object, that he might become a living soul. Then, in the way of foundation, are to be adduced what things are said about the formation of man in God's image, in or according to His likeness (Gen. i. 26, 27). Finally, to this fundamental place is to be added what has been observed from the concordances of the Hebrew Bibles, that the words '""JBO, PM, and rrn are so different, that neschama is the efficient soul, or the spirit with the idea of efficiency (although sometimes it is put for nephesch) : nephesch is the spirit or soul, not simply, but efficient in dust, or the soul efficient in respect of the subject or the efficient subject (for which reason also it is sometimes taken for a corpse, or a lifeless body, as Lev. xix. 28) : ruach is efficiency itself, or energy, or the force and efficacy of power. Wherefore, in the most sacred memorials, neschama and ruach are attributed to God, but not nephesch. From these three words in the holy writings, as if a priori, the nature of the soul is aptly shown by the Spirit of God ; that nature which the philosophers are compelled to investigate only a posteriori; and thus, the foregone foundations being given up to this point, we will approach the matter itself. CHAP. I. That Vegetables are not animated or living, notwith- standing the assertions of Philosophers. Those things which philosophers call living things to wit, endowed with a vegetating soul as they call it, as roots, plants, APPENDIX. 29 trees, etc. are not classed by God's Spirit among animate or living things ; nay, they are absolutely distinguished and sepa- rated from these (Gen. i. 30) ; and therefore we most correctly say that herbs and trees are not animate or living. For the more abundant confirmation of which assertion, I adduce other passages of Genesis. Gen. i. 24, the living soul is classified according to whatever species the earth produces ; but herbs and trees are not enume- rated, but cattle, reptiles, and beasts of the earth ; and there- fore in ver. 30 the herb is distinguished from the living soul by its being appointed for its food. In Gen. vi.-ix. it is plain what things are said to have the spirit of life, or are said to be living things, or a living animal. For when God had determined to destroy every living soul that was on the dry land, He comprehended nothing under this designation except animals winged, and living on the earth beasts, and men ; and these species He very often calls omnem animam viventem, soil, in the dry land (vi. 7, vii. 22). Where- fore the Hebrews never consider the vegetative life worthy of being called by philosophers by the name of soul or life. CHAP. n. Of the Senses. The instruments and servants for the bodily, and, in like manner, for the mental functions, are the senses. In brutes I say they are for the purposes of nutrition ; in man correspond- ingly they subserve the intellect. CHAP. in. What Man is, and concerning his Origin. Although philosophers accustomed to human speculations do not speak with the Spirit of God, since they are left desti- tute of suitable words in so sublime a matter, yet we most rightly say, following the Spirit of God, that man is a soul, that man is a spirit in the dust, etc. Thus also cattle, reptiles, and beasts of the earth, are called living souls. But man is called a soul, not by synecdoche, but by a scriptural phrase in which nephesch is not a part of a man, but a spirit in the dust, or the spirit of dust, i.e. man. Besides, man is often called the world in the sacred writings, 30 PROLEGOMENA. because he is, as it were, the nucleus of creatures (that which, when it putrifies in the fruit, the rest also putrifies), and a rwv /m0y/,aTG)z>, or chief of them all. Man especially is and tcoa/jios, adorned and elaborated (and that not tropically or figuratively only) by God. But every KTUTIG has shone forth in God the Spirit, either that they may become only entities, or at the same time living entities, i.e. either entities potentially, or potentially living. For the efficacy of the Spirit of God is sometimes one thing, sometimes another, as some things may have received the spirit by which they are, others that they may live. All things, how- ever, were made by the spirit of His mouth, i.e. by speaking. Hence being and living differ in the intensity of spirit, which indeed is plain from the intensity of the letters in the Hebrew words rpn and n^n, mn and njn (conf. Ps. civ. 29 ; Job xii. 10 ; Ezek. xviii. 4; Neh. ix. 6). Moreover, law and life have, according to Forster's Annotations, a great affinity between them. Living things are divided, in respect of motion, into flying things, creeping things, and walking things (Gen. vi. 19). But a certain /trtcrt? shone forth in the embrace of love in the moulded dust, to which, as there was its own face and form (species) (whereby it is looked at, so to speak, or known), the Lord, by the efficacy of His own Spirit, gave the spirit of lives, and then man was made a living soul ; which peculiar efficacy is in this /m'cret beyond the rest, that to them it is not said that He breathed into them, although He made them by His own Spirit, and gave them the spirit of life. And how intimately it shone forth in God, Moses declares (Gen. i. 26, 27), even into the very image of God with His likeness, to wit, the airav^da^a and character of God giving itself as an image, in whose close embrace it might obtain the image of God Himself; that, as God Himself in His essence is an act of light knowingly true, of love mightily willing, and of the Holy living Spirit, so this /trtcrt?, in its essence mighty, might exist in light knowingly true, in love mightily willing, and in the Holy Spirit living. Wherefore, as far as the spirit of lives is chiefly the spirit of this KT/crt?, its proper potentiality is noted by the designation of God's image; but as far as it is of bodily dust, it is described APPENDIX. 31 in words of fructifying and subduing. For the life of the mental functions is to see God, ev ovpavols ; that of the bodily functions is efoucrtafecr&w, etc., ev oucavpfvg* Finally, we must observe that soul and spirit are sometimes distinguished, as Heb. iv. 12 and elsewhere. For the soul is so called in its natural powers ; but in so far as it is enlightened by the light of the Holy Spirit, it is called spirit. CHAP. iv. Of the Image of God in Man. Thus man shone forth even in the image of God, which before the fall was like, afterwards unlike. The likeness of the image was, that his spirit beamed with love, or that it was light, love, and spirit, as God is. After the fall the light indeed remained, but unlike; the love remained, but unlike, etc. Thus that likeness must be restored in holiness in regard of ourselves, and in justice in regard of Xoyicr/jiov TOV 0eov. Before the fall God shone forth in a fitting image, that man might reflect God, which light was the life or the to live of man ; and this life obtained from that light, that it might reflect God fittingly, by which very thing man was eW/co?, and moreover ev&o/cifios (who in himself was eV0eo?, and a partaker of the divine nature) and eWo/Lto?. For he was a law unto himself, his own essential conformity and perfection from within dictating to him what God in other cases from without dictates and prescribes ; and that life was in very deed the vision of God, while God was shining forth in our spirit, and was thus being seen. This light perished in the fall, and man died with death, and thus became a'a/eo? and avopos. The fallen Adam indeed retained his essence, and that a living one (Heb. ii. 14), but dead in respect of the perfection of its position. Hence Adam died. What life was left to him in life, was a dead life. And we all received from Adam such a flesh : dead we are, cer- tainly, born of dead flesh. Wherefore it is necessary that we be transformed and daily assimilated to God, which assimila- tion, in proportion as we realize, in that proportion we see God ; and because man has lost the likeness of the image of God, that is to be restored in Christ, in whom, as if in an image, we are built, and in whom intimately made to shine forth again, we have received elicova, from whom, I say, as if 32 PROLEGOMENA. the head and beginning, the image of God Himself, the spirit living, although in moulded dust, has subsisted. For God's counsel remains one and constant, and is not changed on account of the fall, scil. that we ought in \6y

9, as that which is of stasis. But craa-is and virbaTacrw are different, although they sometimes concur in one. For mixed things, as this or that plant, this or that brute, have their aTaaiv, but not vTroo-racrw, because they have not yet attained to that ardoriv and TeXe/a>aw, beyond which it is not permitted them to ascend. For a living form, generally considered, is not restricted to the form of a plant, but may ascend to a nobler grade. In God reXetWi? or crracu? is called hypostasis, in whom all things are said to have o-varacnv and yj"nx) indidit cordibus eorum. In the inmost being of every man is a sanctuary of everlasting being; wherein, in man's true craving for salvation, the ever- lasting Godhead enters to make it His dwelling-place, fiovrj (John xiv. 23). It is, then, no over-bold beginning to take up the course of our psychological investigation from eternity. Still we must guard against too wide a grasp, such as Origen's, who regarded 1 " Eternity," says my Elberfeld critic, " is a circle ; the time- world a horizontal line, which, however, is to be formed into a circle. Heaven wills it, and so does hell." Another critic, on the other hand Noack, in his Psyche, I.e. p. 336 finds " in the above apparent profundity nothing more than the simple fact, that every finite event is generally only a part of that which occurs and exists infinitely." But he who regards time as a segment of eternity, has no correct conception either of time or of eternity. 2 LXX. : " Kect ye OVJ&TOLVTCC rov etluvce, ffaxt* h xctp^ia. etvrav." Eng. version : " He hath set the world in their heart." Tit. SEC. I.] THE FALSE PRE-EXTSTENCE. 43 the earthly history of the human soul only as one epoch in an historical series of changeful decay and restoration, extending backwards and forwards into aeons ; and our temporal human body as the place of repentance and purification for our spirit exiled from a happier existence on account of committed sins. That is the false notion of pre-existence usually associated with the doctrine of the Metempsychosis, which, originating with Pythagoras and Plato, gained currency not only in the Jewish Alexandrianism and Essenism, but also in Pharisaism, in the Talmud and the Cabbala. 1 This doctrine has even lately been circulated as a most sublime revelation. Before man appears on earth, it is said, he lived an immaterial life in a spiritual world, where every one stays until his turn comes to appear upon earth, and here to enter upon a life of probation indispensable to him. Cahagnet relates of a person translated in vision, that she wished to embrace in her arms a child in the other world because it was so lovely, but she could not do so ; and for this very reason, as it was told her, that this child had not yet appeared upon earth, and on that account no earthly spirit could come in contact with it. Apart from the Metempsychosis, which is absurd, because it annuls the distinction between the spirit of man and the soul of the brute, in respect of which Augustine rightly says, " Anima humana facta est ad imaginem Dei, non dabit irnagiriem suam cani et porco," that doctrine of pre-existence which we call the false one is not in itself repugnant to reason, as is seen from the fact that Kant, Schelling, and among theologians Jul. Miiller, have availed themselves of it, in order to transfer the ultimate ground of the moral constitution of individual men into a so-called factum intelligibile prior to time, (in contrast with facium phenomenon,) and thence to explain the beginning and root of sin in humanity. When Tertullian wittily observes against Plato's proposition (in the Phcedo), that all 1 The Talmud teaches that the Messiah will not come till the souls in the 5)1:1, i.e. the super-terrestrial abode of souls, have all together entered upon earthly existence. Manasse ben Israel, in his work D^TJ HOBO (on the immortality of the soul), declares it to be perfectly orthodox Jewish faith that all souls were created within the limit of the six days' work. Upon the Cabbala in this behalf, see Joel, Religions- philosophic der Sohar, pp. 107-109. 44 THE EVERLASTING POSTULATES. [SEC. I. is nothing else than avdfij^a-^, " Plato scilicet solus in tanta gentium silva in tanto sapientium prato idearum et oblitus et recordatus est," his remark is more witty than true ; for precisely the same thought is found outside the range of the Hellenic mind, in which, moreover, it is not limited to Plato ; and when a von Schubert says, in his Geschichte der Seele, " In fact, I seem often to recall to light in my soul a presentiment which I have seen not with this my present, but with some other eye," it is an experience of which assuredly others than he can speak. But generally, the great principle frequently alleged against the pre-existence in question (lately, for example, by Staudenmaier in his Dogmatics), that man must needs have a distinct con- sciousness of that pre-temporal condition in which he sinned with freedom of will, is without any clear capability of proof. For it is matter of experience, that conditions of a higher kind through which the spirit of man consciously passes may be buried in total forgetfulness as far as he is concerned in hia present normal state, without justifying the conclusion that they had not deeply impressed themselves on him ; and in the pre- sumed case, probably, many reasons may suggest themselves in the rectoral wisdom of God, why God should have sunk that existence, already lived through in a previous state, into such an unconsciousness for man. Although, however, this doctrine of pre-existence is not in itself absolutely absurd, it is nevertheless and this is sufficient reason for biblical psychology to reject it absolutely contrary to canonical Scripture ; only the platonically inspired apocryphal book of Wisdom refers to it in the words (viii. 19, 20), "For I was a witty child, and had a good spirit. Yea, rather, being good (just because I was good), I came into a body undefiled ;" and Staudenmaier and others vainly seek to explain away, 1 in the interest of their several creeds, the intimation of pre-existence in this passage. For the rest, this doctrine is not exclusively Alexandrian and Essenian (Jos. Bell. ii. 8, 11) : it is, moreover, talmudic and cabbalistic. The Cabbalists refer to Eccles. xii. 7, " The spirit returns to God who gave it." Origen infers a moral destination of the embryo originating in a pre-existent Btate (7rpov7rapj;is)j from the fact that Jacob and Esau, while 1 See, on the passage, Grimm in the Handbook to the Apocrypha of the Old Testament. SEC. I.] THE FALSE PRE-EXISTENCE. 