diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 01:51:53 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 01:51:53 -0700 |
| commit | 3ca93866812a1bb74d46b9027a73cb667019745e (patch) | |
| tree | 93572f42f73d6091b5464901e776ec6279d14f62 | |
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 22459-8.txt | 11088 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 22459-8.zip | bin | 0 -> 220762 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 22459.txt | 11088 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 22459.zip | bin | 0 -> 220722 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 |
7 files changed, 22192 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/22459-8.txt b/22459-8.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..acd849d --- /dev/null +++ b/22459-8.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11088 @@ +The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Books of the New Testament, by Leighton +Pullan + + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + + + + +Title: The Books of the New Testament + + +Author: Leighton Pullan + + + +Release Date: August 30, 2007 [eBook #22459] +Last updated: January 19, 2009 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT*** + + +E-text prepared by Al Haines + + + +Transcriber's note: + + Page numbers in this book are indicated by numbers enclosed + in curly braces, e.g. {99}. They have been located where page + breaks occurred in the original book. For its Index, a page + number has been placed only at the start of that section. + + + + + +THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT + +by the + +REV. LEIGHTON PULLAN + +Fellow and Tutor of St. John Baptist's College, Oxford. + + + + + + + + "If you choose to obey your Bibles, you will + never care who attacks them."--RUSKIN. + + + +Fourth Edition Revised + +Rivingtons +34 King Street, Covent Garden +London +1912 + + + +{v} + +PREFACE + +This book is intended to meet the widely prevalent need of an +introduction to the New Testament which is neither a mere hand-book nor +an elaborate treatise for specialists. It is written in a conservative +spirit, and at the same time an ample use has been made of recent +critical investigation. + +It has been impossible to give an exhaustive proof of the position +maintained, but no matter of great importance has been overlooked. The +arguments will be intelligible to educated persons who are unacquainted +with the Greek language. + +The author has sometimes derived much help from the articles in Dr. +Hastings' _Dictionary of the Bible_. The dates which have been adopted +are in most cases those adopted in {vi} that Dictionary by Dr. Sanday +and Mr. C. H. Turner. + +His best thanks are due to the Rev. E. W. Pullan, Mr. J. F. Briscoe, +and Mr. E. W. Corbett, for the kind help which they have given him in +the preparation of the book. + + + + +{vii} + +CONTENTS + +CHAPTER PAGE + + TABLE OF APPROXIMATE DATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . x + I. THE NEW TESTAMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 + II. THE GOSPELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + III. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW . . . . . . . . 33 + IV. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK . . . . . . . . . . 49 + V. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE . . . . . . . . . . 64 + VI. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN . . . . . . . . . . 80 + VII. THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 + VIII. THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 + IX. 1 AND 2 THESSALONIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 + X. THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE + CORINTHIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 + XI. THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE + CORINTHIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 + XII. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS . . 150 + XIII. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS . . . 158 + XIV. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE + COLOSSIANS--THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON . . . 170 + XV. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS . . 180 + XVI. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS 188 + XVII. THE PASTORAL EPISTLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 + XVIII. THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 + XIX. THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 + XX. THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 + XXI. THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER . . . . . . . . . 235 + XXII. THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER . . . . . . . . 246 + XXIII. THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 + XXIV. THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 + XXV. THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE . . . . . . . 270 + + APPENDIX A.--RATIONALIST CRITICISM ON ST. JOHN'S WRITINGS 284 + APPENDIX B.--PAPIAS AND JOHN THE PRESBYTER . . . . . . . . 285 + APPENDIX C.--THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT . . . . . . . . . . . 288 + APPENDIX D.--SOME EARLY WITNESSES TO NEW TESTAMENT + WRITINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 + APPENDIX E.--BOOKS RECOMMENDED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 + + INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 + + + + +{x} + +TABLE OF APPROXIMATE DATES + + THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW . . . . . A.D. 69 + " " ST. MARK . . . . . . . A.D. 62 + " " ST. LUKE . . . . . . . A.D. 70-75 + " " ST. JOHN . . . . . . . A.D. 80-90 + ACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 75-80 + ROMANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 56 + 1 CORINTHIANS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 55 + 2 CORINTHIANS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 55 + GALATIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 56 + EPHESIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 60 + PHILIPPIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 61 + COLOSSIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 60 + 1 THESSALONIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 51 + 2 THESSALONIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 51 + 1 TIMOTHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 63 + 2 TIMOTHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 64 + TITUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 63 + PHILEMON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 60 + HEBREWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 66 + JAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 50 + 1 PETER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 64 + 2 PETER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 65 + 1, 2, 3 JOHN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 80-90 + JUDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 63 + REVELATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 96 + + + + +{1} + +CHAPTER I + +THE NEW TESTAMENT + +[Sidenote: Its Name.] + +After the gift of the Holy Spirit Himself, we may justly reckon the New +Testament as the most precious gift which our Lord Jesus Christ has +given since His Ascension to those who believe on His Name. The word +"testament," which is in Latin _testamentum_, corresponds with our word +"covenant," and the phrase "New Testament" signifies the record of that +new covenant in which God bound man to Himself by the death of His Son. +The truth that this was a new covenant, distinct from the covenant +which God made with Abraham, was taught by our Lord when He instituted +the memorial of His death and said, "This cup is the new covenant in My +Blood." We do not know precisely at what date the Christians began to +call this record "the New Testament," but we do know that they used +this name before A.D. 200. + +[Sidenote: Its Language.] + +In the time of our Lord the popular language of Palestine was Aramaic, +a language which was akin to Hebrew and borrowed some words from +Hebrew. Hebrew was known by learned people, but the language which the +Son of God learned from His blessed mother and His foster father was +Aramaic, and He spoke the Galilean dialect of that language. From a +few words preserved in the Gospels, it is plain that the gospel was +first preached in that tongue. In the 7th century after Christ, the +Mohammedan conquerors, who spoke Arabic, began to supplant {2} Aramaic +by Arabic, and this is now the ordinary language of Palestine. As many +people who spoke Aramaic were at one time heathen, both the Jews and +the Christians adopted the habit of calling their language _Syriac_ +rather than Aramaic. The great centre of Christian Syriac literature +was Edessa, and in the eastern part of the Roman Empire Syriac was the +most important and most elegant language next to Greek. It is still +used in the Church services of many Oriental Christians, and it is +spoken in ordinary conversation in parts of North Mesopotamia and +Kurdistan. Further west it is only spoken in a few villages of +Anti-Libanus. In the course of this book it will be necessary to refer +occasionally to the Aramaic language. + +It is highly probable that some of the earliest Christian writings were +in Aramaic, but all the books of the New Testament which we now possess +are in Greek. The Greek language was known by many people in +Palestine, and it was splendidly fitted to be the medium of God's +revelation. It was widely known among the civilized nations of the +time, and it is so rich and expressive that religious ideas are better +conveyed in Greek than in almost any other tongue. Whereas it was +essential that the gospel should be preached first in Aramaic, it was +equally essential that it should be written in Greek, for the benefit +of people who did not live in Palestine or who lived there as strangers. + +[Sidenote: The Canon.] + +The New Testament Scriptures consist of twenty-seven different books, +written by nine different authors. Each book has some special +characteristics corresponding with the mind of the writer and the +circumstances under which it was written. Yet these books exhibit a +manifest unity of purpose and doctrine. Under many differences of +dialect and expression there is an internal unity such as we do not +find in any secular literature, and this unity is due to inspiration. +The whole collection of books is called the CANON of the New Testament. +This Greek word "canon" originally meant a straight rod, such as could +be used for {3} ruling or measuring, then it was employed to signify a +rule or law, and finally it meant a list or catalogue. As applied to +the New Testament, the word "canon" means the books which fit the +Church's rule of faith, and which themselves become a rule that +measures forgeries and finds them wanting. The Church set these +genuine books apart as having their origin in inspiration which came +from God. They were all either written by the apostles or by men who +were trained by the apostles, and thus they contain a unique account of +the sayings of the Lord Jesus and the teaching of those who received +their commission from Him. They are therefore documents to which the +Church can refer, as a final court of appeal, in all questions of faith +and conduct. + +It was only by degrees that the Church realized the importance of +placing all these twenty-seven books in the canon. This was finally +done in the western Churches of Christendom in A.D. 382, by a Council +held at Rome.[1] + +The disciples first endeavoured to collect the sayings of our Lord and +the record of His life. Thus the four Gospels constitute the first +layer of the New Testament canon. The canon of our four Gospels +existed by A.D. 150, as is shown by Hermas and Justin Martyr. + +The next layer of the canon consists of the thirteen Epistles of St. +Paul and the Acts. To these the Epistle to the Hebrews was generally +attached in the east, though not in the west. This layer of the canon +was universally recognized towards the close of the 2nd century, and +perhaps some years earlier, for the books composing it were used and +quoted throughout the 2nd century. + +The third layer of the canon gained its place more slowly. It consists +of what are called the "Catholic Epistles," viz. those of St. James, +St. Peter, St. John, and St. Jude, together with the Revelation or +Apocalypse of St. John. + +A crowd of works circulated among the Christians of the {4} and +century, including some forged Gospels and Apocalypses, the Epistle of +St. Clement, Bishop of Rome, written about A.D. 95, and the allegory +known as the _Shepherd_ of Hermas, written about A.D. 140. Several of +these works appear to have enjoyed a popularity in excess of that which +attached to some of the books now included in the canon. Nevertheless +they were rejected when they were examined. It was not merely a +wonderful intellectual feat on