EXEGESIS. 359 EXEGESIS. incut interpretation, 1ml with such a skeptical attitude of mind toward the New Testament itself as In arouse I lie definite and distinct hostility, nol only of the closer followers of Schleiermacher, but also of a group of cxegetes win), wliile not so profoundly inlluenced by Schleiermacher's spirit, yet followed in the way ill liis organic treatment of Scripture. The heller representatives of 1 h is group are: Winer (died 1858; Exegetical Studies, Leipzig, 1827; Commentary on Galatians, Leipzig, 1859); lileek (died 185!); Com menhiry on llelneirs, Berlin, 1828-40; Lectures on the Apocalypse, ib., 1862; Colossi/ins, Fphesians, I'hitemon, ib.. 1805; He- hreios, Elberfeld, 1808; Synoptical Explanation of the First Three Gospels, Leipzig, 1802); H. A. V. Meyer "(died 1873) , editor of the Critical Exegetical Commentary on tin New Testament (trans., Edinburgh, 1873, sqq.), to which he per- sonally contributed in the first edition Matthew, .Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, and Philippians; Beck (died 1878; Exposition of Epistles to Timothy, Gtitersloh, 1870; ,4/>oc- alypse, ib., 1883; Commentary on Apocalypse, ib., 1884; Exposition of Romans,- ib., 1884; Ephe- sians, ib.. 1891; Epistles of Peter, ib., 1896);. Lange (died 1884), editor of the Commentary on Holy Scripture (trans., New Testament portion, Edinburgh, 1801-05). to which he personally con- tributed Matthew, Mark, John, Romans. James, and Apocalypse; Lechler (died 1890; Commen- tary on Acts, in Lange, Bielefeld, 1800) ; Ebrard (died 1888; Commentary on Hebrews, Ivinigs- berg, 1850; Apocalypse, ib., 1853; The First Three Gospels, trans., Edinburgh. 1853; Epistles of John, ib., 1859; Gospel of John, ib.. 1860) ; Beyschlag (died 1900; The Pauline Theodicy, I '.'il in, 1809; The Parables of Jesus, trans., Edinburgh, 1875; Commentary on Apocalypse, ib.. 1870; Commentary on James, in the last edition of Meyer, Edinburgh, 1897); B. Weiss [Commentary on Philippians, Berlin. 1859; The r,r Testnment Text Critically Investigated nith Exegetical ^otcs, ib.. 1894-1900; Com- mentaries on Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Ro- mans, Hebrews, and Epistles of John in the last edition of Meyer, 1893-1901) ; Henrici [Com- mentary on Corinthians, 1880-87: Corinthians in the last edition of Meyer, 1896-1900). Along with this opposition arose a more thor- ough-going one in the strictly conservative school of Hengstenberg (died 1809; Commentary on Apocalypse, trans., Edinburgh, 1851; Gospel of John, trans., ib., 1865), to which more distinctly belonged: Stier (died 1862; Words of the Lord ■ trsiiK, trans., Edinburgh. 1869; Apostles, ib., I860; Angels, London. 1887: Commentary on Hebrews, Brunswick, 1802; James, Epistles of Peter and Jude, Berlin. 1850); Philippi (died 1882; Commentary on Romans, Gtitersloh, 1878; Galatians, ib., 18S4) ; K. F. Keil (died 1888; Commentary on Matthew, Leipzig, 1877: Mark and Luke, ib., 1879: John, ib., 1881; Peter and Jude, ib., 1883; Hebrews, ib., 1885). To these should be added the following later writers, be- longing to the same general conservative attitude, though varying among themselves as to their degree of conservatism: Franz Delitzsch (died 1890), whose chief New Testament work was a Commentary on Hebrexos (trans.. Edinburgh, 1868-70) ; Luthardt {Commentary on John's Gos- i" /. Nuremberg. 1852-53; Apocalypse, Leipzig, 1861; Commentary on John's Gospel "mi I with ZQckler, t) int., Edinburgh, Isysvo; John's Epistles ami Romans, in Strack and Zbckler, Munich, 1886-88); NBsgen [Commentary on Vets, Leipzig, lss2; Commentary on Matthew, Mark, a„, I Luke, in Sllarl. and Zockler, Muilirh. 1886- 88) ; Zfiekler, editor with Strack of the Conci i Commentary on tin Holy H ritings oj the hij and Neit Testaments (Munich, 1880-88), to which he personally contributed John's Gospil and Acts (with Luthardt), The Pastoral Epistles, n< brews ami Apocalypse (with Etiggenbach), Thi salonians and Galatians in the last edition (Munich, 1894 98). Apart from all school-., occu pying an unalliliated and isolated [io ition, yet bitterly hostile to I he Ttibingen school, is to be placed Ewald (died 1875; Commentary on tin Apocalypse, Leipzig, 1828; Exposition of th<- First Three Gospels, Giittingen, 1850). In this struggle the followers of Baur were not able to maintain their critical position, but abandoned if point by point, suffering their greatest defeat in the defection from their ranks of Ritschl (died 1889), who, in the second edition of his Old Catholic Church. (Bonn, 1857), showed that the historical premises on which the exegesis of the school was founded were false. On tin- basis of this newly established position has arisen a school of exegesis which practically re- produces the .Schleiermacher position of the sep- aration of the critical and religious elements in biblical study. It has gained great influence and may be said to control the New Testament interpretation of to-day. The more prominent cxegetes of this school arc: II. J. Holtzmann, editor of the Hand Commentary to thi few Testament (Freiburg, 1889-91), to which he con- tributed personally in the first edition Matthew, Mark, Lake, John's Gospel anil Epistles, the Apocalypse, and .4cfs; Lipsius (died 1892; Com- mentary on Romans, Galatians, Philippians in the first edition of Holtzmann, ib., 1891); Schmiedel {Commentary on Corinthians ami Thessalonians in the first edition of Holtzmann, ib., 1800); von Sodcn [Commentary on Ephe- sians, Colossians, Philemon, Timothy, Titus, He- brews, James, Peter, and Jude in the first, edition of Holtzmann, ib.. 1801): Wewlt ( Commentary on Acts in the last edition of Meyer. Edinburgh, 1890); Kiihl {Commentary on Peter anil Jude in the last edition of Meyer, ib., 1807) ; Bousset ( Commentary on the Apocalypse in the last edi- tion of Meyer, ib., 1800) ; Bornemann [Commen- tary on Thessalonians in the last edition of Meyer, ib., 1804) ; E. Haupt (The First Epistle of John, trans.. Edinburgh, 1S70; Commentary on the Captivity Epistles of l'aul in the las! edition of Meyer, ib.. 1807) : Klopper [Commen- tary on II. Corinthians. Berlin. 1869 and 1874; Colossians, ib., 18S2; //. Thessalonians, ib., 1889; Ephesians, ib., 1891; Philippians, ib., 1803); J. Weiss (Commentary on Epistles to Timothy and Titus; also, with B. Weiss. Mark and Luke in the last edition of Meyer. Berlin. 18! In France, after Renan (died 1802) had sup- ported and developed the mythical principles of Strauss, the best results in New Testament exegesis were produced by the conservative schol- ar F. Godei (died 1900; Commentary on Luke, trans., Edinburgh, 1875: John, trans., ib., 1879 80; Romans, Iran-., ib.. 1.880: /. Corinthians, trans., ib., 1886). In Holland the earlier writers were conservative in their tendency, being best