45 yet unborn, and prior to all earthly agency, are objects respec- tively of divine love and hate (Rom. ix. 11-13) ; as well as from the fact that John, while still in the womb of Elisabeth, leaped at the salutation of Mary (Luke i. 41). " John the Baptist," he says, enlarging on the interpretation of Mai. iii. 1, " was an angel sent from God into the flesh, to bear witness of O ' the Light." In his unrestrained allegorizing exegesis, it is certainly easy to him to discover many other proofs of a dogma which he regards a priori as established. Even the men of the parable, who stand idle in the market-place, are in his view souls not yet sent down into this present state. Only one of his Scripture proofs is really striking, namely Jer. i. 5, where Jehovah says to the youthful Jeremiah, when He calls him to the prophetic office, " Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee ; and before thou earnest forth out of the womb I sancti- fied thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." But our momentary surprise must at once yield to the recol- lection, that Scripture knows no creation of man other than that which comprises the body and the soul, which it records in Gen. i. and ii. ; that it knows of no self-determination of a human soul, which could have preceded the self-determination of Adam, embracing as it did all human souls with it ; that it traces back every moral destination under which man is found, no further than to Adam, and to the connection with our fathers and forefathers, by means of that procreation which entails it. These three fundamental principles, occupying the Scripture from beginning to end, substantially exclude the false doctrine of pre-existence. But with what propriety do we speak of the false doctrine? Is there, then, also a true one? Decidedly there is. How else could Jehovah say to Jeremiah, Priusquam te formarem in utero, novi te? 46 THE EVERLASTING POSTULATES. [SEC. IL THE TKUE PEE-EXISTENCE. SEC. II. ACCORDING to Scripture, there is a pre-existence of man, although an ideal one ; a pre-existence not only of man as such, but also of the individual and of all ; a pre-existence not only of the human soul, but of the entire man, and not merely of the entire man in himself, but moreover of the individual, and of all, in the totality of their constitution and their history; a pre-existence in the divine knowledge, which precedes the existence in each individual consciousness; a pre-existence, more- over, in virtue of which man and humanity are not only a re- motely future object of divine foresight, but a present object of divine contemplation in the mirror of wisdom. For let it be said at once, not only Philosophy and falsely boasted Gnosis, but Scripture also, knows and speaks of a divine ideal-world, to which the time-world is related as the historical realization of an eternal fundamental design. That all which is realized in temporal history exists from everlasting in God's sight as a spiritual pattern, and therefore as an idea in God, is not only taught in Plato, but also in the coherences of sacred history, of which Plato knew nothing: Isaiah, for instance (xxii. 11, xxv. 1, xxxvii. 26, and throughout in chaps, xl.-lxvi.) ; and the New Testa- ment Scripture, which reveals the mystery in a way that was yet unattainable to the Old Testament. There are, moreover, two New Testament statements which even in form recall the speculative Hellenic mode of expression. For when Paul (in Rom. iv. 17) describes God as KaXwv ra firj ovra 009 6Wa, this is in terms Philo's formula of God the creator, ra pr) ovra, etcdXecrev et? TO elvai\ and although Paul, and Scripture in general, are as far removed as heaven itself from teaching an eternal I/XT;, a ^ ov in the Platonic sense, yet still Paul, no less intentionally than Philo, says (where he expresses himself punctiliously) pr) ovra, and not OVK ovra, on the ground that that which comes forward into historical existence is not pre- viously an absolute Nothing. Abraham, as the father of the nations, becomes an everlasting subject of divine knowledge, SEC. II.1 THE TRUE PRE-EXISTENCE. 47 and as such is a fivj 6V, waiting in readiness to come mto exist- ence forthwith, as soon as the creative KdKeiv is uttered. The other passage is Heb. xi. 3, where it is said that the world-system in all its parts, ol al&ves, was created by God's word, els TO firj e/c fyaivofjbevtov TO ^eiro^evov yeyovevai,. Here, also, the writer purposely avoids saying ov/c ef ovr&v, as 2 Mace. vii. 28 (although this expression might have been justified, as in the sense of creatio ex nihilo, by way of excluding the idea of eternity of matter), but firj etc fyaivopsvav. All that was created by God's word was, prior to that creation, a fir) ^>aivo^kvov ; that is, some- thing which was not yet brought forward into manifestation, into temporal historical actuality. It existed only as a divine idea. Even when fjt,rj is associated with yeyov&at) the meaning is the same, for the contrast implied in addition is d\V e/c vorjTwv ; and these voyrd are the very eternal invisible exem- plars, whence proceeded, as from their ideal source, by means of the divine fiat, the visible reality. And faith is precisely that which pierces through the phenomenal externality of the world to this its supersensuous essential source, and to its production therefrom by means of the purely spiritual power of the divine creative word. Or could the author actually only mean to say, that no sensible material was at the source of the visible world ? The mode of expressing an assertion in itself undoubtedly true, would be strangely chosen. The words them- selves say, either that the visible did not proceed from that which was sensuous (but spiritual), or else that it proceeded from the supersensuous (spiritual). But what would be the contrary of this sensuous, or what would this supersensuous be, other than the thoughts of that world one day to come into existence, thoughts formed and established by decree from eternity, scil. the divine ideas? Thus, at least, that passage was understood by Albertus Magnus of old, and in later times by Staudenmaier, although the latter has made it the business of his life to combat that which is unscriptural in Philo's doc- trine of Ideas, and generally in that of the philosophers. But we are not at- all in need of these two texts. What they declare, as we understand it, is as we shall now proceed to show, in order to draw therefrom psychological conclusions the fundamental view of the entire Scripture. We perceive and acknowledge on scriptural ground, (1) 48 THE EVERLASTING POSTULATES [SEC. II. that the idea of man as such is an eternal idea of God ; for when Elohim says (Gen. i. 26), " Let us make man in our image, after our likeness," that is no decision come to in time, but only the revelation of an eternal purpose : for the whole six days' work was a priori intended to concentrate itself finally on the man, and the man as such was thus the substance of God's eternal plan even before the beginning of the temporal carrying into effect of this plan. What is true generally of the entire agency of God in time (Acts xv. 18), yvao-rbv anr atwz/o? rw icvpiw TO epyov avrov, is true especially in reference to man, the great object of the creative work. But (2) not only was man, as such, an integral element of the divine plan : moreover, every individual, in the totality of his nature and of his life's history, was a sub- ject of eternal divine knowledge, and on that account also of eternal divine will, as says the Psalmist (cxxxix. 16), " Thine eyes did see me as embryo, yet being imperfect ; and in Thy book were they all written, the days which were still to be fashioned, 1 when as yet there was none of them," for which the Keri reads, " and His (God's) is every one of them," i.e. " He had eternally in His sight every one of these days before it came into being." What the Psalmist here acknowledges, Jehovah says Himself in another place to Jeremiah, " Before" (D^tpa, properly, in the time when it was still to be expected that) " I formed thee in the womb, I knew thee ;" whereby it is not only said that from the beginning Jehovah knew of the person of Jeremiah, but since, in accordance with the just observation of the ancients, the word VT usually indicates a nosse cum effectu et a/ectu, that He chose this Jeremiah from everlasting for the prophetic office (comp. Gal. i. 15), into which He now calls the man who is manifested on the stage of temporal history. But still more than this, (3) the Scripture says to all who believe in Christ that God has pre-appointed and foreseen them irpo KaTa/3o\fi<; Kocrpov to the relation of children in which they stand (Eph. i. 4 ; 1 Pet. i. 2 et seq.) ; that the calling, justifica- tion, and glorification, by means of which He leads them from 1 Or, moreover, " The days already formed, and while still there was none of them" (that is to say, actually manifested). At all events, IV has the same meaning as in Isa. xxii. 11, xxxvii. 26, and elsewhere, what is realized in time exists already long before as a spiritual type, i.e. an idea in God. SEC. II.] THE TRUE PKE-EXISTENCE. 49 temporal foretaste to eternal enjoyment of blessedness, was preceded by an eternal Trpoyvwvai, and Trpooplcrai (Rom. viii. 28-30) ; that all the grace which they experience is only the

/a, as the completion of the nature of the human soul, is the typically reflected knowledge of the spirit itself, in the harmonious disposition and regulation of all its powers. All wisdom, which pertains to the spiritual soul by virtue of the immanence of a spirit detached from God, is tyv%iKr) in an evil sense (Jas. iii. 15 ; comp. on the other hand, Col. i. 9). The soul has, however, not merely a side turned towards the spirit, but a side turned towards corporeity and the world. But before applying ourselves to the consideration of this aspect of the soul's life, we have to deal with a weighty objec- tion. According to the usual view, the spirit's life is related to the soul's life, as its blossom and flower ; according to our view, it is its root. The human process of development appears to contradict this view, to which we attach ourselves on the ground of Scripture. It is this which we are now engaged to investigate. THE COMMENCEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE THKEEFOLD LIEE. SEC. VIII. WHEREVER the Holy Scripture speaks of the act of begetting and conception, e.g. Ps. li. 5, it speaks of it as of a fact to which is referred the beginning of the being and the threefold life of the whole man of man absolutely and without exception entire. Even the male or female sexuality is already distinguished according to Scripture in this moment of commencement (Job iii. 3 ; Luke i. 36). The embryo is called in Hebrew Di?i (Ps. cxxxix. 16). As is known, the embryo does not lie straight, but so that the front of the head is inclined forwards to the front of the belly ; the extremities are folded, and all is as much as possible thrown 248 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. VIII. into the form of an egg. The Israelite had skill in this know- ledge, in consequence of the practice then frequent in war times of laying open the womb of the mother (nftfj 2J53, 2 Kings viii. 12, xv. 16 ; Amos i. 13 ; Hos. xiv. 1). A more significant word for the embryo could hardly be found than that tAa, ierived from D/3, to roll together. 1 The development of the embryo, to the wisdom of the Israelite, stands for one of the profoundest mysteries. "As thou knowest not what is the way of the wind," says the Preacher (xi. 5), " nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child" (as thou knowest not the growing of this into a man) ; even so thou canst not know the works of God, who maketh all." " I know not," says the mother of the seven in the time of the Maccabees to these her children (2 Mace. vii. 22), "I know not how ye came to being in my womb ; neither gave I you spirit and life, nor did I arrange the members of you (aTo^elcoa-tv SiepvOpricra)." Two poetic passages of the canonical Scripture speak at large of this mysterious development. We translate them : first of all, vers. 13-16 of the 139th Psalm of David : " For Thou hast brought forth my reins. Thou inweavedst me in the womb of my mother. It was a fearful wonder, therefore I thank Thee. Marvellous are Thy works ! And my soul knoweth it right well. My bones were not hidden from Thee When I was made in secret, Variously wrought in the lower parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see me as an embryo, And on Thy book were they all written ; The days of the future, of which none existed then." Then verses 8-12 (one strophe) from ch. x. of the book of Job: " Thine hands have formed me and fashioned me Altogether round about ; and now Thou hast destroyed me. Remember still, that as clay Thou hast fashioned me ; And wilt Thou change me into dust again ? The LXX. translates dxetripy OKJTOV [tov, Symmachus, In the Talmuuic, c6j implies the unformed man, especially the still un formed vessel. SEC. VIII.] THE THREEFOLD LIFE. 249 Hast Thou not poured me out in form as milk, And allowed me to curdle like cheese ? Thou clothedst me with skin and flesh, And interweavedst me with bones and sinews. Thou hast shown to me life and grace, And Thy protection defended my breath." The most important matter to us in these two passages is this, that the female uterus is called pK n^Jjinn. 1 It is called thus, as the secret workshop of the earthly principle, with the same reference back to the first origination of man's body from dust of the earth, as when Job ( i. 21) says, "Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither again." This back reference is expressed according to both aspects, when, on the one hand, it is said of Elihu (Job xxxiii. 6), " Behold, I am, even as thou thyself art, of God : I also am moulded out of the clay;" on the other hand, ver. 4 : " God's Spirit hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life." In the origination of every man is thus repeated, according to the view of Scripture, the mode of Adam's creation. But if it be the case that the primeval coming into being is the type of every following instance, we are not, with Fr. Nasse, 2 at all to assume in respect of Gen. ii. 7, that the child has no soul of its own until its birth ; but, on the contrary, the sub- stance of the germ from which man is developed must be taken for an interaction of body and spirit effectuated by the soul, which proceeds from the spirit ; and this view is to be held although it cannot be proved by inquiry, and has the apparent evidence against it. Thus (1) the view is objectionable, that the body is even from its first beginning the image of the soul embodying itself. 3 " When we suppose," says K. Heyder, 4 " that 1 Reuchlin had previously interpreted briefly and well in his Rudimenta (1506) : Contextus sum in inferioribus terrae id est in matrice. 2 In the Appendix, "of the Animation of the Child," Zeitschr. fur die Anthropologie, 1824, i., and 1825, iii. In both, the author depends on Gen. ii. 7. 3 So, for instance, the author of the Seelenfreundlichen Brief e (1853), p. 57, and especially J. H. Fichte. 4 In his notice of the Wagnerian work on the struggle about the soul, Zeitschr. fur Protest. 1857, p. 345. Just thus decides A. Zeller, art. " Irre" in Ersch and Gruber's A.E. 250 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. VIII. God has endowed the soul with anything of creative power, by which itself produces its own bodily appearance, and, indeed, in such a manner that, by divine contrivance, its previously existing material offers itself as the conditioning of its operation, we think that we are not therein coming into contradiction with the Holy Scripture." As a recommendation of this opinion, the observation is premised, that in general " it is not the purpose of Scripture to give us scientific disclosures on the problem of the union of body and soul." But, however that may be, the Scripture certainly has a fundamental view on the relation of the soul to the body, which it holds unchanged from its first page even to its last ; and this fundamental view, it must be conceded, is decidedly dualistic. This decisiveness is not diminished by the fact, that it none the less comprehends the union of body and soul as an internal and essential fact. The narrative of creation (Gen. ii. 7) which certainly has another purpose than that of making scientific disclosures is actually, with respect to this its other purpose, 1 the most express protest against monism. And as in this foundation text, so throughout, Scripture con- siders body and soul as distinct creations of God, and the latter, not as that which produces the body, but only as that which enlivens it; as also the brute soul has not formed to itself its own body, 2 but it is the constitution of the creative Spirit, which came forth at the divine call to being, at the same moment with the body. Nevertheless the origination of the child differs from that of the first man in this respect, that certainly the beginning of the individualized corporeity absolutely coincides with the beginning of the individual soul that vitalizes it ; so that, from the first moment of its beginning to be, the embryo is a germinating concrete unity of body and soul. And, more- over, it is true, that from this first moment the soul is a co- efficient factor of the bodily development ; but it is false to say (2) that it is a plastic or organizing principle of this develop- ment, 3 and the body only the external formation of the soul's inner natural life, effected by attraction from the natural world 1 See thereupon Drechsler, in my Commentary on Genesis (I860), p. 138. 