A duplicate

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The rejoinder of Lessing was born in the wake of the fragments dispute , especially through the controversy with Johann Heinrich Ress . It is Lessing's answer to Reß's resurrection story of Jesus Christ.

Emergence

During the dispute over the Reimarus fragments, the fragmentation dispute, Johann Heinrich Reß published in 1777 “The resurrection story of Jesus Christ defended against some new objection made in the fourth contribution to history and literature from the treasures of the ducal library in Wolfenbüttel”. Lessing's answer to this publication is the duplicate.

content

Lessing's duplicate consists of an introductory part and a detailed discussion of the ten contradictions from the Reimarus fragments, which Reß tries to refute in his story of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Lessing, on the other hand, refutes point by point Johann Heinrich Reß's attempts to debilitate him. Since Reß's argument is in part not very convincing and not always logical, Lessing finds it easy to refute it and prove it to be untenable. With superior rhetoric and knowledge, but also sharp and mocking remarks, Lessing performs his duplicate. Reß himself is not mentioned by name and, like Reimarus, is initially referred to as an unnamed. Lessing pretends to know neither the name nor the profession of the author of the resurrection story of Jesus Christ and then calls Reß his neighbor in the duplicate.

preface

Before Lessing refutes all of Reß's attempts to refute it, there is an introductory part in the duplicate, which in turn is divided into a short introduction and three points. At the beginning Lessing emphasizes on the one hand his neutral position and on the other hand presents his conviction of the truth, which lies between that of Reimarus and Reß.

First part

Lessing pretends not to know who the unnamed is. He distances himself from the unnamed position, but wants him to be judged fairly and takes on a mediator role. He appeals to humanity and emphasizes that the search for the truth and the sincerity with which one searches are more important than the supposed possession of the truth.

Second part

Again Lessing emphasizes that he does not know who the unnamed is and distances himself even more from the position of Reimarus. Lessing warns against setting too strict standards for the evangelists, since historians from that time would not be judged so severely either. Lessing refers again to humanity and thus also to the possibility of human errors occurring. Above all, he criticizes the harmonists and defends himself against the fact that all contradictions must be resolved. He relativizes the role of the Holy Spirit just as he states that what was written at the time must also be understood from the time it was written. He supports his argument with parables such as the uncertain foundation of a temple or the scaffolding of a house during construction.

third part

Lessing makes it clear that it is not easy to explain the contradictions from the Reimarus fragments really conclusively. He also emphasizes only dealing with the ten contradictions that he has made his own. He begins his refutations with a challenging tone.

Dealing with the contradictions

First contradiction

The first contradiction is found between Luke (XXIII, 56.) and Mark (XVI, 1.). The women who want to anoint Jesus after the crucifixion buy their goods from Luke on Friday evening. H. before the Sabbath, with Mark only on Sunday, i.e. after the Sabbath. Lessing refutes Reß's argument, among other things through his language skills, and attacks him personally for the first time on this point.

Second contradiction

The second contradiction can be found between John, Mark and Luke. It is about the type of burial of Jesus Christ, which Mark and Luke portray differently than John. Lessing accuses Reß of not having understood the heart of the matter. His tone becomes increasingly mocking and he also attacks the dialogue structure of Reß's talks in defense of the resurrection story. In conclusion, his criticism applies above all to the harmony and thus to the attempt to refute the contradictions at all costs.

Third contradiction

The third contradiction is found between Matthew and the rest of the evangelists. This is about the discovery of the empty grave, more precisely when the empty grave was discovered. Lessing goes through Reß's argument sentence by sentence and scoffs at Reß's emotional portrayal of Maria by depicting her just as emotionally. Lessing uses a new means for his argumentation by creating a fictitious reader-author conversation and in this way discussing the relevant Matthew passage with the fictitious reader and repeatedly expressing himself negatively about his “neighbor”. He closes again with a criticism of the harmony.

Fourth contradiction

The fourth contradiction concerns the number of angels who were present at the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Lessing argues that an exact number could not be determined, since the evangelists apparently do not count the angels. Here, too, he ends his refutation with a criticism of harmony.

Fifth contradiction

The fifth contradiction is found between Luke and John. It is about Mary Magdalene , who reports on the resurrection with Luke together with other women and with John does this alone. For Lessing, Reß's argument is incomprehensible and illogical. He proves his linguistic ability again and attacks Reß again directly by accusing him of sleeping. His attacks lead to the conclusion that Reß has only a low capacity for absorption and is not entirely in his right mind. Furthermore, Lessing attacks the harmonists again and insinuates that the neighbor, who is supposedly unknown to him, cannot be a theologian , but a layman. Reß was a theologian. Lessing's tone becomes increasingly sharp and aggressive, but also more mocking. At the beginning of his refutations, Lessing emphasized that he did not know how long he would like to get involved in this matter. At this point he is with body and soul and closes this point with: "Brave, to the other half too" .

Sixth contradiction

The sixth contradiction is found between Matthew and John and concerns the first appearance of the resurrected Jesus. According to Matthew, Christ first appeared to Mary Magdalene, who was on her way back to the city. According to John, Christ first appeared at the door of the tomb. Lessing again declares Reß's argument to be untenable and doubts that they had the same text. He makes it clear that even with the greatest striving for harmony, this contradiction cannot be resolved perfectly and that Augustine has already worked on it once.

Seventh contradiction

The seventh contradiction concerns the touch of the risen One. Matthew describes that the women touched Jesus' feet, Lucas says that Jesus himself encouraged the disciples to touch him and John writes that Jesus commanded Thomas to touch him, but Mary Magdalene did not allow this. Lessing refuses, on the basis of the manner in which Reß argued, to acknowledge that Reß had dispelled this contradiction.

Eighth contradiction

The eighth contradiction is found between Matthew, Mark and Luke. It is about the instructions that Jesus gave to the disciples after his resurrection. Lessing attacks Reß by calling him a "blind chicken" which one day finds a grain. At the same time, he attacks Reß's rhetorical approach in his conversations in the resurrection story. Verse for verse, Lessing follows Reß's argument and concludes that he cannot understand them.

Ninth contradiction

The ninth contradiction is found between Matthew and John. It is about the exact place of Jesus Christ's appearance to his disciples. Lessing attacks the harmonists again and proves that the contradiction was clearly not resolved. It closes with an open sentence as a transition to the tenth contradiction.

Tenth contradiction

Strictly speaking, the tenth contradiction is a deeper examination of the ninth contradiction. On this point, too, Lessing follows Reß's inconclusive argument. He closes, tired and disillusioned with the argument.

He ends the duplicate with a reason and justification of the term duplicate.

effect

Despite his polemical statements, Lessing repeatedly demonstrated his rhetorical skills. Through his superiority, but also through the less than convincing argumentation of Johann Heinrich Reß, Lessing proves that he is not facing any serious opponent in this part of the fragments dispute.

Despite his emotional outbursts, Lessing proceeds very precisely and significantly more logically than Reß in his refutation. The duplicate remains Lessing's only answer to Reß's writings.

literature

Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Letters. Ed. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774–1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, p. 510
  2. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 510-519
  3. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 519-523
  4. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 524-528
  5. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 529-531
  6. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 531-540
  7. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 540-543
  8. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 543–558
  9. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 558-563
  10. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 564-565
  11. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 565-575
  12. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 575-579
  13. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, pp. 580-585
  14. ↑ Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim: Works and Briefe.Hg. v. Wilfried Barner (among others). Vol. 9 works 1774-1778. Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1993, p. 585