the part of the Church to have sifted +out this mass of literature; it was an action in which the Christian +cannot fail to see the hand of God. + +One question remains to be asked after drawing this small sketch of the +history of the canon. Why is it that for several generations the canon +of the New Testament varied in different countries, containing fewer +books in one place than in another? Two reasons may be given: (i.) +Certain books at first enjoyed only a local popularity; thus "Hebrews +was saved by the value set upon it by the scholars of Alexandria, and +the Epistle of St. James by the attachment of certain Churches in the +East." (ii.) The books of the New Testament, when translated into +other languages, were not all translated together. The Gospels were +naturally translated first, as containing the words of our Lord. The +other books followed gradually. Interesting information is given us +with regard to the latter fact by the _Doctrine of Addai_, a Syriac +book of which the present form dates from about A.D. 400, but which +appears to describe the condition of the Syrian Church in the 3rd +century. The writings of _Aphraates_, a Syrian writer, A.D. 338, +supplement this information. We find from these books that about A.D. +160 the Syrian Christians possessed a translation of the Gospels. +Early in the 3rd century they used a harmony of the Gospels with Acts +and the Epistles of St. Paul. In the 4th century they used also the +Epistle to the Hebrews. It is fairly evident, from the _Doctrine of +Addai_, that only the Old Testament and the Gospels were at first used +by the Syrian Christians, and that St. Paul's Epistles and Acts arrived +later. And as late as {5} A.D. 338 they knew nothing of the Catholic +Epistles and Revelation, though these books were well known by the +Christians who spoke Greek and Latin. + +[Sidenote: Ancient Versions.] + +The most ancient versions or translations of the New Testament were in +those three great languages spoken by people who touched the borders of +the districts where Greek was spoken. These were Latin, Syriac, and +the Coptic language spoken by the Egyptians. It seems probable that a +large part of the New Testament was translated into these languages +within about a hundred years after the time of the apostles. The +oldest version in any language closely akin to English was that made by +Ulphilas, the celebrated bishop of the Goths, who translated the Bible +from Greek into Gothic about A.D. 350. There is a most beautiful +manuscript of this version preserved at Upsala, in Sweden. The Goths +were then settled in the country between the Danube and the Dnieper. +As late as the 17th century their language was still spoken in part of +the south of Russia. A carefully revised translation of the Latin +Bible was made by St. Jerome between A.D. 382 and 404, and this version +came to be used by the Church throughout the west of Europe. + +[Sidenote: English Versions.] + +The Gospel of St. John and perhaps the other Gospels were translated by +the patient historian and monk, the Venerable Bede, who was buried at +Durham in A.D. 731. Parts of the Bible, especially the Psalms, were +soon fairly well known through translations. King Alfred was +translating the Psalms when he died, in A.D. 901; and soon after A.D. +1000, Archbishop Aelfric translated large portions of the Bible. As +the language of England gradually changed, new versions of the Psalms +were made, and most of the Bible was known in a version made before +1360. But perhaps there was no complete version of the Bible in +English until the time of John Wyclif (1380). Wyclif translated most +of the New Testament of this version, and a priest named Hereford +translated the Old Testament. Wyclif held various {6} opinions which +the Church of England at that time condemned, and some of which she +still rightly condemns. The result was that in 1412 Archbishop Arundel +denounced Wyclif's version, but it seems to have been revised and to +have come into common use. All these versions or partial versions in +the English language were made from the Latin. But after the Turks +captured Constantinople from the Greeks in 1453, a number of learned +Greeks fled for refuge to the west of Europe. The result was that +Greek books began to be studied again, and the New Testament began to +be read once more in the original language. Three important editions +were printed in 1514, 1516, and 1550 respectively. The first was +printed under the direction of the Spanish Cardinal Ximenes, but owing +to various causes was not published until 1522. The edition of 1516 +was printed under the direction of the great Dutch scholar Erasmus. +That of 1550 is important as being substantially the "received text" +which has appeared in the ordinary Greek Testaments printed in England +until the present day, and as being the foundation of our English +Authorised Version. This "received text" was printed by Robert +Estienne (or Stephanus), a great printer of Paris. About the same time +a desire for a reformation of abuses in the Church caused a deeper +interest to be taken in the Word of God. The first English translation +of the New Testament shows a desire for a reformation of a somewhat +extreme kind. It was the version of _William Tyndale_, which was +printed at Worms in Germany, in 1525. In 1534 the Convocation or +Church Parliament of England made a petition to King Henry VIII. to +allow a better version to be made. The work of translation was +interrupted by an order to have an English Bible in every church. As +the Church version was not completed, a version made in 1535 by _Miles +Coverdale_ had to be used instead. Two other versions, also somewhat +inferior, appeared in 1537 and 1539, and then a slightly improved +version called the _Great Bible_ appeared in April, 1539. It is {7} +also called Cranmer's Bible, because Archbishop Cranmer wrote a preface +to the second edition. Three other important versions were published +before the end of the 16th century. The Calvinists, who were the +predecessors of the modern Presbyterians, published a New Testament at +Geneva in 1557, followed by the whole Bible in 1560. The English +bishops published what is called the _Bishops' Bible_ in 1568, and the +Roman Catholics published an English New Testament at Rheims in France, +in 1582. We cannot fail to be impressed by the eager desire felt at +that time by the people of Great Britain, of all religious parties, to +study the Holy Scriptures, a desire to which these various translations +bear witness. + +All previous English versions were thrown into the shade by the +brilliant _Authorised Version_, which was commenced in 1604 and +published in 1611. Its beauty and accuracy are so great that even the +Presbyterians, both in England and Scotland, gradually gave up the use +of their Genevan Bible in favour of this translation. But since 1611 +hundreds of manuscripts have been discovered and examined. "Textual +criticism," by which an endeavour is made to discover the precise words +written by the writers of the New Testament, where discrepancies exist +in the manuscripts, has become a science. Many results of this +criticism have been embodied in the _Revised Version_, published in +1881. The English of the _Revised Version_ is not so musical as that +of the _Authorised Version_, and it seems probable that a deeper +knowledge of the ancient versions will before long enable us to advance +even beyond the verbal accuracy attained in 1881. But at the same time +we know that both our modern English versions give us a noble and +trustworthy interpretation of the Greek. And criticism has made it +certain that the earliest Greek manuscripts are essentially the same as +the original books written by the apostles and their companions. The +manuscripts are almost utterly free from wilful corruptions. And +concerning the small variations which they contain, we {8} can fitly +quote the words of a fine old English scholar, Bentley: "Even put them +into the hands of a knave or a fool, and yet with the most sinistrous +and absurd choice, he shall not extinguish the light of any one +chapter, nor so disguise Christianity but that every feature of it will +still be the same." + +For the sake of space the works of the evangelists are often referred +to in an abbreviated form; _e.g._ "Matt." has been written for "the +Gospel according to St. Matthew," and "Mark" for "the Gospel according +to St. Mark." But when the writers themselves are mentioned, their +names are usually given in full, with the title which Christian +reverence has bestowed upon these "holy men of old." + + + +[1] See Mr. C. H. Turner, _Journal of Theological Studies_, July, 1900. + + + + +{9} + +CHAPTER II + +THE GOSPELS + +[Sidenote: Their Name.] + +The modern English word "Gospel" is derived from the Anglo-Saxon word +_Godspell_, which means "God story," the story about the life of God in +human flesh. It does not, therefore, exactly correspond with the Greek +name _euaggelion_, which means "good tidings." In the earliest times +the Greek name meant the good tidings proclaimed by our Lord about the +Kingdom of God which He had come to establish. And, as our Lord +Himself rules over this kingdom, the tidings about the kingdom included +tidings about Himself. So Christ Himself says, "for My sake and the +gospel's" (Mark viii. 35). After the Ascension of our Lord and the +disappearance of His visible presence, the _euaggelion_ came to mean +the good tidings about Christ, rather than the good tidings brought by +Christ (see 1 Cor. ix. 14 and 2 Cor. iv. 4). So St. Paul generally +means by _euaggelion_ the good news, coming from God, of salvation +freely given to man through Christ. When he speaks of "My gospel" +(Rom. ii. 16), he means "my explanation of the gospel;" and when he +says, "I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision" +(Gal. ii. 7), he means that he had been appointed by God to preach the +good tidings to the Gentiles, with special emphasis on the points most +necessary for their instruction. + +The word _euaggellon_, in the sense of a written gospel, is first found +in the ancient Christian manual called the _Didaché_, or _Teaching of +the Twelve Apostles_, in ch. xv.: "Reprove one {10} another, not in +anger but in peace, as ye have it in the gospel." This book was +probably composed about A.D. 100. The word seems to have been still +more definitely applied to a written account of the life of Christ in +the time of the great heretic Marcion, A.D. 140. The plural word +_euaggelia_, signifying the Four Gospels, is first found in a writing +of Justin Martyr,[1] about A.D. 152. It is important to notice that he +also calls them "Memoirs of the Apostles," and that he refers to them +collectively as "the Gospel," inasmuch as they were, in reference to +their distinctive value as records of Christ, one book. + +[Sidenote: Their Genuineness.] + +The first three Gospels do not contain the name of the writers in any +connection which can be used to prove conclusively that they were +written by the men whose names they bear. On the other hand, the +fourth Gospel in a concluding passage (John xxi. 24) contains an +obvious claim to have been written by that intimate friend of Jesus to +whom the Church has always attributed it. But the titles, "according +to Matthew," "according to Mark," "according to Luke," rest on +excellent authority. And they imply that each book contains the good +news brought by Christ and recorded in the teaching of the evangelist +specified. These titles must, _at the very least_, signify that the +Christians who first gave these titles to these books, meant that each +Gospel was connected with one particular person who lived in the +apostolic age, and that it contained nothing contrary to what that +person taught. The titles, taken by themselves, are therefore +compatible with the theory that the first three Gospels were perhaps +written by friends or disciples of the men whose names they bear. But +we shall afterwards see that there is overwhelming evidence to show +that the connection between each book and the specified person is much +closer than that theory would suggest. + +Speaking of the four Gospels generally, we may first observe that it is +impossible to place any one of them as late as A.D. 100, {11} and that +the first three Gospels must have been written long before that date. +This is shown by the internal evidence, of which proof will be given in +detail in the chapters dealing with the separate Gospels. The external +evidence of the use of all the four Gospels by Christians, and to some +extent by non-Christians, supports the internal evidence. Let us begin +by noting facts which are part of undoubted history, and then work back +to facts of earlier date. It is now undisputed that between the years +170 and 200 after Christ our four Gospels were known and regarded as +genuine products of the apostolic age. St. Irenaeus, who became Bishop +of Lyons in France in A.D. 177, and was the pupil of Polycarp, who had +actually