2 Thus Keerl, Schopfungsgeschichte, pp. 575-578. 8 Thus e.g. K. Ph. Fischer, in his Anthropologie (1853), see especially sec. 82. SEC. VIII.] THE THREEFOLD LIFE. 251 of the corresponding material. 1 This view is only another variation of that which has just been rejected, which makes the soul a productive principle. For if the soul, according to an idea dwelling in it, forms the material beginning of the body into a skilfully articulated organ of itself, it is the creator of the body, although it does not bring it forth out of nothing, but out of a plastic chaos. And this is contrary to Scripture, and contradicts itself. It is contrary to Scripture ; for, look- ing to the history of creation in Gen. ii. 7, the skilful struc- ture of the body is prior to its endowment with soul ; and in the origination of the child, the body, according to Scripture, equally as then, is God's structure, and the soul, equally as then, God's inspiration, equally, although effectuated by those who beget it, inasmuch as the creative impresses of the primitive beginning are continuing to operate in the act of procreation. But, moreover, it confutes itself ; for if the origination of the body and the origination of the soul absolutely coincide, so that neither of the two precedes the other, then the body is, even in the first moment of its individualization, a germ, preformatively bearing in itself the idea of its development, 2 a D/3, i.e. an undeveloped thing, but a thing capable of development out of itself; in conformity with that capability, it is already all that it subsequently becomes ; and the final impelling cause of its development, according to Scripture, is God, not the soul. To understand this, it must be remembered that the elementary germinating substance of the body, even apart from the soul, is not an absolutely dead mass. It has already a part in organic nature-life, although as yet it is not individually living. It is indeed fructified from the father's life ; it is rooted in the mother's life ; it is pervaded by powers from which its vege- tative development may be comprehended even without the addition of a soul. But there is implied in the preformative idea of this development, that the corporeity has to be moulded 1 Thus literally Schoberlein, Jahrbb. 1861, p. 47. 2 We know well what modern psychology is pleased to say against this : " It is nothing but a phrase which pretends to satisfy, bub dissolves in the hand that would grasp it to say that it is the idea of the creature involved in the egg, which is confirmed by the derelopment, and that the idea is awakened by fructification." Bergmann-Leuckart, Vergleichende Anatornie und Pliysiologie, 1855, p. 572. Assuredly ideas cannot be grasped with hands. 252 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. VIIL into a suitable organ of the soul. The soul is thus the purpose, and link, and support of this growth into being : it is the self- living centre, round which all the atoms of the body are grouped and arranged. Certainly also it influences this growth into being, in that it not merely lets it happen that a body forms itself, but it operates for this purpose, that a body correspond- ing to this soul, in such or such a way determined, should form itself to it thus conceiving for the growth into being of the body the stamp of its individuality. So far it is, as the unity of the end of this growth into being, so also the unity of its foundation, but not absolute, only in a certain measure. A third view is confuted by that resemblance which Scrip- ture assumes between the act of procreation and the primeval act of creation. For instance, (3) it has been often and much taught, under manifold modifications, that the spiritual soul, free in itself as it forms its real external organization (the body), so further, by spontaneous relation to this organization, de- velops also its ideal spiritual nature, or internal organization, which is the medium of its self-realization into the concrete spirit, or to the spiritual personality. 1 The human soul (in this respect distinguished from the brute soul) is thus, as it were, b, priori spiritual, but only potentially so : the spirit does not become actual until the soul realizes this potency, and thus completes itself. This is not only the prevailing philosophical view, but also the theosophic view, although the latter considers the process of development not as physical, but ethical. It pertains to the fundamental views of J. Bohme, and his great interpreter Fr. Baader, that the soul has its primitive standing in the fire-life of the Father, which is as well a longing after light and existence, as the power towards both ; that in it is implanted by the Son, as the bearer of the world of ideas, the idea or the divine image of human destination ; and that it has in the body the essentiality, which must come to a spiritual conformation through the Holy Spirit by His actualizing that idea, and so making the soul itself spiritual. 2 We will not dissemble it, but, on the contrary, in love for the truth, we will most urgently declare it, that this is the point at which our conception of the relation of soul and spirit has to undergo 1 See K. Ph. Fischer, Antliropologie, sec. 84. 8 See J. Hamberger, in the second Appendix of this division. SEC. VIII.] THE THREEFOLD LIFE. 253 the hardest and most decisive trial. Here is the motive which first decided me, after long delay, to allow this my system of biblical psychology to issue to the world a second time. For whether the development of man is to be placed under a natural or a spiritual point of view, most weighty considerations occur to us here. But they still cannot determine me to subvert my fundamental view. In writing biblical psychology, we are con- cerned to know whether the fundamental view in question is biblical ; and of this foundation we are now as ever assured. The act of divine inbreathing (Gen. ii. 7) is not appre- hended by theosophy as endowing with spirit, but as the en- kindling of the essentials of the soul present in the bodily form, and the awakening of the idea, or of the spirit-form of the soul, by the Holy Spirit. It is this which calls the soul into life, and makes manifest the idea in it, which primarily is a gift, but at the same time a charge, so far as the soul is to allow it now to attain form in itself, and, as Baader expresses it, to become spirit through the inbirth of the idea as seed of the spirit. But these are thoughts which cannot be read from the biblical text. For the breath of life (nischmath chajim) is a breath of God which not only effects this and that in the con- struction of the body, but, as is shown -by Gen. vii. 22, Isa. ii. 22, and other passages, enters into man as a continual element of his nature. Man is henceforth living soul by the power of the spirit of life, wherewith God has endowed him in a manner elevated above the origin of the brutes. He is an individual endowed with soul, and, at the same time, a spiritual person- ality. The endowing with soul is the consequence of the en- dowing with spirit, and the endowing with spirit is not previously the object into which the endowment with soul was developed. The God-willed object of development is penetration by the spirit, i.e. spiritual permeation of the whole condition of being, but not the outworking of the spirit itself. The realization of the idea is not the becoming of the spirit itself, but the problem proposed to the threefold spirit with the co-operation of the seven powers of the soul. In the spirit shines forth the light which corresponds to the birth of the Son. The entire three- fold life of man has as its destination to develop itself forth from its ground of fire to the life of light. The entire man is to become a child of light by becoming a light in the Lord, the 254 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. VI I L everlasting Light which became the Light of the world. This is the biblical truth of the theosophic view. The philosophic view of the priority of the soul, and of its first gradually ensuing self-development into spirit, not merely dynamically present, but actual, has, at all events, experience in its favour, so far as man does not enter except with advancing growth into the position of intellectual self- determination j as, moreover, Scripture assumes (Isa. vii. 16). This gradual progress is altogether undeniable; and, moreover, we are far from opposing to the proposition that the soul de- velops itself into spirit, the reverse proposition, that the spirit develops itself into soul. No ; we concede that we should thereby be flying in the face of experience. But this conse- quence is not at all involved in our premiss, that the priority in relation to the soul belongs to the spirit. For we maintain this priority with reference to the created origination of the two, and their position in respect of creation to one another, but not with regard to the development of the man, which in general, following the procedure of creation, begins from below upwards, in order then to complete itself from above downwards. What results from that premiss, with reference to the develop- ment of man, is only this : that in the first germinating begin- ning of man, spirit and soul also are placed together in the way of germ ; that they both together emerge by degrees into actu- ality ; and that the life of the soul does not unfold itself, without, at the same time, the self-consciousness of the spirit glimmering near it in the background, and so glimmering on throughout the development. The Scripture at least knows absolutely nothing of a PB3 developing itself into nvi, of a ^f%^ becoming TTvev^ua ; rather it supposes, that with the embryonic beginning of bodily life is produced, at the same time, the beginning of the spirit's and soul's life. The human life, says a philosopher who in this matter agrees with us 1 comprises three periods of development and training, the bodily, psychical, and spiritual, the characteristic features of which are predominantly denoted by the age of life of childhood, youth, and manhood. None of these elements is wholly absent in any one epoch of life ; but the rest are subordinated to the spiritual, not only manifestly in 1 Windischmann, in Fr. Nasse's Zeitschr. fiir d. Anthropologie, 1823-4, p. 382. SEC. VIII.] THE THREEFOLD LIFE. 255 the time of greater maturity, but also from the beginning, onfy in a more hidden manner: in the psychic element they have their natural effectuation and reciprocal action. For when, according to Luke i. 25, John even in his mother's womb was said to be full of the Holy Ghost, it is plainly assumed that the fruit of the body has not only soul, but also spirit; for it is precisely the human spirit which is the organ for the reception of the divine. Besides, moreover, Scrip- ture relegates secret events, which primarily concern the spirit, back into the life of the embryo, especially the separating and sanctifying to a lofty call (Isa. xlix. 1, 5 ; Jer. i. 5 ; Gal. i. 15). And as well believing love of God (Ps. xxii. 10 et seq., Ixxi. 6), as self-turning departure from God (Ps. Iviii. 4 ; Isa. xlviii. 8), are dated back at least without any limits into the period of infancy, to say nothing of Gen. xxv. 22, Hos. xii. 4, Luke i. 41. It is therefore impossible that the Scripture should so separate spirit and soul in the child, as that the former should be only potentially included in the latter. Spirit and soul are factors, present from the beginning in proportional correlation in the process of man's development. If the Scripture appa- rently contradicts this, by saying that the beginning of man is psychical, and the aim of his development is pneumatical, it is meant of the ethical development that is to be completed on the ground of the physical condition. The first position of man is the implanted or inborn one of psychical immediateness deter- mined in this or that way ; and from this position he is to pass over into the self-effectuated spiritual one of all, even to the outer- most end of the self-determination that rules over the corporeity. We stand here before a riddle, which, however, is equally enigmatical, whether we suppose that the soul is the self-copy of the spirit, or that the spirit is the culminating point of the soul. In both cases it is mysterious, that the existence of the spirit to which it is essential to be conscious of itself begins with a condition of unconsciousness. For the actual and reflex know- ledge, especially the knowledge of itself, begins, like the percep- tion of the sunlight, not until after birth (Eccles. vi. 3-5). How is it possible, it is asked, that man, beginning to be, should have spirit without yet having self-consciousness? Personality, as Philippi teaches in reference to the question, is that which lies at the foundation of self-consciousness and free self-determination: 256 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. VIII. something deeper that peculiar internal nature which is re- flected in these two forms of appearance that spiritual Ego-ness of which man becomes conscious in his self-consciousness, and which, in his self-determination towards the external, he disre- gards, as is shown in the child in which the Ego-ness is already present as a germ, and still does not develop itself in conscious- ness and freedom. 1 The fact is true, although its mode of indication may be questioned. This Ego-ness is the personally implied, but not yet personally efficient, individuality of man, which is not so much the essence, as it is rather the ground of possibility of self-consciousness and of freedom ; or still more plainly and definitely, this Ego-ness is the spirit of man itself, to which self-consciousness and freedom already potentially belong before they become energetic. The human spirit is thus a self-conscious spirit before man becomes conscious of himself. That is just the enigma. But this enigma is a fact which could not be otherwise. If spirit and body were to enter into a unio personalis, it was indispensable that ths spirit should be subjected to a similar law of development with that of the body. How this was possible may be guessed, if we remember that (as has been shown) the basis of the life of the spirit and of the soul is not knowledge, but will ; but it can just as little be apprehended as the unio personalis infinitely more mysterious of the divine and human nature in Christ. We experience the actuality of this incomprehensible thing in ourselves daily. For there are many normal and abnormal conditions, in which the human spirit is put back into that state of unconsciousness or restrained consciousness with which its existence began. And as it has forced itself upwards from darkness to light, it has (itself herein being a witness of its conditionally) even now still a gloomy depth, in which every- thing great that it brings forth is wont embryonically to ripen 2 before it is born into the light. 1 Glaubenslehre, ii. 144. 2 C. Gust. Carus, in his book entitled Psyche, has exquisitely repre- sented the region of unconsciousness still ever subsisting in the neighbour- hood of the conscious life of the soul. Also in the work, Sckadel, Him, und Seek (1854), of E. Huschke, there occur some profound considerations having reference to this subject. " In our spirit," we read, p. 186, "there is constantly active gloom, half gloom, and clearness ; and while the clear back into gloom, a gloom is labouring upwards to the daylight of SEC. VIII.] THE THREEFOLD LlFtf. 