F.A.J. Hort on Revelation in Jesus

Here's a good quote that I came across in Baird's History of NT Research (2:61):

All our primary knowledge of God is through Him, the true Son of the true Father. All of our primary knowledge of Him, the Son, is through His revelation in human flesh and blood under the conditions of earthly life, and through the testimony of those who had conversed with Him by their bodily senses. (F.A.J. Hort, The Way the Truth and the Life, 163)

The quote is from Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892), who was part of the Cambridge Triumvirate along with J.B. Lightfoot and B.F. Westcott. I find the quote both inspirational and daunting. It is great to think that God was revealed in the person of Jesus...but it is something else to think that this great revelation of God has been relayed to us "through the testimony of those who had conversed with Him by their bodily senses."

If Hort is right (and I think he is), then this should be a reminder to all of us who are confessing scholars to remember to be humble. Where is there room for arrogance when such a great thing (the revelation of God in Jesus) has come in such a dingy package (the testimony of people's senses)? Though the question was intended to be rhetorical, I'll answer it: There's no room for arrogance!

Ewald on the Bible and Revelation

I found the following paragraph in Baird's History of New Testament Research to be helpful. It is concerned with the thoughts of Heinrich Ewald (1803-1875):

According to Ewald, "we have had for a long time no other historical means other than the Bible by which to satisfy ourselves of the nature and content of true religion as it has been revealed." The Bible records events and experiences in which revelation has occurred. The writing was accomplished by persons, but sometimes the writers speak for others, so that the appearance in the NT of pseudonymous documents is not disquieting. In the main, the biblical record is reliable, but discrepancies (e.g., imperfections in copying) occur. The holiness of Scripture consists not in the letter but in its power to speak the word of God which is effective for human salvation... (288-59)

Later, Baird writes the following: "Ewald, with his recognition of pseudonymous documents within the canon and his acknowledgment of discrepancies in Scripture, is no biblicist" (292). Thus, I guess Jim West could not call Ewald a fundamentalist! I am sure that Ewald is resting in peace peacefully with that little bit of reassurance!

Even though Ewald was (perhaps over-)reacting to the Tübingen School, I think he expressed his opinions powerfully. He affirmed the uniqueness of the Bible as the revelation of the Word of God without blinding himself to the obvious problems therein. Much more attention should be paid to Ewald's contributions to the study of the NT!