been a disciple of St. John, uses and quotes the four Gospels. +He shows that various semi-Christian sects appeal severally to one of +the four Gospels as supporting their peculiar views, but that the +Christian Church accepts all four. He lays great stress on the fact +that the teaching of the Church has always been the same, and he was +personally acquainted with the state of Christianity in Asia Minor, +Rome, and France. His evidence must therefore be considered as +carrying great weight. Equally important is the evidence of Tatian. +This remarkable Syrian wrote a harmony of the Gospels near A.D. 160. +Allusions to this harmony, called the _Diatessaron_, were known to +exist in several ancient writers, but until recently it was strenuously +maintained by sceptical writers that there was not sufficient evidence +to prove that the Diatessaron was composed of our present Gospels. It +was suggested that it might have been drawn from other Gospels more or +less resembling those which we now possess. This idea has now been +dispelled. A great Syrian father, Ephraim, who died in 373, wrote a +commentary on the Diatessaron. This was preserved in an Armenian +translation which was made known to the world in 1876. The discovery +proved that the Diatessaron had been drawn from our four Gospels. In +1886 an Arabic version of the Diatessaron itself was found, and it {12} +proved conclusively that Tatian's Diatessaron was simply a combination +of our four canonical Gospels. About the same date as Tatian, a famous +Gnostic writer named Heracleon wrote commentaries on Luke and John, and +it can also be shown that he was acquainted with Matt. There can +therefore be no doubt that all our four Gospels were well known by A.D. +170. + +Between A.D. 130 and 170 our Gospels were also in use. The most +important evidence is furnished by Justin Martyr, who was born near +Samaria, and lectured in Rome about A.D. 152. He says "the apostles +handed down in the Memoirs made by them, which are called Gospels;" he +shows that these Memoirs were used in Christian worship, and he says +that "they were compiled by Christ's apostles and those who companied +with them." This exactly agrees with the fact that the first and the +fourth of our Gospels are attributed by the tradition of the Church to +apostles, while the second and the third are attributed to companions +of the apostles. The quotations which Justin makes show that these +Memoirs were our four Gospels. It has been thought that Justin perhaps +used some apocryphal Gospel in addition to our Gospels, but there is no +sufficient proof of this. We may explain that he uses the term +"Memoirs" in order to make himself intelligible to non-Christian +readers who would not understand the word "Gospel." + +The _Shepherd_ of Hermas, which was written at Rome, probably about +A.D. 140, but perhaps earlier, uses expressions which imply an +acquaintance with all our Gospels, though none of them are directly +quoted. Moreover, the _Shepherd_, in depicting the Christian Church as +seated on a bench with four feet, probably refers to the four Gospels. +This would be in agreement with the allegorical style of the book, and +it gains support from the language of Origen and Irenaeus. + +The testimony rendered to the authenticity of the Gospels by the +heretics who flourished between A.D. 130 and 170 is of importance. At +the beginning of this period, Basilides, the {13} great Gnostic of +Alexandria, who tried to replace Christianity by a semi-Christian +Pantheism, appears to have used Matt., Luke, and John. The fact that +they contain nothing which really supports his peculiar tenets, forms +an argument which shows that the genuineness of these documents was +then too well established for it to be worth his while to dispute it. +Marcion, whose teaching was half Gnostic and half Catholic, endeavoured +to revive what he imagined to be the Christianity of St. Paul, whom he +regarded as the only true apostle. He believed that Judaism was the +work of an inferior god, and he therefore rejected the whole of the Old +Testament, and retained only the Gospel written by St. Luke, the friend +of St. Paul, and ten of St. Paul's Epistles. Modern writers have +sometimes urged that Marcion's list of New Testament books proves that +all other parts of the New Testament were regarded as doubtful about +A.D. 140. But it is quite evident that Marcion, unlike those Gnostics +who adapted uncongenial books to their own systems by means of +allegorical explanations, cut out the books and verses which would not +correspond with his own dogma. In spite of his pretended fidelity to +St. Paul, he mutilated not only St. Luke's Gospel, but even the Epistle +to the Galatians. So whereas it is certain that he used our Luke, +there is no indication to show that he did not admit that the other +Gospels were really the work of the writers whose names they bear. + +In the period between A.D. 98, when the death of St. John probably took +place, and A.D. 130, we find several signs of acquaintance with the +Gospels. About A.D. 130, Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, wrote a book +called _Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord_. It may be regarded as +almost certain that the word "Oracles" signifies written Gospels, just +as in the New Testament the word signifies the written documents of the +Old Testament. He mentions Gospels written by St. Matthew and St. +Mark, and we know from Eusebius that he made use of 1 John. It is +deeply to be regretted that we only have {14} a few remaining fragments +of the writings of this early bishop, who was acquainted with men who +knew our Lord's disciples. In the letters of St. Ignatius, the +martyred Bishop of Antioch, A.D. 110, we find signs of acquaintance +with Matt. and John. The Epistle written by St. Polycarp to the +Philippians soon after the death of St. Ignatius contains quotations +from Matt. and Luke, and the quotations in it from 1 John almost +certainly imply the authenticity of St. John's Gospel, as it is +impossible to attribute the Epistles to any writer except the writer of +the Gospel. The _Didaché_, about A.D. 100, shows acquaintance with +Matt. and Luke, and contains early Eucharistic prayers of which the +language closely resembles the language of St. John. The Epistle of +Barnabas, probably about A.D. 98, contains what is probably the oldest +remaining quotation from a book of the New Testament. It says, "It is +written, Many called, but few chosen," which appears to be a