257 But if spirit and soul stand in inseparable causal connec- tion, and if the spiritual functions of the soul are the beamings forth of the spirit itself, the development of the spirit in its normal consummation must of necessity keep equal pace with that of the soul, and the advance of the spirit must at the same time be the advance of the soul. And thus it actually is. Of the child normally developing itself, Scripture says, /cparcuovcrOcu Trvevjuari, (Luke i. 80, comp. ii. 40, 52). It is readily felt how almost impossible to be said is KparaiovaOai, ^f%5, for this reason, namely, because the latter is comprised in the former, and would have specially suggested the idea of speaking of a strengthening of the soul in distinction from the spirit there- fore of a defective development. That for the rest even in children, and plainly in them, a determinate development of the three activities of the spirit is possible, no one will doubt, who remembers that the mysteries of the kingdom are revealed to infants vrjTrlois (Matt. xi. 25) ; and that God has chosen TO, fj^wpa roij Koa/jiov to bring to shame the wise (1 Cor. i. 27, comp. Ps. viii. 2). Precisely in the child that is to say, in the rightly trained child the spirit comes to the first develop- ment, which corresponds to its nature of love originating from God ; and the soul of the child which is not yet clouded by the gloomy shadows of sensuality, and is not yet thoroughly disordered by the magic power of the passions is the still clear lovely mirror of that firstling life of the spirit. In the commencement and advance of the threefold life of man, closely considered, there thus appears no counter-proof against our view, founded on Gen. ii. 7, of the priority of the spirit in relation to the soul. Undisturbed in our view, we may advance to the consideration of the aspect of the soul which is turned towards the body and to the world, just as we have already more closely considered the aspect turned towards the spirit. consciousness." Similarly, J. H. Fichte, and especially Fechner in his Psychopliysilc (2 vols. 1860), in which he, with a Herbartish application of mathematics to psychology, seeks to establish the wave-like vicissitude of consciousness and unconsciousness according to law. 258 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. IX THE TWOFOLD ASPECT OF THE SOUL. SEC. IX. EVERT spirit has its doxa, even as God has ; but not every doxa is called t^'aj. Scripture nowhere speaks of souls of the angels, and only anthropomorphically of a soul of God. 1 For PM is, in any case, only the doxa of the spirit united with a material body. Man has a soul, and the brute has a soul. The soul of the brute is the individualized breathing forth of the spirit of entire nature ; the soul of man is the self-out- breathing of his personal spirit. There are always in bodies living natures, to which Scripture adjudges rrtt^M. With re- spect to such, God is called "i?*?"^ nnnn t) r6tf (Num. xvi. 22, xxvii. 16) ; and with respect to such, He says, Ezek. xviii. 4 (comp. Job xii. 10), H3H ^ rrtBtojrrb |n. In the idea of K ; SJ there is thus involved the fact that it is the incarnate doxa of the 1 Ex ea istud (sell, esse Dei animam) significatione commemorari soli- turn est, qua et manus et oculi et digiti et brachium et cor incor- porali Deo connumerantur. Thus with great propriety Hilary de trinitate, x. 58. Beidawi, on the Koran, observes, that God has ruach, but not nefs; and thus if it be said to God, " in my soul is not what is in Thy soul" that the &L&y ( a rhetorical figure similar to the Zeugma) is as if, e.g., the one who possesses a hut were to say to the other who has a castle, I find myself just as well in my hut as thou in thine. When Scripture speaks anthropomorphically of a soul of God, there is brought into consi- deration, man's soul transferred to God, as the means and link of the spirit- embodied condition of nature. God swears " by His soul," i.e. by His very own self. God's soul hates this and that (Ps. xi. 5 ; Isa. i. 14) ; or abhors it as repulsive (Lev. xxvi. 11, 30 ; Jer. xiv. 19) ; or satisfies itself by punishment (Jer. v. 9) ; i.e. He Himself, in the innermost depth, and in the entire circumference of His nature. It is only once said that God's " soul " delights namely, in His servant (Isa. xlii. 1 ; Matt. xii. 18, els o ivlox-wtv yj tyvxn pov). Even here, soul seems to mean the very deepest inward self, comprehending the entire condition of nature. Origen (deprinc. ii. 5) conjectures that the Son of God, who is God's word and wisdom, is named anima Dei. But this is untenable ; and altogether, there is only one single text in which God's soul implies a name of God ; and this is allied in meaning to doxa of God, soil. Ps. xxiv. 4, whereupon we have spoken ,'tbove, Div. II. Sec. IV., towards the end. SEC. IX.] THE TWOFOLD ASPECT OF THE SOUL. 259 spirit that it is the principle of bodily life in the form of the spirit. In conformity to its nature, it is double-sided: 1 for, on the one side, the spirit is manifested in it in its own sight; on the other side, the unity is effected by the spirit through it, for which the spirit is allied with corporeity. It is a question of very ancient times, and of history that reaches into the latest periods, how any reciprocal action is possible between spirit and body. We refer to the much dis- cussed suppositions of a physical influx (originated by Thomas Aquinas) ; of a divine assistance (to the so-called Occasionalism of Cartesius : " Deuin occasione animse in corpus agere et vice versa) ; of an action upon one another only occasioning, and furnishing opportunities (the occasionalism as sy sterna causarum occasionaliwn of Malebranche and De la Forge); and of a paral- lelismus inter corpus et animam, by virtue of a harmony pre- established by God (Leibnitz), as well as to the later strained attempt to supply the void, either by an idealizing of matter, or by a materializing of the spirit. Even scriptural-minded inquirers have not known how to help themselves otherwise than either by regarding the spirit as the final link in the advancing process of the centralization of matter, and as such for its arbitrary counterpart; 2 or than by explaining spirit and body as two several modes of manifestation of one power, or one life, as space and time, form and law, perceptibility and per- ception ; 3 or than by seeking to grasp in any other wav the last existing element (TO vTrofceinevov) in spirit and matter, as being essentially one and the same. 4 The answer of Scripture is none of all these. If God, who is spirit, created matter, and if God's Spirit, as we read in the first page of Scripture, gave life to matter, and formed it, it follows of necessity that the created spirit which is originated from God will be able to exercise a powerful agency upon matter, resembling the creative power of God and of His Spirit. 1 The soul Haussmann,in his Biblical Doctrine of Man, 1848, briefly and well says is a twofold and mediate nature, fleshly and spiritual soul in one. 2 Rothe, Ethik, i. 170. 8 Heinroth, Psychologic, p. 264. 4 Thus v. Schaden, in his work, ilber die Hauptfrage der Psychologic fur die Gegenwart (1849), according to which the power of extension is that common substratum. 2 GO THE NATURAL CONDITION. ISEC. IX. It is implied in its nature that it is super-ordinated to matter, and in its appointment to act through and to pervade matter. And there is no insurmountable barrier between them, for although they are opposites, yet, on account of the unity of their final source, they are no absolute opposites; 1 so little, that the son of Sirach, in an absolutely scriptural sense, is able to express the proposition, that sounds so entirely pantheistic, TO irav earlv auro? (Ecclus. xliii. 27). The powers of the spirit, as of the matter, have, in a like manner, the actual presence of God in every created thing as the background that supports them (Jer. xxiii. 24). All life, individual as well as universal, has, as its ground of origination and subsistence, as its root and its link, God's Xcryo? (Ecclus. xliii. 26), and God's irvev^a (Wisd. i. 7, xii. 1). There is therefore no need of a pre-established har- mony. Everything lives, and moves, and subsists, closely united, and reciprocally attracted to itself in one element, eV avrq) (Acts xvii. 28). " As an army is organized by its general, and is arranged according to his plan of battle," thus speaks a theological scholar, who stands at the summit of the present scientific knowledge of nature, " even so are banded together the starry hosts and the groups of atoms according to the will of the one eternal Spirit. This creating and ordaining Spirit pervades every cell, generates and regulates the flight of every working bee, according to the eternal purpose of the whole. Everywhere in nature, the relative contrasts stand in the closest reciprocity, by means of their higher united nature. That which generates the galvanic current in the most opposed ele- ments of the voltaic pile that which gives the living weapon of defence to the electric eel, by the contact of moist hetero- geneous parts that which inclines the magnetic needle to the north, precisely the same creative principle orders and controls the whole fabric of the world creates and vitalizes the organic cell arranges the intercourse between spirit and matter, the association between soul and body. Everywhere the inner living unity of the larger system rules over all the parts that 1 It is true (as in Div. II. we have already ascertained), as E. Harless said in his Grenzen u. Grenzgebiete der physiol. Forschurig, p. 27, " the unity of the foundation of all things suggests a homogeneity of the things with one another, and thus is assured the possibility of their substantive reciprocal action." SEC. IX.] THE TWOFOLD ASPECT OF THE SOUL. 261 belong to the whole." 1 Above the material stands the power as the material of materials, and above the power stands life as the power of powers, and above life stands the spirit as the life of life, and above all spirits stands God as the Spirit of spirits ; and there is no solution for the enigma of the reciprocal action of all things, but this all-effecting and pervading chief monad, which unites all contraries in itself and through itself, and has united them in man as in a microcosm, as even in itself it is no monad in the sense of the doctrine of monads, but the absolute unity of diverse and infinitely manifold life. The reciprocal action of spirit and matter is thus explained on the one hand by reference to the origin and the destination of the spirit, on the other by reference to the common ground of existence in God, which systematically includes together all things (Col. i. 17). The influence of matter upon spirit is, however, essentially of a different kind from the influence of spirit upon matter. Spirit acts upon matter by the power of a conscious will, but matter acts upon spirit when spirit makes matter the object of its cognizance, which it is able to do by virtue of its eminence above it (Ps. xciv. 9), and allows it to act upon itself. There is in matter no will which overpowers the will of the spirit, but matter becomes manifest to the spirit in its own Unlit, as when, e.g., the narrative of creation says of God, N"|3 ; and the impressions which are made upon it by that which was manifest to it are feelings, thoughts, determi- nations, to which it is decided by reason of that manifestation, as when, e.g., Ps. civ. 31 says that God rejoices in His works, or when, according to Gen.vi. 2, the daughters of men became an object of attraction to sin for the sons of God. Matter with its powers is incapable of carrying its action over into the region of the spirit. But in that the spirit takes up this or that material fact into its consciousness, or enters into it with its consciousness, it may allow that of which it is conscious to become a moving impulse to one of its three fundamental powers. Briefly, matter has no power over the spirit, except so far as the spirit itself makes it to have, for it is the power over matter. But hitherto w ? e have only had in view the relation of 1 Bohner (pastor in Dietikon at Zurich) in his work, Naturforschung und Kulturklen (1858), p. 216. 202 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. IX. matter to the spirit as such. In man it is otherwise. In him, spirit and matter are combined into a personal unity, by means of which the spirit not only, as we saw Sec. VIII., is brought under the law of natural development, but also is in many ways conditioned by matter in a fashion withdrawn from its own spon- taneity. Here, for the first time, the relation of spirit and matter becomes really for us a closely veiled mystery ; and Augustine is quite right in saying that this mystery is in no respect Jess deep nay, if possible, is still deeper than that of the personal union of God and man in Christ. 1 We must not indeed forget that the present condition of man represents to us a condition- ing of the spirit by matter, which is a deplorable caricature of the original relation. But even apart from this, spirit and matter in man are in such wise fenced in, that the spirit is limited by matter; for development and limitation, which the former is gradually overcoming, are altogether inseparable. How are we to explain to ourselves this conditioning of the spirit by matter in man ? Holy Scripture gives us the dis- closure on the subject with which we may be satisfied. It does not explain to us that which is inconceivable physically, but as it were from God's level. 2 It teaches us that the body is an image of God, and that God has established the spirit under conditions of this body, wherewith it may prove itself in progres- sive strengthening as a power over matter. That is the distinc- tive task allotted to it, the importance of which, in connection with the world's entireriess and the world's history, we know. This present crass materiality is no original creation of God. It came into existence by the perversion of this (vid. Div. II. Sec. I.). Man is destined to overcome this perversion. For this purpose the spirit of man is absorbed into this crass matter, that it may raise it up again to the lost standing, and to its completion, a result, however, although the spirit was added to the matter, which could accrue in no other way than by the Logos Himself becoming flesh. 1 Gangauf, Psychologie des h. Augustinus, p. 308; v. Thomasius, Dog- matik, ii. G3. On the other hand, it has lately been maintained by Lotze with much truth, that " in the reciprocal action between body and soul there subsists absolutely no greater enigma than in any other instance of causality, and that only the idea of knowing more in that other matter has begotten the astonishment that here nothing is known." 