Closing comment (to Volume 2 of Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte der Synoptiker)

Critique of the Gospel History of the Synoptics
by Bruno Bauer

Volume 2



I do not want to close this volume with a remark about Matthew’s servile dependence on his predecessors – it has already occurred and been confirmed too often in the above remarks. However, I cannot conclude the account between the Synoptics and the fourth evangelist here: not until later, when, after the critique of the former, we have overlooked both circles of evangelical historiography and can prove the test of our account in the critique of the history of the Passion and the Resurrection! The characterisation of the evangelical historiography will also follow later, in the following volume, which will conclude the critique of the Synoptic Gospels. With what, then, shall we conclude? Should we even apologise in the end for having carried out these investigations so thoroughly? First the newer theologians would have to prove that they are right when they dismiss the most important questions with a few slogans and are only indefatigable in repeating the same phrases in a thousand books. First they would have to prove that he who has the prospect of bringing a question to a conclusion is not obliged to be thorough. So give me a conclusion! The theologians give it to me. See how they stand there, theological hatred glowing again from their eyes! Ha! “Do you reach for the thunder? Well that it was not given to you wretched mortals!” So what should we do with them in the end? Well, based on the above explanations, we could ask them how long they think their Jesuitism can last, and whether they believe their deceit and lies will last forever? When the time comes that their lies must become conscious and deliberate, then judgment is not far away.

July 1841.





Printed by Breitkopf und Härte! in Leipzig.

The following two tabs change content below.

Neil Godfrey

Neil is the author of this post. To read more about Neil, see our About page.