quotation +from Matt. xxii. 14. The Epistle of St. Clement of Rome, written to +the Christians of Corinth about A.D. 95, is full of the phraseology of +St. Paul's Epistles, but contains nothing that can be called a direct +quotation from our Gospels. But it does contain what are possibly +traces of the first three Gospels, though these passages are perhaps +quoted from an oral Gospel employed in the instruction of catechumens. + +We must conclude that, considering what a large amount of early +Christian literature has perished, the external evidence for the +authenticity of our Gospels is remarkably strong. They are genuine +writings of the apostolic age, and were received by men whose lifetime +overlapped the lifetime of some of the apostles. In the early +Christian literature which remains, there is much which lends support +to the authenticity of the Gospels, and nothing which injures a belief +in that authenticity. And there are strong reasons for thinking that +in the early Christian literature which has perished, there was much +which would have made a belief in their authenticity quite inevitable. + +It would be an aid to modern study if we could be certain {15} when and +where the four Gospels were put together in one canon. In the 4th and +5th centuries it was believed by some Christians that the collection +had been made at Ephesus by St. John himself, and that he had prefixed +the names of the writers to the Gospels when he published his own +Gospel. It is at present impossible to discover how far this supposed +fact is legendary or not, but modern criticism has done something to +corroborate the idea that the Gospels were really collected first in +Asia Minor, and if St. John did not make the collection himself, it was +probably made by his disciples soon after his death. + +[Sidenote: Their Diversity.] + +If we compare the four Gospels together, it is as plain as daylight +that there is a marked difference between the first three Gospels on +the one hand and the fourth Gospel on the other hand. The first three +Gospels are usually called the _Synoptic Gospels_, because they give us +one _synopsis_ or common view of our Lord's work. To a great extent +they record the same events and the same discourses, and in many +passages they express themselves in almost identical words. The +account which they give of our Lord's work is mostly confined to His +ministry in Galilee, the birthplace of our religion, and it includes +only one visit to Jerusalem. But St. John's Gospel differs widely in +language from the other Gospels, and also gives an account of no less +than five visits to Jerusalem, and chiefly describes the scenes +connected with our Lord's ministry in Judaea. Whereas our first three +Gospels can be appropriately printed in three parallel columns, the +greater part of St. John's Gospel cannot be appropriately placed by the +side of the other three. Another most important difference is that St. +John's Gospel is marked by a tone and teaching which are seldom to be +found in the Synoptic Gospels. The difference was well expressed by +Clement of Alexandria, who calls the Synoptic Gospels _bodily_ and St. +John's Gospel _spiritual_; and by Theodore of Mopsuestia, who says that +St. John declared that "doubtless it was not right to omit {16} the +facts told with regard to the sojourn of Christ in the flesh, but +neither was it right to omit the words relating to His Divinity." For +the Synoptic Gospels relate the outward events connected with our +Lord's ministry, while St. John records the discourses and works which +reveal our Lord's heavenly origin and divine authority. Again, the +Synoptic Gospels report Christ's addresses to simple Galilean people, +addresses consisting largely of _parables_; while St. John reports +discourses, frequently expressed in the language of _allegory_, and +uttered to the Jews of Jerusalem or to His own intimate disciples. + +[Sidenote: The Synoptic problem.] + +The Synoptic problem consists in the difficulties raised by the fact +that the Synoptic Gospels show both a remarkable similarity and a +remarkable dissimilarity. It is just because the similarity is often +so astonishing that we find it all the more difficult to explain the +dissimilarity when it exists. A study of the Synoptic problem is +valuable for the Christian student, inasmuch as it directs our +attention to the sources employed by the evangelists, and thus leads us +nearer to the actual events connected with the rise of Christianity. + +The RESEMBLANCES between the Synoptic Gospels may be observed in the +following points:-- + +(a) _A common plan._--The general view of the course of events is +almost identical. St. Matthew and St. Luke give separate accounts of +the infancy of our Lord, but they then join with St. Mark in their +account of St. John the Baptist, the baptism and temptation of Christ, +and the beginning of His ministry. Later all three direct their +attention mainly to Christ's work in Galilee, while St. John describes +much that took place in Judaea and Samaria. They pass rapidly over +some considerable space of time until they come to the last week of His +life, where all three give a detailed account. + +(b) _A common selection of facts._--By far the larger number of both +events and discourses are found in all three Gospels. If anything is +recorded in Mark it is generally to be found in {17} Matt. and Luke, +and almost always in either Matt. or Luke. If the whole number of +incidents in the Synoptic Gospels be reckoned as eighty-eight, the +distribution of the incidents shared by at least two Gospels is as +follows:-- + + In all three Gospels . . . . . . . 42 + In Mark and Matt. . . . . . . . . 12 + In Mark and Luke . . . . . . . . . 5 + In Matt. and Luke . . . . . . . . 12 + +If we add the above together, we realize that seventy-one incidents out +of a total of eighty-eight are to be found in more than one Gospel. Of +the remaining seventeen incidents, three are peculiar to Mark, five to +Matt., and nine to Luke. + +(c) _Similar groups of incidents._--Not only is there a common +selection of facts, but detached events which happened at different +times are sometimes grouped together in the same way in all of the +Synoptic Gospels or in two of the three. Thus in all three we find +together the cure of the paralytic, the call of Levi, and the question +of fasting (Matt. ix. 1-17; Mark ii. 1-22; Luke v. 17-39); so also the +plucking of the ears of corn and the cure of the withered hand--events +separated by at least a week (Matt. xii. 1-21; Mark ii. 23-iii. 6; Luke +vi. 1-11). Thus also the death of John the Baptist is introduced both +in Matt. xiv. 3 and in Mark vi. 17 to explain the fear felt by Herod +Antipas that he had risen from the dead. In fact, when a parallel +passage is found in all three Synoptic Gospels, it is never immediately +followed in _both_ Matt. and Luke by a whole separate incident which is +not in Mark.