2 Thus, for example, also Gregory of Nyssa, in Moller, I.e. p. 33. SEC. IX.] THE TWOFOLD ASPECT OF THE SOUL. 263 Scripture, therefore, opens up to us the mystery, at least so far as that it gives us to apprehend the reason in the history of redemption for that which is physically inconceivable. For that destined vocation man is created, and indeed et? ^v^v ^waav. The soul is the link between spirit and matter in man, as he him self, as the unity of both, is the link of all created things. Only, in man, spirit and matter are united in one individual life, stand- ing in mutual reciprocity of action ; and that which effectuates this reciprocal action is the soul, which only in man is an indi- vidual manifestation of an individual spirit; but in the brute world, on the other hand, is the individual manifestation of the general spirit that pervades it. The soul, indeed, is not less immaterial than the spirit; but yet, by the object of its exis- tence, it is more nearly and more immediately related to matter than it. 1 It is, so to speak, the outside of the spirit, whereby the spirit is personally united to the externality of the body. It is the speculum conveying to it, the speculator, the spectra of the outer world ; or, moreover, as Augustine permits himself to say, specula mentis, the watch-tower whence the spirit looks forth, and receives objects of sight. It is the mirror of the spirit in twofold relation, as well in respect of the spirit reflect- ing itself in it again, as in respect of the outer world reflecting itself in it to the spirit. Besides this one soul, man has no other. It is this by which the powers of nature, operative in the body, 1 E. Earless, I.e. p. 2G, denounces those who, proceeding from the erroneous supposition of a specific opposition between spirit and matter, wish to arrange this opposition by means of an interpolated phantom which is neither fish nor flesh. This does not concern our biblical-psycho- logic view, for (1) we indeed separate spirit and matter specifically, but still recognise a profound homogeneity of both in the unity of their original ground ; (2) we do not interpolate the Psyche between spirit and body as a third element, but it stands to us as a phenomenon of the spirit itself ; and (3) to the question whether it belongs to the side of the spirit or of matter, we give the decided answer that it is not a mongrel thing, but of a spiritual nature. The appendix of E. Harless, on the Apparatus of the Will, Zeitschr. fur Philosophic, 1861, i., is in favour of this our sub- division. For the nervous system, which is stimulated from without, still has the Psyche, in which the stimulus becomes a reflex of sensation, as its background ; and the Psyche, on the other hand, has as its background the self-conscious spirit, to which it conveys the sensations, and which governs the physically caused ideas (perception, form, and inducement of motion) with the light of thought and the freedom of the will. 204 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. IX are comprehended into a united life. There is no especial fleshly soul, and the hypothetic nervous aether, if there be such a thing, is no soul. 1 Man consists only of three essential elements, which the Latin language appropriately designates by the masculine animus, the feminine anima, and the neuter corpus. The spirit vivifies the body by endowing it with soul. As God, the eternally Triune, reveals Himself in eternal doxa, in order to fill eternity, and to fashion it into his heaven; and as, within the range of history, He lowers His doxa to fill the temple of Israel ; and as at last the whole earth is to become the vessel and reflex of His doxa (Isa. vi. 3, comp. Ezek. xliii. 2), so the human soul is the doxa proceeding by the power of the creative impulse from the human spirit, for the purpose of filling the body as its house, and of absorbing 2 it into the region of spiritual life. The trine of the fundamental powers of the spirit is here developed by the power of creative arrange- ment into a septet of powers, by means of which the spirit takes possession of the body, and propagates even upon it its psychical image. As the seven spirits of God on the one side are turned to God as the sevenfold glorious mirror of His threefold nature, on the other side, to the world as the powers that carry out the process of the glorious realization of the world-idea ; so the seven spirits of the soul, or powers of the soul, are on the one hand turned to the spirit as the sevenfold glorious mirror of its godlike threefold nature, on the other hand, to the body as the powers that effectuate the process of its becoming united into the life of the spirit, or more briefly, of its spiritual ization : for the body may become pneumatical, because matter and spirit are only opposites relatively, not absolutely. The soul is the double-sided mid-nature which unites the two; as the seven- coloured rainbow, originating from the effect of the sun on the dark cloud, symbolizes the willingness of the heavenly to per- 1 V. Rtidloff (Lehre vom Menschen, p. 90) regards the nervous spirit as the anima, the principle of animal life. 2 Gbschel (Letzte Dincje, p. 181) strikingly calls it Personation : " The personality which has its root in the self-consciousness of the spirit, is in man the principle of development ; for the process of development sub- Bists essentially in progressive penetration and personation of the entire organism." Augustine has previously used personare in a similar way, when, for example, he says, Deus est qui nos personal. SEC. IX.] THE TWOFOLD ASPECT OF THE SOUL. 265 meate the earthly, and, according to the tradition, is the bridge (t/^9 from eipeiv) between heaven and earth. I think that thus we gain a profounder glimpse into the essential condition of man, than when Philo regards the soul, considered in Plato's sense, as tripartite (\6fj,aTo C3 7 T T (Job xxvii. 8). According to a third figure, the body is the vesture, eVSu^a, of the soul (2 Cor. v. 1), as flesh and skin are the vesture, B^p, of the body (Job xxx. 18, comp. x. 11). In all three figures 2 there is only expressed the relation of the temporal association of the soul and the body, and that indeed (which is important) as a relation that is capable of dissolution without the destruction of the soul ; but there is not expressed in any way the cause of this mutual relation. Such an expression is given in some degree, when, in carrying out further the figure of the tent, the soul is called the tent-cord, "tfV (Job iv. 21), which holds the tent upright and expanded; or when the life is compared to a web (scil. the life of the soul, since this is the 1 See Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 854. The Talmud, 5. Sanhedrim, 108, interprets accordingly JIT"^ (Gen. vi. 3). Moreover, the Indian Vedanta says that the soul is in the body as in a sheath (Koslid), or a succession of sheaths, proceeding from within outward (Colebrooke, Misc. Essays, i. 372 ; and Graul, JZibliotheca Tamulica, i. 139). 2 See thereupon Tobler's essay, Haus, Kleid, Leib, in Pfeifer's Germania Vierteljdhrsschrift fur Deutsche Alter ihumskunde, Jahrg. iv. Pt. ii. (1854, pp. 160-184). That the body is called (Gen. xlix. 6) "ita3 and (Ps. ciii. 5) ^ and therefore the doxa of the soul, as Juda ben-Bileam supposes (see Aben- ezra on Gen. I.e.), is not confirmed. SEC. X.] THE BODY SELF-REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SOUL. 269 cause of the bodily life), the cutting loose of which from the thrum is death (Job vi. 9, xxvii. 8 ; Isa. xxxviii. 12). But nowhere is the original connection of the soul and the body more designedly symbolized, although in enigmatic and allego- rical form, than in one of the latest canonical books, which is called Ecclesiastes, because Solomon, to wit (Solomon redivivus), is there introduced speaking as the incarnate preaching Wisdom. There (xii. 6) the young man is warned, mindful of his Creator, to rejoice in his youth, " or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden lamp be shattered, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel be broken at the cistern." The first image places before our eyes a lamp hanging down from the tent-covering (Job xxix. 3) by means of a silver cord. The silver cord is without doubt the thread of life, or more accu- rately the soul, which holds and supports the body in life. By the silver cord being suspended from above, may probably be intimated that the soul, to which the life of the body is attached, itself depends again upon a higher cause to wit, on God. It is further plain that the hanging down, dependent n?3 ? is the body. But that this is called a golden vessel, because it is royally and wonderfully made, 1 seems to me very improbable ; for a golden vessel is certainly not shattered when it falls down : moreover, the body would not consistently be said to be of gold, while the soul is represented as of silver. 2 The body is indeed <7K6vo<; oa-TpaKivov (2 Cor. iv. 7). Thus also it is here meant ; for the writer has in view Zech. iv., where, in the descrip- tion of the seven-branched candlestick of the vision, n?j| is the oil reservoir, which is in the midst of the lamps, and above them ; and of the two ejects of this oil reservoir, it is said that they empty out of themselves the oil necessary for the burning of the lamps. But the oil is here called ^njn. It is the golden oil which flows from the two olive branches, which are close to the two ejects, into the npa, wherewith then from the n^3, by means of the seven pipes, the seven lamps are supplied. 3 Thus 1 Mich. Baumgarten, in Scldeswig-Holstein Gnomon, 3d ed. p. 170. 2 Thus justly observes Hitzig in his explanation of Ecclesiastes, p. 214. 8 Hofmann, Weiss, u. Erf. i. 344, understands the gold of the lamp itself taken up in the flow of constant becoming ; but the gold in the repre- sentation of the prophet comes from the olive trees. It is thus golden oil. Thus also Kohler, Zacliaridh, i. 142. 270 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. X by 2n-jn n?3 is to be understood the designation of the body. But if the gold is not the material, but the contents of the vessel, then that the soul is represented by silver can only imply the spirit, of which ch. v. 7 says that it returns to God who gave it. When the silver cord of the lamp gives way (PDT.j according to the Keri pW, is unchained, or as certainly Ni. in privative meaning is without example when it collapses), the lamp full of gold is shattered, the body becomes wro^ta (Matt. xiv. 12, comp. Num. xiv. 32), and the golden oil and light of the spiritual life, whose reservoir it was, is all lost. 1 Up to this point the interpretation is tolerably certain, but the two other types can only be conjecturally explained. That they are only general personifications of death, 2 in connection with the pre- ceding very special symbolism, is to me not probable. Per- haps 13 (the bucket or pitcher) is a symbol of the heart, and ?3?a (the wheel of the draw-well) is a symbol of the respiratory apparatus. 3 For 1?^0, which is here said of 13, is a usual scriptural word applied to the heart when it has come into the 1 The spirit the one spirit says an Indian didactic poem in Grant. Bibl. Tamulica, p. 185 enlightens the senses at whose summit is the under- standing, as the lamp does a vessel. 2 So Jerome, " Contritio hydriae super f on tern et confractio rotie super lacum per metaphoram mortis senigmata sunt ; " and just so Winzer, who, with many others, in all the three figures only finds the thought, antequam macliina corporis destruatur (in Commentatioms theol. 1825, i. 1, p. 104). 8 Rich. Mead takes a different view in his Medica Sacra (in the sixth chapter of which this allegorical description is explained of old age) : he understands the golden lamp, of the head (distillationes humoris ex capite in nares, fauces etpulmoneni), the urn, of the bladder (fcedum stillicidium urime), and the wheel, of the circulation of the blood (cor vi sua defectum concidif). Similarly the interpretation given by Witt in his Swedish work on the soul (Sj&leri) t from Westerdahl (in his Ilehans bevamnde, Maintenance of Health, 1768). The latest interpreters of the book of Ecclesiastes have different explanations Hengstenberg (1859) and H. A. Hahn (1860). According to the former, the pitcher = individual life, the fountain = general life, the wheel = life by reason of the swift movement, the well = the world ; according to the latter, the pitcher = the body, the fountain = the spirit, the wheel u to the cistern " = the life turned to the spirit supplying to the body the powers peculiar to it. A plain and sensible interpretation of this allegorical passage is contained in Gbschel's work, iiber das Alter., 1832. He finds in ver. 6 the gradually ceasing aspiration, expiration, and inspiration represented (dvennioq, Ixz-vos?, gjWyoaJ), while he regards the "silver cord of the gold fountain" as the draw-rope. SEC. X.] THE BODY SELF-REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SOUL. 271 condition of death, or of nearness to death (Jer. xxiii. 9 ; Ps- Ixix. 21) ; and Scripture says as well 37 ^Bj? (Lam. ii. 19) as B>|M Tjaip : moreover, the heart can actually be compared to a bucket, in relation to the blood that courses through the body. And if we reflect that the words which come out of the mouth are compared to deep waters (Prov. xviii. 4), and the mouth of the righteous to a well of life (Prov. x. 11), that to draw air (comp. nn t\$w y Jer. ii. 24, xiv. 6) is spoken of as well as inrav aepa (Wisd. vii. 3), and that the throat (with the larynx) is called fli">|1l, from "V]|, to draw, as also |ilj (Isa. Iviii. 1 ; Ps. cxv. 7, cxlix. 6), in probably similar meaning, from rn j ; it is not so very unreasonable to find the thought in the third image before the breath is stifled, or stopped, and in the second before the heart is broken or paralyzed. Still these are only conjectures. For us at present the important point is only this, that the soul, or the life of the soul, is represented as the link which is the condition of the continued union of the body and the spirit. Proceeding now from the incontestable position which Nemesios 1 very rightly formulates, TO crw^a TT}? ^frv^fj^ Spyavov vTrdp^ov rat? ^V^LKOL^ vvdfj,(ri o-vvStaipeirai,, we have indeed no direct scriptural statement io our favour, when we further assert that the soul, as in its inclination towards the spirit it reflects the nature of the spirit in seven forms of life, so in its inclination towards the body, and by its means, it sets forth its own nature in seven forms of life. We do not wish to appeal to the fact that the number seven has already been found to be significant in the origination and development of life, by the natural philosophers of antiquity, 2 among whom, as the Canticles belong to the range of the literature of the Chokma, their author might be referred to, as speaking of a sevenfold corporeal beauty, which is praised (Cant. iv. 1-5) in Shulamith. 3 We would rather rely upon the fact that the number seven is absolutely, plainly, and confessedly a fundamental number in 1 .De Natura Jiominis, ch. v. 2 According to the view of the Graeco-Roman philosophers and physi- cians, the capacity of life of the foetus does not begin till the seventh month, and the whole life of man runs in a gradual progression of weeks of years (Hebdomads); v. Sprengel-Kosenbaum, Gesch. der Arzneikunde^ i. 427, 465, 488. 3 This observation of Hengstenberg and Hahn is just. 272 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. X. the human body for the head of the full-grown man, or the region of the head that reaches to the middle of the neck, exactly measures the seventh part of the entire length of the body ; and as in the neck of man (also of almost all mammals) there are found seven vertebrae, so seven ribs form the enclosure of his breast. 1 But the point on which we depend is another to wit, that guidance of Scripture which bids us to understand spirit and soul by the relation of God to His doxa. We pro- ceed from the fact that the soul is the image of the spirit, and makes the body the image of itself. It will be manifest that, from this scriptural assumption, all things which appear in the Scripture as a pervading prevailing representation of the bodily life, articulately work into the whole texture, and mutually explain one another. The first of the seven forms of life is that of the D?5, or embryo. The soul which, upon the lowest basis of its spirit- resembling nature, is direct will appears here, at the lowest grade of its nature, manifested as corporeal as a blind, even still undeveloped agent of the idea that forms the body : spirit, soul, and body are in process of becoming, but "ttlDS (Ps. cxxxix. 