DeWette

[ David Strauss ] [ Semler ] [ VON SODEN - AVAILABLE ] [ Lachmann ] [ F.C. Baur ] [ NKJV Hodges&Farstad MT ] [ Knowing W & H - Conclusions ] [ Wettstein ] [ Gerhard Kittel ] [ Tischendorf 1 ] [ The Unbound Scriptures - A Biblical Critique - Part 1 ] [ The Unbound Scriptures - Critique - Pt 2 ] [ The Unbound Scriptures - Critique - Pt 3 ] [ textual criticism newtestament1 ] [ textual criticism newtestament2 ] [ UBS Red Cover NT ] [ DeWette ] [ GRIESBACH ] [ Majority Text ] [ Bengel ] [ Von Soden ] [ Kittel & His Version ] [ Kittel and the O.T. ] [ Miles Coverdale ] [ Westcott & Hort ]

Scofield Never Agreed with Westcott and Hort

Westcott & Hort

THE NETWORKS OF WESTCOTT & HORT

DE WETTE

DE WETTE, WILHELM MARTIN LEBERECHT (1780-1849), German theologian, was born in January 1780, at Ulla, near Weimar, where his father was a liberal pastor. He was sent to the gymnasium [note: a "gymnasium" in Germany is simply a high school] at Weimar, then at the height of its literary glory. Here he was much influenced by intercourse with Johann Gottfried Herder, who frequently examined at,the school. In 1799 he entered on his theological studies at Jena, his principal teachers being J. J. Griesbach and H. E. G. Paulus, from the latter of whom he derived his tendency to free critical inquiry. Both in methods and in results, however, he occupied an almost solitary position among German theologians.

Having taken his doctor’s degree, he became privat-instructor at the University of Jena; in 1807 he was professor of theology at Heidelberg, where he came under the influence of J. F. Fries (1773—1843); and in 1810 was transferred to a similar chair in the newly founded university of Berlin, where he enjoyed ‘the friendship of Schleiermacher. He was, however, dismissed from Berlin in 1819 on account of his having written a letter of consolation to the ‘mother of Karl Ludwig Sand,’ the murderer of Kotzebue. (Apparently, writing a letter to the mother of a murderer was a bit over the line).

A petition in his favour presented by the senate of the university was unsuccessful, and a decree was issued not only depriving him of the chair, but banishing him from the Prussian kingdom. He retired for a time to Weimar, where he occupied his leisure in the preparation of his edition of Martin Luther, and in writing the romance Theodor oder die Weihe des Zweiflers (Berlin, 1822), in which he describes the education of an evangelical pastor. During this period he made his first essay in preaching, and proved himself to be possessed of very popular gifts.

But in 1822 he accepted the chair of theology in the university of Basel, which had been reorganized four years before. Though his appointment had been strongly opposed by the Theologically orthodox Protestant party, De Wette soon won for himself great influence both in the university and among the people generally, for his style- if not his theology. He was admitted a citizen, and became rector of the university, which owed to him much of its recovered strength, particularly in the theological faculty. He died in June 1849.

De Wette has been described by Julius Wellhausen as "the epoch-making opener of the historical criticism of the Pentateuch." Therefore DeWette's speciality within Textual Criticism, is that he was specifically an Old-Testament Bible-Attacker ! DeWette's theory was that the Old Testament was a mixture of totally different sources and texts that had been re-arranged and then presented to us today as the Old Testament, when nothing of the kind was originally intended. He disputed the authorship of Moses of the Pentateuch, attacked the Bible as Not being inspired by God, and also specifically attacked the Messianic portrayals as indications of a future Messiah in the book of Psalms.

He prepared the way for the Supplement-theory. But he also made valuable contributions to other branches of theology. He had, moreover, considerable poetic talent, and wrote a drama in three acts, entitled Die Enisagung (Berlin, 1823). He had an intelligent interest in art, and studied ecclesiastical music and architecture.

As a Biblical critic he is sometimes classed with the destructive school, but, as Otto Pfleiderer ‘says (Development of Theology, p. 102), he "occupied as free a position as the Rationalists with regard to the literal authority of the ‘creeds of the church, but that he sought to give their due value to the religious feelings, which the Rationalists had not done, and, with a more unfettered mind towards history, to maintain the connexion of the present life of the church with the past."

What does this last quote mean ?

It means that other Bible attackers (Textual Critics) thought highly of him, and that even though DeWette attacked many aspects of Christianity, falsely suggesting that they were not supported by History [a position that Textual Critics have since fallen flat on their face with], that DeWette was still willing to be tolerant of those who wanted to believe in Christianity, since he - DeWette - was willing to be magnanimous in considering the "due value to the religious feelings".

DeWette was also willing to allow that there MIGHT be a connection between the Christianity of his era, and historic Early Christianity. This was a "Concession" that DeWette himself could well aford to make, knowing that his allies who were other Textual Critics, would undermine this view - in multitudes of heretical books designed to undermine DeWette's official tolerance for the "False" view of any actual link between the Christianity of his day, and Early Christianity.

Does this mean that DeWette was working with Textual Critics, attempting to sound conciliatory in person, while using his written works to deliberately attack the claims of Jesus Christ and the Bible ?

Absolutely Yes !!

"His works are marked by exegetical skill, unusual power of condensation and uniform fairness. Accordingly they possess value which is little affected by the progress of criticism."

What does that mean ?

That Textual Critics thought highly of him, and that he was praised by other Textual Critics as being "Fair" (Which means he was anything but). The reason why DeWette's works possess value which is not much affected by the value of Textual Criticism, is because most of what he wrote was historically innacurate.

So, it Could affect the progress of Higher Criticism, if the Textual Critics were to respond to the merits of DeWettes faulty research and erroneous conclusions. However, since the Textual Critics will ignore the fact that DeWette was historically wrong and innacurate, The "Progress" of Textual Criticism will continue, since the Textual Critics will themselves continue to teach the conclusions that DeWette arrived at, even though the historical basis for them is entirely lacking.

De Wette also edited Luther’s works (5 vols., 1825—1828).

Isn't it interesting, that among the first works that Textual Critics wanted to get ahold of, was the Work of Martin Luther, in order to be sure that they would "Edit" it, according to their own designs and conclusions ?

Before DeWette died in 1849, his influence in undermining Christianity on the University level had made great strides forward.