[2] There is a general tendency in Matt. and Luke to +narrate the same facts as Mark in the order of Mark. And therefore it +is difficult to think that the original basis of the Synoptic Gospels, +whether written or unwritten, did not coincide closely with Mark in the +order of events. + +{18} + +(d) _Similarity of language._--The Synoptic Gospels often agree +verbally. And this agreement is not merely found in the reports of the +sayings of our Lord, but even in the narrative of events. It extends +even to rare Greek words and phrases. The clauses are often remarkably +similar. Sometimes quotations from the Old Testament are found in two +or three Gospels with the same variations from the original. Matt. +iii. 3, Mark i. 3, and Luke iii. 4 have the same quotation from Isa. +xl. 3, in which they agree in every word, although at the end they +depart in the same way from both the Hebrew and the Greek version of +the Old Testament, for they put "His paths" instead of "the paths of +our God." Another interesting instance is to be found in Matt. xxvi. +47, Mark xiv. 43, and Luke xxii. 47, where all three evangelists, +apparently without any necessity, explain that Judas was one of the +twelve. Again in Matt. xxiv. 15, 16, and Mark xiii. 14, we have the +note or parenthesis "let him that readeth understand," which one +evangelist seems to have copied from the other. + +The DIFFERENCES between the Synoptic Gospels may be observed in the +following facts:-- + +(a) _Facts peculiar to one or two Gospels._--There is a wide difference +between the account of the birth and infancy of our Lord given in Matt. +and that given in Luke. In Matt. we have recorded an angelic +communication to St. Joseph concerning the future birth of Jesus. In +Luke, an earlier and fuller annunciation to St. Mary is recorded. In +Matt. the story of the infancy is centred at Bethlehem, in Luke at +Nazareth. The accounts given of the appearances of our Lord after the +Resurrection record different events. In Matt. and Mark Galilee is the +scene of His appearances, in Luke the scene is laid in Jerusalem and +its neighbourhood. There is not the least reason for regarding these +accounts as contradictory, but there is reason for inquiring why the +different writers selected different appearances. + +{19} + +(b) _Different accounts of the same facts._--The three distinct +incidents of the temptation of our Lord are recorded in a different +order in Matt. and Luke, and the temptation is recorded without these +incidents in Mark. St. Luke's version of the Beatitudes is reduced in +number, and is followed by corresponding denunciations. In Mark x. 46 +and Matt. x. 29 we have the cure of Bartimaeus on the departure from +Jericho, in Luke xviii. 35, xix. 1 at the entrance of the city. In +Matt. viii. 28 there are two demoniacs, while in Mark v. 2 and Luke +viii. 27, which seem to narrate the same event, only one demoniac is +mentioned. All the Synoptic Gospels give slightly different accounts +of the inscription on the cross, and the words spoken by the centurion +at the death of Jesus vary in Luke from the words in Matt. and Mark. + +(c) Differences in the order of words and sentences.--Although Matt. +and Luke do not combine against Mark in narrating a whole incident in +an order different from Mark, it is important to notice that there are +some cases in which Matt. and Mark agree against Luke, or Mark and Luke +agree against Matt. And we must not omit a significant instance where +Matt. and Luke agree against Mark in the order of _part_ of an +incident. In Matt. iii. 11, 12 and Luke iii. 16, "I indeed baptize you +with water," etc., comes _before_, in Mark i. 7, 8 it comes _after_, +the description of Jesus as "He that is mightier than I." No doubt one +author who copies another may often omit something stated by the first +author. But, surely, he is not very likely to invert the order of the +materials before him, especially when no obvious purpose can be served +by such an inversion. Another instance of inversion is this: in Mark +ix. 12, 13 the rejection of the Son of Man is mentioned by our Lord +_between_ two statements of His about Ehas, in Matt. xvii. 12 it is +mentioned _after_ both statements. Such inversions would naturally +take place in the case of oral transmission of the sacred story, but +they would be less likely in the case of one writer copying another. + +{20} + +(d) _Verbal differences._--Striking verbal differences occur even when +the general resemblance is most close. In Matt. ix. 1-17, Mark ii. +1-22, Luke v. 17-39, there are verbal changes even where the sentences +closely coincide. Other instances might be quoted. All three +evangelists have a style of their own, and show a marked preference for +particular idioms and words. In narrating the sayings of our Lord, +they narrate them with some verbal differences, and in the case of the +history of His ministry, they narrate it with numerous verbal +differences. It is therefore evident that St. Matthew and St. Luke, if +they used St. Mark's work, felt themselves at liberty to deal with it +very freely. + +The above brief account of the chief resemblances and differences +between the first three Gospels is an attempt to give a fair though +condensed statement of certain facts which appeal with different force +to different minds. "How came these Gospels to be so alike and yet so +different?" This is the "Synoptic problem," and great divergence of +opinion exists as to the solution. + +[Sidenote: Possible solutions.] + +The most important views propounded to solve the problem are-- + +(1) Both St. Matthew and St. Luke copied the Gospel of St. Mark, while +not omitting to make use of other documents. In the case of St. Luke, +his acquaintance with earlier written stories about our Lord is +rendered indisputable by his own statement. Sometimes it has been +thought that St. Luke made use of the Gospel according to St. Matthew +as well as the Gospel according to St. Mark. This theory is most +appropriately called the _theory of the mutual dependence of the +documents_. + +(2) The three Synoptic Gospels put down in writing different, but +closely similar forms of an oral tradition concerning the teaching of +our Lord. It is thought that the statements made by the apostles about +Christ were repeated by them and occasionally added to, and treasured +up in faithful memories. {21} The idea of a _literary_ connection +between the Gospels is dismissed, and it is held that the methods of +teaching employed among the Jews, and the probable existence of a +school of trained catechists, will account sufficiently for the fixed +form of the tradition. According to this hypothesis the differences +between the Synoptic Gospels are to be explained by the necessity of +teaching different aspects of the truth among different classes of +inquirers, and by the fluctuating memories of the teachers. This +theory is known as the _oral theory_.