15), i.e. in the dark laboratory of the womb, and, as the spirit is still as undeveloped as the soul, in the dark region of absolute unconsciousness. This original unconsciousness remains even subsequently as the gloomy foundation of man's life ; it is the root of life, all the processes of life which are performed in unconsciousness are based in this lowest psychico- corporeal form of life, which enters into the subsequent forms without becoming destroyed by them. The second form of life is that of the '"IBE 5 ?, or of the breathing ; 2 for immediately after separation from the circulation of the placenta, the child 1 M. Frankel, Trifolium, p. 48, where occurs, moreover, the striking remark, that "in the physical nature of man the number seven predomi- nates ; in the spiritual, on the other hand, three" The anatomical con- sideration of man in Zeller's Seelenkhre, sees. 13-22, has the same sug- gestive view. 2 J. P. Lange (Deutsche Zeitschr. 1859, p. 30) finds that here there is a jump into another category; since after the embryo should follow the suckling, the child, etc. But we wish to show how the embryonic be- ginning itself advances even to the perfect working out of the body as the organ of the soul. The subsequent form of life is developed always on the basis of the preceding, which is modified by it, but carried on with it. SEC. X.] THE BODY SELF-REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SOUL. 273 breathes and cries : hitherto the mother has breathed for the child, now it breathes itself. We ought here to be reminded of the now generally known fact, that breathing in its funda- mental nature is one and the same chemical process as the heating of an oven that chemical process, to wit, whose manifestation is fire, and whose result is the warmth of the body and the blood. 1 Thus the second form of life is fiery, as the first is dark. Without wishing to substitute for Scrip- ture a knowledge of that bio-chemical process, we still think that we may observe that breathing and burning are regarded in Scripture, especially where it speaks of God's wrath, as very neighbouring ideas, e.g. Job xli. 13, Isa. xxx. 33. We lay a greater stress on the fact that t^BJ actually signifies the breath- ing (Job xli. 13), and that the same words by which the spirit is named, denote also the breath exspired and inspired through nose and mouth: to wit, """?!j^, Isa. ii. 22, comp. Gen. ii. 7, vii. 22 ; nn, Job xxvii. 3, Lam. iv. 20, etc., comp. I?a. xi. 4, Ps. xxxiii. 6, cxxxv. 17 ; nvi riBO, 2 Sam. xxii. 16 ; so that spirit and air (Job iv. 15), life and wind (Ezek. xxxvii. 5), are nearly related ideas, and breathing out of the soul is associated with dying (Job xi. 20, xxxi. 39 ; Jer. xv. 9). Whence arises this pre- vailing mode of representation and expression in Scripture, except from the fact, that really the breathing or the self-sus- tenance by the element of life which is found in the air, is that form of life wherewith the life begins to become self-life, and in a continual succession of ejection and infraction (HVi ^CJn, Job ix. 18) to evidence itself outwardly I With the commencement of breathing, the current of the blood of the child, which hitherto has been dependent on that of the mother, becomes independent. We purposely avoid saying the circulation of the blood, for antiquity was aware that the blood flowed through the body, but did not know that it circulated. With the first drawing breath of the child, the soul is manifested in its third form of life the form of life of the Q% or the blood : this also is fiery, for the blood is red, D'lK ; and TO irvppov is at once the Colour of fire and of blood ; 2 the bright red of the blood 1 The breathing, on the one hand, regulates the animal heat as a process of cooling, perfecting itself in interchange and exchange; on the other hand, it effects the same as a process of fire. 8 V. Hofmann (Weiss, u. Erf. ii. 329) on Apoc. vi. 4 : "The horse of S 274 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. X. actually passed with the ancients, and not without reason, as the effect of a process of fire. 1 Moreover that the soul, imme- diately after operating in the breathing, whence it has its name, reveals itself in the blood, is declared by the direct testimonies of the Noachian (Gen. ix. 4) and of the Mosaic Thora (Lev. xvii. 11-14, etc.) : to pour out the soul is equivalent to die (Isa. liii. 12 ; Ps. cxli. 8). This moving of the soul in blood which is independently the infant's own, begins with the first breathing (not first with the dividing and binding up of the umbilical cord, Ezek. xvi. 4), so closely is linked the third form of life to the second. And not less closely is the fourth form of life to the third that of the 27 ? or heart. In the heart, whose move- ment presupposes the breathing, and is suspended at once by its cessation, the soul attains for the blood in which it rules, a reservoir (com p. BOJ, to wither from the heart, Ps. cii. 5) : it is the pitcher at the fountain of blood which draws and pours forth : it is the principal vessel of the blood-life become inde- pendent, whereinto it discharges and whence it proceeds, for D' s n rrix^in BO (Prov. iv. 23). 2 The heart is the centre of the wheel of life (Jas. iii. 6), a representation which is so prevalent in Scripture, that it speaks even of a 37, i.e. of a middle of heaven (Deut. iv. 11), of the earth (Matt. xii. 40), of the sea (Ex. xv. 8 ; Jonah ii. 4), etc., yea, even of an oak-tree (2 Sam. xviii. 14). But if the heart be the centre of the life revolving round itself, as the individuation of this life is fundamentally completed in it, we may scripturally say that the natural light of life, Dnn nta (Job xxxiii. 30, Ps. Ivi. 14, comp. Job iii. 20), proceeds in it on the ground of the preceding forms of life; and we are justified in the conclusion that the form of life of the J? will be just as much followed by three, as it has been pre- ceded by three. And this expectation is actually and without any constraint realized. The next which follows on the concen- tration of the three first forms of life in the heart is this, that now nourished by the blood which moistens all the organs, even the second rider is fiery red, and points, in contrast to the former, to blood- shed and burning." 1 See Schubert, Gesch. der Seek, i. 142 ; comp. Fr. v. Baader, Werke, xv. 566 : "The water of life the blood is at once fluid and heat ; and it perishes when both of these elements are separated from their concrete condition." 8 See Hitzig, in loco (p. 37 of his commentary of the year 1858). SEC. X.] THE BODY SELF-REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SOUL. 275 the nerves, the life of experience and of sensation, carried on by means of the sensitive and sensuous nerves, begins, by means of which the soul comes into relation with its own corporeity, and with the outer world. It is the form of life of the nb, or of the nerves. But as, in the idea of nb (Job xxi. 24), there is no distinction between the marrow of the bones and of the nerves, and as generally the nerves, as organs of feeling and of sensation, were unknown to antiquity, 1 this name might appear ill chosen. It is not, however, so ill chosen as it appears, for nb is also a name of the brain and of the spinal marrow, which, as is known, are the central portion of the nervous system, although in the sense of antiquity they are not named as such. The brain (Syr. mucho) was probably called in ancient Hebrew nb ; 2 and of this (as is primarily implied in the plural form /jLve\ol, Heb. iv. 12 : v. Passow) it was the cere- bral medulla, with the spinal medulla, whence the ancients at- tained a glimpse of the nature of the nerves, and of their causal relation to feeling and perception. This being considered, nb, if we open up the idea still undeveloped in the Old Testament, is no unsuitable and unauthorized denomination of this fifth form of life. 3 Primarily there are, on this fifth stage, the organs of the five special senses (n&fj, opav, VftW aicoveiv; n'nn, : from which in the New Testament only 007-177 = eveaBaii P$3, ^O, T\rr)\a$av, ameer 0ai) 9 which are the means of the receptive relation of the soul corporeally 1 Herophilos in Alexandria (about 300 years before Christ) is the first in whom there is a dawning perception of the functions of the nerves ; vid. Sprenger, I.e. p. 511. 2 It is said in b. Menachotli, 80, &, of a man without judgment : I fancy that he has no brain in his skull (nplpl nb "6 {IN^O- 8 More suitable than D^TS (Gen. xxxii. 33 ; Job x. 11 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 6, 8), which, without distinction (as vevpa, rivovres, TOVOI, avv'btafAtjt, in the older medical language of the Greeks ; vid. Harless, Gescli. der Him und Nervenlehre in Alterihum. i. 23-30), denotes muscular fibres, ligaments of the joints, and generally every elastic and tense fibre in union with the body (from T3 = *UK, 1py)> and thus excludes that which we now call nerves. Hupfeld, Psalms, i. 99, and Rb'diger in the Tlies., translate Prov. iii. 8, " It shall be healing to thy nerves" (nervis tuis) ; but this would not be understood in the present current meaning. i> (from TlC^, strong) means the sinews, and especially the umbilical cord, and then generally the navel. 276 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. XL manifested to the outer world ; the organs of tlie cuo-#?;<G>vrj pij^aTuv, Heb. xii. 19). 1 For thus the indi- vidual impulses of the origination of speech may be thought of as distinct from one another. The things of the outer world are first formed in the perceptions of man, e.g., upon the retina of the eye, and thence become representative pictures which the soul offers to the spirit : the spirit receives them into its self-consciousness, makes them, as thoughts, its own property, 1 Otherwise language is called by metonymy ptjj? or riDb>, yAawae, the mouth, as the organ of speech is called, Cant. iv. 3, ")3"jp. SEC. X.] THE BODY SELF-REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SOUL. 279 and gives to these thoughts in the soul the sounding elementary form of speech of the inner word, and then, by means of the power that it exercises by means of the soul over the organs of speech, establishes this inner word in a condition of sensible perceptible external realization. Human speech, therefore, is the creation of the spirit by the mediation of the soul. 1 We find ourselves here on the outermost light side of the corporeal self-manifestation of the soul ; for all that becomes manifest, says the apostle, Eph. v. 13, is light ; but in speech the spirit becomes manifest : it comes by way of the soul to light-like manifestation ; as, moreover, fyavai with y "IQDJTl >D3 K3D, one soul covers or atones for the other, i.e. the offering atones so far as it is a substitu- tionary surrender of the life of the beast that flows in the blood, instead of the life of man: e.g. David b. Abraham in his Lexicon, written in Arabic, jnHtf (see in Pinsker. Zur GescJi. des Karaismus, p. TDp). The blood atones through the soul : this is its fundamental ground, and for this reason it atones for souls ('aw en-nufus), and takes their place (/fltnfi&M, from which nalb, the representative). 284 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. XI. eat, for its blood is the soul of all flesh : whosoever eats of it shall be destroyed." The passage here (which the LXX. has simplified by omission of the ^333) is difficult. Wessely and other Jewish commentators explain, as concerning the soul of all flesh (whether it be of tame cattle, wild beasts, or feathered fowl), its blood is most closely associated with its soul : it can- not be said of the blood of the slain beast, that the soul is as little therein any more, as a man is in the house from which he has gone forth ; for there remain in the blood, the elements which served the soul as media of its efficiency, and thus are themselves of a psychical kind. This explanation is not incon- sistent with the meaning of the Thora; for the prohibition of eating blood has actually its reason in the continuous psychical arrangement of the blood. Otherwise Knobel, who, however, takes the preposition 2 similarly in the sense of the prohibition : " The life of all flesh it is its blood with its life, i.e. it subsists in its blood, nevertheless, only so far and so long as this latter is united with its B>BJ, and includes and contains it : it is not the material of the blood in itself that is the life, e.g. not therefore coagulated and dried blood, from which the >2: has vanished, but blood associated with the E%0. But this distinction between blood that still contains soul, and blood deprived of soul, lies altogether outside the range of the prohibition of blood : it comes into consideration only in a certain measure within the law of sacrifice, in that there the atoning power cleaves pre-eminently to the blood of the soul flowing forth of itself the so-called life's blood (Q^.nn D^)." Against both explanations, as well that of Wessely as that of Knobel, it is, however, to be observed, that a passage which regards blood and soul as united, and therefore holds them as distinct from one another, does not truly agree with those that identify them (lla, 146) by which it is sur- rounded, according to which it is more probable that 3 is to be apprehended in the sense of immanence, rather than in the sense of concomitance, which, besides, in such a simple decla- ratory text, is more according to the usus loquendi. Moreover, neither does Baumgarten's explanation commend itself : " As regards the soul of all flesh its blood is in its soul (N*n re- o \ ferred back to ton), i.e. it has therein its being it is its mani- festation ;" nor the explanation proposed in the first edition : " This is (fcvin referred back par attractionem to tt'By its blood in SEC. XL] SOUL AND BLOOD. 285 its soul, i.e. its blood existing in its soul having this for its exist- ence, and bringing it to manifestation." 1 Both explanations are hair-splitting, not sufficiently simple and natural. Equally con- formed to the connection and to the usus loquendij on the other hand, is Hofmann's explanation, according to which ^'wa is a predicative idea, introduced by Beth essentiale: " Of all flesh, soul avails thus much, that to it its blood is that which constitutes its soul." 2 The blood has the peculiarity of being the soul of the nature living in the flesh ; therefore it is even to be allowed to flow from the body of the beast not offered in sacrifice, and to be covered with earth. It is to flow forth because it is not to be eaten, and, as it were, to be buried, out of respectful awe, to wit, for the blood is C'SJ as the corpse is 5?BJ, the former as that which has been the vehicle, the latter as that which has been the shrine, of the soul. (3.) Deut. xii. 23. Beasts of sacrifice, it is said here, may be slaughtered and eaten for com- mon use, generally like the roebuck and the hart, i.e. beasts not of sacrifice : " Only be sure that thou eat not the blood ; for the blood is the soul, and thou mayest not eat the soul with the flesh. Thou shalt not eat of it ; thou shalt pour it upon the earth like water." How much the Thora relies upon this prohibition of the eating of blood, is seen from the fact that, without closer reasons, it is often repeated (Lev. iii. 17, vii. 26) ; so that in the Mosaic legislation itself, it occurs in all seven times (Lev. iii. 17, vii. 25-27, xvii. 10-14; Deut. xii. 16, 23, 24, xv. 23). 3 The later literature, moreover, shows us that eating of blood was acknowledged in Israel as sin (1 Sam. xiv. 32). Even in the prophets, who otherwise meddle little with the prescriptions of the law in detail, the transgression of this special one is not left unpunished (Ezek. xxxiii. 25, comp. Isa. Ixvi. 3). And even in the New Testament, where the seasonable occasion of the prohibition in the sacrificial use of the blood ceases, absti- nence from blood outside or inside the body of the beast 1 Thus also David b. Abraham, from Fes. I.e. : *' The blood is in the soul, i.e. the one is in the body, in and with the other, so that with the condi- tion of the one, that also of the other stands or falls." 2 Schriftbeweis, ii. 1, 238, with which I have declared myself agreed in the Commentary on Genesis, p. 272 (3d ed.). 3 The pre-Mosaic texts (Gen. ix. 6), and that which does not specially belong to the subject (Lev. xix. 26), are left in this out of the question. 286 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. XI. TO? teal TTVIKTOV) is maintained (Acts xv. 20, 29, xxi. 25) as binding upon the Gentile Christians. The ancient church adheres strongly to it, as numerous witnesses testify: Erubescat error vester Christianis Tertullian is able to oppose to the suspicions of the heathens qui ne animalium quidem san- guinem in epulis esculentis habemus, qui propterea suffocatis quoque et morticinis abstinemus. 1 The idea of the unity of the soul and the blood, on which the prohibition of blood is based, comes to light also, everywhere where the Scripture speaks of violent death, in its mode of ex- pression. In the blood of one mortally wounded, his soul flows forth (Lam. ii. 12), and He who voluntarily sacrifices Him- self pours out His souJ unto death (Isa. liii. 12). The blood of man shed, which as plural is named B 1 ^, 2 cries to heaven for vengeance (Gen. iv. 10 ; Heb. xii. 24), for which, in Job xxiv. 12, comp. Apoc. vi. 10, it is said that the soul of those that were slain cries out. Of the murderer of the innocent, Scrip- ture says that he slays the soul of the blood of the innocent (ty v XV v afaaTos dOwov, Deut. xxvii. 25), and that the blood of the souls of the innocent (aifjLara tyv^wv dOcoayv) cleaves to his skirts (Jer. ii. 34, comp. Prov. xxviii. 17, blood of a soul). And because the blood is the soul, that which is true of the person is said of the blood : *Pj tt (Ps. xciv. 21), aipa ^IKCLIQV (Matt, xxiii. 35). 3 This idea of the unity of the blood and the soul is not exclusively peculiar to the Holy Scripture. How har- moniously antiquity thus expressed itself, has been set forth by Bahr in his Symbolism of Mosaic Worship. That in the ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics, the hawk, which according to old tra- dition feeds on blood, implies the soul, proceeds, according to Horapollo (i. 7), on just the same idea. Virgil, in his jffineid, gives to it the boldest expression, when in ix. 349 he says of a dying person, purpuream vomit ille animam. Many Greek and Roman philosophers and physicians sought to establish it scientifically as the true view among the many various notions of the situation of the soul. 4 Critias taught absolutely: the blood 1 Opp. ed. Oehler, i. 149. 2 Vid. 011 this plural of the product, my Commentary on Genesis, p. 204. 8 Beck, Biblische Seelenlehre, p. 5. * Vid. Aristotle, vtpl ^VMS, B. i. ch. 2, and Tertullian, de anima, ch. xv. SEC XI. J SOUL AND BLOOD. is the soul. 1 Pythagoras and others : the soul is nourished by the blood. Empedocles : the heart's blood (aipa TrepiicdpSiov) is the seat of the soul. 2 The Stoics : the soul is the exhalation (avaQvfjLiaa-is) of the blood. In the supposition of these last tli at the soul is developed from the blood as gas from the fire, they derived ^v^r) from ^v^euv in the sense of cooling. 3 The better knowledge is found in Homer. The Psyches in Hades, when it is granted to them to take up blood into them- selves, attain again the power of thought, language, and ex- perience. The blood is thus not absolutely one with the soul. It is only as, moreover, Scripture supposes it the means of its self-attestation. Turning back again to the Scripture, it is first of all 1 Matthsei observes, in Zoco, when Nemesius mentions this, that this Critias at any rate, if anybody had, had a soul of blood : he was one of the thirty tyrants. 2 He says it in the verse often cited in the church fathers, alpx, ya.p dvdpaTTot; irspix*pbtov sari vo^ot ; comp. Cicero, Tmc. i. 9 : Empedocles animum esse censet cordi suffusum sanguinem. 3 The Stoic derivation of the name -fyvw appears, moreover, differently used, e.g. by Chrysippus, in Plutarch, de Sloicorum repugnantiis, ch. xli. : " The child is naturally nourished in the womb like a plant ; but when it is born it is cooled by the air (^v^o^evoy), fills the mouth with breath, and thus passes into a living life ; wherefore the soul is fittingly so named from the cooling breathing (voipx ryv *//|/z>)." Just so the physician Hicesius, in Tertullian, de anima, ch. xxv. (where he contends against the view that the child is not endowed with soul till birth) : Hicesius jam natis animam superducens ex aeris frigidi pulsu, quia et ipsum vocabulum animse penes Grsecos de refrigeratione respondens. Plato succeeds better in etymology, in the Cratylus, p. 399 : " The soul is the cause of life, which procures to the body the capacity of breathing, and refreshes it (dvx-^v^o^ " for -fyvYfiv signifies to breathe, to blow, and also to cool, inasmuch as a man breathing cools himself, and blowing cools anything else. The simplest is Dio Chrysostomus, Or. xii. p. 387 (in union with the view of the endowing with soul at its birth) : " When the child has left the womb, the air awakens it to life by means of breathing and inbreathing (etWygtwc; KXI i/'aj (Isa. v. 14). It is everywhere where 1 See Pliilonis Op. ed. Mangey, i. 206, 480, ii. 356, and Opp. ed. Tauchnitz, 1. vi. pp. 258, 390. 2 The -xvivpa, oiluviov of Christ stands here in contrast with the perish- able soul of the beast ; according to the difference of their TrvevftctTx, is measured the respective value of the bloody self-sacrifice of Christ and of the sacrifice of beasts. The bold assertion of the contrary, by Liinemann, On the Hebrews, p. 289 (ed. 2, 1861), that the Scripture throughout knows nothing of a irvtvftoc. of beasts, is contradicted by Ps. civ. 30, Eccles. iii. 21, Gen. vii. 15, comp. 22, and other places. 8 Cassiodorus thinks, in naive ignorance of language, that anima is perhaps therefore related to oiyoupat. SEC. XL] SOUL AND BLOOD. 289 bodily life is ; and where it is, there it is always entire, although here and there in different manifestation. 1 The question only occurs : With what justice is the soul, that manifests itself in all corporeal forms of life, brought into so pre-eminently close a union with the blood ? The identification of the blood with the soul which prevailed in antiquity, appears at first to have no further foundation, than that a sudden diminution of the quantity of blood in the body causes death. But this phenomenon itself has the deeper reason, that all activity of the body namely, that of the nervous and muscular systems depends on the quantity of the blood ; for if a part of the body be deprived of the flow of blood, all activity therein ceases a sensible part in a few minutes loses all sensi- bility a muscle no longer either serves the volition, nor is it sus- ceptible of reflex irritability. The consequence which antiquity gathered from the phenomenon that blood-shedding and death coincide, is thus perfectly justified on physiological grounds. Irritability, sensibility, capacity of movement, all activity of the body, are lost with the loss of blood. The blood is actually the basis of the physical life; and so far, the soul, as the principle of bodily life, is pre-eminently in the blood. Therefore in the 1 Our old dogmatists express both the above propositions in the fol- lowing manner: "Anima in ubi est corporeo, sed non corporaliter neque local! ter;" and, "Anima in toto corpore tota et in singulis simul corporis partibus tota." Even the Calvinistic dogmatists maintain the former position, but not the latter. It is true also of the brute soul. Claudius Mamertus (i. 21) says even of the plants, not without truth : Aut cuncta quse de seminibus prodeunt intra eadem semina corporaliter ostende, aut herbarum quoque vitam incorpoream confitere. In extreme opposition thereto, it is said now, pointing to the fact, that from the lower beasts, e.g. polypi and worms, from the one hydra or naid, by mechanical division, two, three, or several hydrae or naids may be formed by divisibility of the soul yea, indeed, " of the consciousness." The expression is old (e.g. in Albertus M., de anima, i. 15, with reference to the same experimental fact : Anima quse uno numero fuit in toto efficitur duae numero per division ein), but inappropriate; for, as it has been rightly said in opposi- tion, " that which is divisible must, moreover, be extended ; and what is extended is a body." That which is multiplied as the result of the cutting up of the bodies of lower creatures (comparable to the setting of a plant), is only the body, to which neither individualized life, as in the higher kind of beasts, nor, what is the same thing, psychical life, cleaves. As concerns the multiplication of souls, however, in the process of generation, this is 110 division, and ought not therefore to be called so. T 290 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. XI. sacrifice, the blood of the sacrificial beast represents the soul of the offerer, and, indeed, as we have elsewhere shown, not in symbolical, but in intercessory and substitutional worth. 1 There is still, besides the principle that the blood is the basis of the psychical life, a second, without the addition of which the biblical prohibition of the eating of blood, although it doubtless seeks to prevent a brutal degradation of man, cannot at all be comprehended. The blood is not only the all- conditioning basis, but also the all-embracing source, of the physical life. Scripture expresses itself on this point as decidedly as possible (certainly without purposing to give us physiological information), when, in Acts xvii. 26, it says that God hath made ef eyo? at/zaro? all nations of men on all the face of the earth; and in John i. 13, 2 that man by nature is born ef aifjLarwv. The blood is there plainly considered as the original material, and, as it were, the chaos, from which the whole human organism proceeds. This view, moreover, is scientifically con- firmed : for it is generally acknowledged, that from the point at which in the embryo the nervous marrow and blood have come into existence, all further secretion and formation arises from the blood ; and that even after birth, in every body endowed with soul, all the material for growth, i.e. for all sorts of nourishment, as well as of secretion, proceeds from the blood. Only it is still scientifically in debate, whether the various kinds of material are contained in the blood in a state of actual diversity, and thence, 1 See the second final consideration of my Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 1857 : " When the priest," says Nachmani on Lev. i. 5 (to appeal to a Jewish witness), u sprinkles the blood on the altar, this repre- sents the position of the blood and of the soul of the offerer, that he may consider, when this occurs, that he has sinned in his body and his soul ; and that properly his blood ought to be shed and his body burnt, if God had not graciously ordained this substitution (mion)." 2 In this passage, OVA g| ad^a.ruv denies the material basis; ovbe Ix. Qthh- potros axpxos the causality of the fleshly, therefore unspiritual, unsanctified will; ovte i* 6&qftTOs dvlpog the causality of man's, and therefore of created will. An Old Testament parallel does not occur to the above two New Testament passages. For the " blood-relationship " is in Hebrew (fellowship of the flesh), Lev. xviii. 17. My blood relation is i-)^, or "ntol s 5pVV- I n bth those New Testament passages, Hellenic and Israelitish views appear to prevail. Comp. Euripides' /on, AXhuv rp*(peis atf etif4.a,ruv. But it is only the Hellenic usus loquendi which here defines the biblical: the view is old- Israelitish. SEC. XL] SOUL AND BLOOD. 291 by virtue of the relations of affinity which the several organs have thereto, are transferred to these as actual products; 1 or whether they are first changed by the organs themselves, by virtue of the functional powers of these organs, in such a way as to furnish them with certain characters and qualities. If the former view be true of some materials, and the latter of others, it is the fact that the restlessly prosecuted investigation of the blood, in respect of the manifold material of healthy and unhealthy life, supplies to the view of its pre-existence in the blood, a continually extending support. 2 The same acknow- ledgment, although not as yet scientifically stated, lies at the base of the biblical prohibition of the eating of blood. The blood is thus stringently forbidden, because it is the substantial centre whence the animal life in all its forms is radiated intc development. Everything fluid and firm, which, in the body endowed with soul, separates itself, by way of assimilation or secretion, exists already either as a product, or else potentially, in the blood. The immanence of the soul in the body is thus, physically regarded, nowhere so intensive as in the blood. The blood is the soul, not only as the principle of bodily life, but also as the principle of bodily formation in its sensible manifestation. But only the blood of beasts is forbidden, in order to pre- vent the contact of the human soul with the brute soul. That the traditional practice allows the blood of fishes, arises from the fallacious idea that the blood of fishes has not the same relation to their life as the blood of other creatures. Mean- while the Thora certainly does not expressly forbid the blood of fishes; and, moreover, it does not forbid human blood. Human blood, says Wessely, is legally permitted, for no reason exists to forbid it. 3 Wherefore not 1 Because it is homogeneous to man. He, therefore, who thus sucks the blood perchance from one who has cut himself, does nothing unlawful. And when 1 See e.g. Rosch, Bedeutung des Blutes, p. 8 : " The blood as the primi- tive fluid is a homogeneous liquid, which, notwithstanding, contains all differences, whereby it is possible that even the most different things can be formed from it, and be nourished from it, depositing this in one place, that in another, and thus it is dispersed as the light is broken up into colours." It is the so-called humoral-pathologic view. 2 See, for example, Budge, Memoranda, ii. sec. 268. 8 no*6 m DJJB jw n-nnn JD nmo DIN DI- 292 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. XII. the Lord, in the last supper, ordains His blood for drink, that is not, on the legal standing, so startling as when Peter receives the command to eat of the living things in the descending vessel. In the former case, the purpose is to transplant the life of the God-man into us; and this life is so far homogeneous to us, that it is the life of man, in which the idea of humanity has attained to its highest conceivable perfection. Thus much upon blood and soul. That spiritual functions are nowhere attributed to the blood, we have already observed above. So much the more multifarious are the functions which Scripture attributes to the heart, which is the reservoir of the blood. And in conjunction with the heart, there scarcely occurs any mention of the head, which is the reservoir of the brain. Here, if anywhere, biblical psychology encounters difficult pro- blems, which, however, when they shall be solved, are equally evidences for the just claims of the science, with the building up of which we are concerned. HEART AND HEAD. SEC. XII. " QUID sine capite est homo," cries Ambrose, " cum totus in capite sit !" According to thorough investigation and evidence of Scripture in all its parts, however, the heart is the innermost centre of the natural condition of man, in which the threefold life of man blends together ; wherefore 31, inwardness, inter- nality (although properly of a broader meaning than 37 ? Ps. xxxix. 4, Lxiv. 7), is used in a sense almost the same as 3!? (Arab. qalb) (e.g. Ps. v. 10, xlix. 12) ; and 37, /cap&la, denotes also the middle or centre of other natural things (see Sec. X. of this division). The heart is (A) the centre of the bodily life, it is the reservoir of the entire life-power (Ps. xl. 13, comp. xxxviii. 11), and indeed in the lowest physical sense; for eating and drink- ing, as strengthening of the heart (Gen. xviii. 5 ; Judg. xix. 5 ; 1 Kings xxi. 7 ; Acts xiv. 17 ; Jas. v. 5, comp. Luke xxi. 34), becomes the strengthening of the whole man. It is (B) the SEC. XII.] HEART AND HEAD. 293 centre of the pneumatico-psychical life, and (a) of the life of will and desire. When the man determines of himself upon any- thing, it is called tep iop (Esther vii. 5, comp. Eccles. viii. 11, ix. 3), or iriN ^ nnj (Ex. xxxv. 29), or fa*? to (Ex. xxxv. 21), or ^ jn; (Eccles. i. 13), or teWy Db> (Dan. i.S) ; in the New Testament, TrpoaipelTai T{J /capSla (2 Cor. ix. 7). When the man designs anything with a consciousness of the motive and object, it is called taafa rrn (I sa . x. 7) or m^DJ> (1 Kings viii. 17, x. 2): it is HIXJPi (Ps. xxi. 3), evBo/cla (Horn. x. 1), Trpbdecns (Acts xi. 23), of his heart ; and when he is strongly determined, he is efyato? ev rfj tcap&la (1 Cor. vii. 37). What is done gladly, willingly, and of set purpose, is done 2??p, etc KapBias (Lam. iii. 33; Rom. vi. 17 ; comp. Prov. xxiii. 7). The heart is the seat of love (1 Tim. i. 5) and of hatred (Lev. xix. 17). Whom a man loves, to him he gives his heart (Prov. xxiii. 26 ; Judg. v 9), and him he has in his heart (Phil. i. 7 ; 2 Cor. vii. 3). The heart is (b) the centre of the pneumatico-psychical life, as the life of thought and conception. The heart knows or perceives, Deut. xxix. 3, Prov. xiv. 10 ; it understands, Isa. xxxii. 4, Prov. viii. 5, Acts xvi. 14 ; it deliberates, Neh. v. 7 ; it reflects, avfjiflaXXei, Luke ii. 19 ; and estimates, Prov. xvi. 9. The heart is set or directed (B"^, W&) when one gives heed (Deut. xxxii. 46 ; Ps. xlviii. 14) : it is turned away from, or inclined towards, according as one's sympathies are turned away or turned towards an object (Deut. xxx. 17; Josh. xxiv. 23). That which one impresses on one's self, and makes one's own, is said to be settled, bound, written on or in the heart (Deut. xi. 18; Cant. viii. 6 ; Prov. vi. 21, iii. 3) ; one knows in his heart if he is conscious to himself (Deut. viii. 5), and with his whole heart if he is absolutely conscious (Josh, xxiii. 14 ; comp. 2?, know- ledge about anything, in the phrases, 2 Kings v. 26, Gen. xxxi. 20) ; and everything which comes into our mind or memory rises in the heart (^'^ ty or nW, Isa. Ixv. 17, Jer. iii. 16, or nirto a, 2 Chron. vii* 11; avaftalvet eVl icapSia, Acts vii. 23, 1 Cor. ii. 9) ; the heart is the storehouse of all that is heard and experienced (Luke i. 66, ii. 51, xxi. 14). Thinking is called ^ni, Gen. xvii. 17, or nWs, Gen. viii. 21, xxiv. 45; iray -a-nj Eccles. i. 16, or aWy, 1 Sam. i. 13 ; \fyeiv or eiireiv cV rfj /capSia, Matt. xxiv. 48, Apoc. xviii. 7. The heart itself discourses inwardly, and then speaks, by expressing itself out- 294 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. XII. wardly ("i^, Ps. xxvii. 8 ; If?, Ps. xli. 7, Prov. xxiii. 33 ; run, Prov. xv. 28, xxiv. 2, Isa. xxxiii. 18). The heart is the birth- place of the thoughts : thought is called nun, Ps. xlix. 3, ffan, Ps. xix. 14, or I^SH, Dan. ii. 30, of the heart ; its thoughts, ntaB>n, Gen. vi. 5 ; h i?pn O r "npn, Judg. v. 15 ; ntotip, Jer. xxiii. 20; ; 51V, Prov. xvi. 1 ; ntofco, Ps. Ixxiii. 7 ; 'gnto, Job xvii. 11 ; {3ov\al, 1 Cor. iv. 5 ; StaXo7tcr/zot, Matt. xv. 19, Luke v. 22, ix. 47, xxiv. 38 ; evOvfttfa-eis, Matt. ix. 4 ; eWotat, Heb. iv. 12. Wise thoughts, as well as inventions (1 Kings xii. 33 ; Neh. vi. 8 ; Isa. lix. 13) and deceits (Jer. xiv. 14, xxiii. 16), originate from the heart : it is the heart which forms them ("TCP, Gen. viii. 21), and devises them (B^n, Prov. vi. 18). Because it is the birth-place of the thoughts, the heart is, moreover, the birth-place of words. Words are brought forth from the heart (Job viii. 10), are spoken with the heart (Ps. xv. 2) ; the mouth speaks etc rov Trepio-a-ev/jLaros T?}? fcap&tas (Matt. xii. 34). The heart thus comprehends both vovs and ^0705 ; therefore the wise man is called 3^"D?n (Ex. xxviii. 3), and 3? is pregnantly used as equivalent to understanding (Job xii. 3 ; Prov. xv. 32 ; Hos. iv. 11) : thence XXFttafy the man of understanding (Job xxxiv. 10, 34), and ^pn (Prov. x. 13) or n!rpK (Hos. vii. 11 ; Jer. v. 21), the man void of understanding ; for heart without B> (Job xvii. 4) or HD^n (Prov. xiv. 33) is no better than none. The heart is (c) the centre of the pneumatico-psychical life, as emotional, i.e. the life of the feelings and the affections (affections of the mind). To the heart are attributed all degrees of joy, from pleasure (Isa. Ixv. 14) to transport and exultation (Acts ii. 46 ; Ps. Ixxxiv. 3) ; all degrees of pain, from discontent (Prov. xxv. 20) and sorrow (John xvi. 6) up to piercing and crushing woe (Ps. cix. 22 ; Acts xxi. 13 ; Isa. Ixv. 14) ; all degrees of ill-will, from provocation and anger (Prov. xxiii. 17 ; Jas. iii. 14) to raging madness (Acts vii. 54) and glowing desire of vengeance (Deut. xix. 6) ; all degrees of dissatisfaction, from anxiety (Prov. xii. 25) to despair (Eccles. 11. 20) ; all degrees of fear, from reverential trembling (Jer. xxxii. 40) to blank terror (Deut. xxviii. 28 ; Ps. cxliii. 4). The heart melts and writhes for anguish (Josh. v. 1 ; Jer. iv. 19), becomes weak by despondency (Lev. xxvi. 36 ; Deut. xx. 8), glows and ferments for sadness (Ps. xxxix. 3, Ixxiii. 21), dries up and withers under the weight of sorrow (Ps. cii. 4 SEC. XII.] HEART AND HEAD. 295 Ezek. xvi. 30), is broken and crushed by the anguish of ad- versity, wrath, and punishment (Ps. cxlvii. 3 ; Jer. xxiii. 9 ; Ps. li. 19), is turned for sympathy (Hos. xi. 8) ; is set into a sacred burning by God's word (Jer. xx. 9 ; Luke xxiv. 32). Briefly, A 9 /capita, is the conscious unity of the pneumatico- psychical life in all its directions ; and therefore ^HK 37, KapSia fj,ia y is the conscious perfect unity of will, thought, and feeling (Jer. xxxii. 39; Ezek. xi. 19; 1 Chron. xii. 38 ; Acts iv. 32). But as will, thought, and feeling are always conceived by Scrip- ture from an ethical point of view, it is thence understood of itself, that the heart, moreover, is (C) the centre of the moral life ; so that all moral conditions, from the highest mystical love of God (Ps. Ixxiii. 26), even down to the self-deifying pride (Exek. xxviii. 2, 5), and the darkening (Rom. i. 21) and harden- ing (Isa. vi. 10, Ixiii. 17 ; Jer. xvi. 12 ; Lam. iii. 65 ; 2 Cor. iii. 14), are concentrated in the heart as the innermost life- circle of humanity (1 Pet. iii. 4) ; and the moral character is called precisely 2? (comp. 3J?J 3?, an ambiguous character, Ps. xii. 3, 1 Chron. xii. 33), or with reference to the heart, "WJ (Deut. xxxi. 21 ; New Testament, iavoia, Luke i. 51, eTrlvoia, Acts viii. 22). Therefore ">?, clear; "!^9> pure; 1 "i^J, upright; D.to, whole ; DF), perfect ; |toJ, strong ; JONJ, faithful, and so further, with their opposites, are appellations of the heart, the discussion of which, however, is not a problem of psychology, but of ethics. The heart is the laboratory and place of issue of all that is good and evil in thoughts, words, and deeds (Mark vii. 21 ; Matt. xii. 34); the rendezvous of evil lusts (brffivfiiai) and passions (irdOrj eVt^iyua?, Rom. i. 24 ; Mark iv. 19, comp. 15); a good or an evil treasure (Luke vi. 45). It is the place where God's natural law is written in us, and effectually proves itself (Rom. ii. 15) ; as also the place of the positive law put within by grace (Isa. li. 7; Jer. xxxi. 33). It is the seat of conscience (Heb. x. 22) ; and all the testimonies of the conscience, e.g. \ John iii. 19-21, are ascribed to it. With the heart it is believed, /capSta Trio-Teverai (Rom. x. 10) ; and also disbelief places there the dregs of all wickedness (Heb. iii. 12). It is the field for the seed of the divine word (Matt. xiii. 19 ; Luke 1 It is characteristic of the rather Hellenic than Hebraic language in which the idea is expressed, that the book of Wisdom (vii. 27) says I\ where the Old Testament (Prov. xxii. 11, LXX.) says wrteti xu 296 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC XII. viii. 15). According as it makes its decision, it stands under the inspirations of God (e.g. 2 Cor. viii. 16) or of Satan (John xiii. 2 ; Acts v. 3). It is the dwelling-place of Christ in us (Eph. Hi. 17), of the Holy Ghost (2 Cor. i. 22), of the peace of God (Col. iii. 15); the receptacle of the love of God shed abroad (Rom. v. 5), the place of rising of the heavenly light (2 Cor. iv. 6; 2 Pet. i. 19), the closet of secret communion with God (Eph. v. 19 ; comp. Lam. ii. 18, iii. 41, Hos. vii. 14); a great mysterious depth, which only God fathoms (Prov. xv. 11 ; Jer. xvii. 9 ; Ps. xliv. 22 ;Rom. viii. 27). 1 To speak with Beck, it is the centre of the entire man the very hearth of life's impulse the supporter of the personal con- sciousness, combined with self-determination and the activity of the reason the training-place of all independent actions and conditions ; it is the agent of all relations and conducts, as well on the spiritual as on the bodily side, so far as they ensue with self-consciousness and free agency. It is by the heart that is characterized the moral condition of the man : in the heart are found the postulates of speech ; in the heart is affirmed the natural law, and, by means of regeneration, the new law of God as a living power. The question of v. Rudloff, 2 whether the heart belongs to the domain of the spirit or of the soul, needs not at all to be proposed in this mode of comprehension. It is the pneumatico-psychical inward nature of the man in its concrete central unity, and on all sides of its dynamic efficiency and its ethical determination. All that Hellenically and Hellenistically is called 1/01)5, XOYO?, o-welBijcn^ QV/ULOS, is involved in KapSla; and all by which iba and t?aj is affected, comes in J? into the light of consciousness. The heart, says Solomon (Prov. xiv. 10), knoweth the bitterness of his soul. It is obvious, from this mode of conception, that the heart is the place where, as Oehler expresses it, 3 the soul is at home, and becomes conscious of all its doing and suffering, as its own. All the rays of the life of soul and body converge thither, and again develop themselves thence (comp. e.g. Prov. xiv. 30, xvii. 22). Heart, 1 "Where hitherto, in the individual cases, only one illustrative text or a few or many of them are cited, it has always occurred with design, and after a previous review of the collected texts pertaining to the point. 2 Die Lehre vom Menschen, p. 42. Art. " Herz" in Herzog's R.E. SEC. XII.] HEART AND HEAD. 297 soul, and flesh, is the Old Testament trichotomy (Ps. Ixxxiv. 3, xvi. 9) ; heart and soul, the Old Testament designation of the pneumatico-psychical inner life (Deut. iv. 29, vi. 5 ; Josh, xxii. 5, xxiii. 14; 1 Kings ii. 4 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 3; 1 Chron. xxviii. 9 ; 2 Chron. vi. 38 ; Prov. ii. 10). We have purposely spared neither ourselves nor the reader the trouble of a tabular survey thus dry and wearisome, that the importance of the questions might be duly estimated which are associated with the view which is expressed in so continuous and various a manner in Scripture, from beginning to end. Mai- monides disregards all difficulties, when, in view of this biblical mode of speaking, he says that X> is a homonyrnous word, which primarily denotes the principal organ of life, and then, more- over, thought, sentiment, will, and intellect. 1 Between heart in the lower bodily-vital sense and heart in the higher pneu- matico-psychical sense, there must subsist a deeper and more real consistency than that of a mere figure of speech. From the fact that Scripture speaks nowhere of a heart of the brutes in a higher sense (a fact to which Roos first of all calls attention), 2 as moreover the Arabic Hamasa, p. 513, says directly, the brute is without heart (c^J^j^o), it cannot be proved that the higher conception of the human heart is a purely spiritual one: for the difference of the human and the brute heart has its foundation in the distinction of the human and the brute soul ; the organ of which in both cases is the heart of flesh : the fleshly heart of man is divested of humanity, when his soul is brutalized (Dan. iv. 16). That, moreover, when Scripture speaks of the heart in the higher sense, its reference is not to be so entirely with- drawn from the fleshly heart, is proved by almost all the passages where the heart appears as the object and subject of affections, e.g. Job xxxvii. 1 : "At this also my heart trem- bleth, and is moved out of his place." These are for the most part symptoms of the fleshly heart, as Ps. xxxviii. 10; the im- petuous quickly recurring contraction and expansion, 3 by which 1 Moreh Nebuchim, i. 39. 2 See also Beck, Seelenlehre, p. 70. 3 Not to say movement of rotation, for which "imnD is the strict ex- pression, the heart revolves in every condition of its efficiency a little round its axis leviter sese quasi contorquet. as Harvey expresses it ; and with 298 THE NATURAL CONDITION. [SEC. XII. the sentiments are indicated. But, moreover, Scripture conceives of higher spiritual occurrences in association with the fleshly heart. " I will give them," says Jehovah, in Ezek. xi. 19, of the Israel of the future, " one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you ; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh" (">^3 37). And Paul says to the Corinthians (2 Cor. iii. 2) : " Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men : inasmuch as it is manifest of you that ye are the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God ; not on tables of stone, but on fleshly tables of the heart." Irenseus not unjustly avails himself of this passage as a proof- text for the resurrection of the flesh : Si ergo mine corda carnalia capacia spiritus fiunt : quid mirum si in resurrectione earn quse a spiritu datur capiunt vitam I * Will it perchance be opposed to us, that this concentration of all pneumatico-psychical life in its sensuous agency upon the heart is not at all peculiar to the Holy Scripture ? Even according to the Indian view, the sun of knowledge rises in the aether of the heart : there dwells the part " which stands at the crest" (Kutast'a) of the universal Brahma, who, by his reflection, bestows the needful light on the spiritual capacities. 2 Of the Persians, Firmicus Maternus tells us that they regard the heart as the source and ground whence the thoughts branch forth like a wood 3 (in modum silvarum). In Homer, KpaSiT) (rjrop) likewise serves as the central living hearth of man, and stands to typeves directly in the relation of an internal nature. It is only because of the distinct and more elevated position which philosophy and physiology award to the vov$, that the brain gradually attained a higher significance. Pythagoras was the first who isolated the vovs in the brain. Alcmaeon, his pupil, considered the brain as the organ, as well of perception (afc&yarc) as of thought. Even Plato located the vovs in the head, wearing the form of a terrestrial globe. In like manner, convulsive states of the heart is associated at times a feeling as if the heart were in a rolling motion. 1 Opp. ed. Stieren, i. 753. 2 Grant, Bibliotheca Tamulica. 8 In a passage given in full in the following section, in Gersdorf, Biblio- theca Patrum, vol. xiii. p. 67. SEC. XIL] HEART AND HEAD. 299 the younger Hippocratic school, 1 and most of the Alexandrian physicians. Nevertheless Erasistratos taught (under Seleucus Nicator), according to Galen's testimony, that not alone the spirit of life, but also the spirit of the soul, had its seat Kara rrv tcapSiav. This view, moreover, found scholastic support elsewhere. Empedocles gave the heart's blood to the soul, Diogenes of Apollonia the cavity of the chest to the vo^ais ; the author of the Hippocratic work, Trepl /capbias, gave the left ventricle to the yvcb/jLT) (intelligent soul), as its place. But the chief assertor of the heart as the central organ of the soul is Aristotle, with the school of physicians that adopt his philosophy. The heart, from which the formation of the embryo takes its beginning, is, in his estimation, the centre whence proceed all the organs of sense, and whence, therefore, the soul, as the entelecheia of the body, develops its activity. 2 Moreover, among the Stoics, Chrysippus taught that the heart is the abode of the reason and the affections ; and Posidonius, that the one soul, with its three fundamental powers (\o