[3] + +(3) The three Synoptic Gospels are based upon one original Gospel +written in the Aramaic language. A large number of verbal variations +can thus be accounted for. They might have sprung from different +renderings of the same Aramaic original, and various passages derived +from oral tradition might have been added to the original Gospel when +it was translated. It has been held by some that there was at least an +Aramaic document behind Mark, if there was not an Aramaic original +employed by all the Synoptics. The different forms of this hypothesis +can be described as the _theory of an Aramaic original_. + +It is now generally believed that the three evangelists did not employ +one original Aramaic Gospel. The agreement between the Greek words of +the Synoptic Gospels is too close to be explained by the use of an +Aramaic original. The real controversy, therefore, lies between the +scholars who support theory (1) or theory (2). + +[Sidenote: Probable conclusions.] + +On the whole, it appears that a general agreement is being arrived at. +It is becoming evident that the theory of the mutual dependence of the +documents and the oral theory are _both_ partly true, and that neither +of them can be held in an extreme form. In the first place, the +resemblances between the first three Gospels make it extremely probable +that St. Matthew and St. Luke {22} employed the work of St. Mark. In +England, Germany, and France the opinion of scholars seems steadily +tending towards this conclusion. The chief reasons for it are +undoubtedly that (i.) the order of facts in Mark is the _normal order_ +of the whole narrative of the Synoptists, and (ii.) in the main, the +language of Mark explains the verbal agreements between Matt. and Luke. +Therefore among the probable conclusions with regard to the Synoptic +problem we must reckon the fact that _Mark is earlier than Matt. and +Luke, and was employed in the composition of them both_. This is the +first important conclusion. + +But we must also allow room for the influence of oral tradition. + +We have already noticed many differences between the Synoptists, all of +which more or less suggest that the Gospels are largely based on oral +tradition. We may now mention a few other facts which point in the +same direction. There are cases in which Matt. or Luke has a more +decided appearance of originality than Mark. These cases include +words, phrases, and even sections. For instance, Matt. employs several +times the phrase "the Father who is in heaven," a phrase which our Lord +must certainly have used, but which in Mark only occurs once (xi. 25). +Mark i. 40-45, ii. 1-12, iii. 1-6, x. 35, appear less original than the +parallel passages in the other Synoptic Gospels. Moreover, there are +statements in Matt. of a striking kind, which are not at all likely to +have been invented, but which are entirely absent from Mark. We may +notice the texts, "Go not into any way of the Gentiles, and enter not +into any city of the Samaritans; but go rather to the lost sheep of the +house of Israel" (Matt. x. 5, 6); and again, "I was not sent but unto +the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. xv. 24). In both cases +the context has a parallel in Mark, but the verses in question do not +occur in those parallels. + +Also there are certain passages to be found in Mark which are in +neither Luke nor Matt. If we believe that the Gospels {23} are largely +based on oral tradition, it is easy to account for the absence of a +passage in one or two of the three Synoptic Gospels. An incident which +was remembered in one place might be forgotten in another. But if we +exclude the influence of oral tradition, there are only two solutions +of the problem raised by these passages. Either (a) St. Matthew and +St. Luke were ignorant of them, because they were added to Mark later +than the date when they used Mark; or (b) they knew them and omitted +them. In other words, we have to ask, Did they use an original form of +the second Gospel, a form to which German scholars apply the name +_Ur-Marcus_ and French scholars apply the name _Proto-Marc_, or did +they omit passages in Mark which suggested difficulties or appeared +unnecessary? The main argument against the existence of a Proto-Mark +is that neither Papias nor any known Father of the Church preserves the +least recollection of it. It has simply been invented to account for +the difficulties of the Synoptic problem. If, on the other hand, St. +Matthew and St. Luke deliberately abbreviated or altered the narrative +of St. Mark, we must naturally inquire why they did so. The authors +who maintain that they did alter the material which lay before them, +account for some of the changes as having been made from a mere desire +to abbreviate, or to remove a few verses which might prove "hard +sayings" to Jewish or Gentile Christians respectively. Some think that +other passages in Mark were emitted because St. Matthew and St. Luke +considered them to be derogatory to our Lord's power or the character +of His apostles. For instance, St. Matthew omits the rebuke +administered to the apostles in Mark viii. 17, 18, and he does not +mention our Lord's use of spittle as a means of healing. He also in +ch. xiii. 55 represents the Jews as calling our Lord "the carpenter's +son," whereas in Mark vi. 3 they call Him "the carpenter." + +This latter line of argument is often hazardous and occasionally +profane. And in special reference to the points just {24} described, +we may remark that St. Matthew in ch. xiv. 28-33 does not hesitate to +record the weakness of even St. Peter's faith; and that St. John, +although he gives the greatest prominence to the majesty of our Lord, +does in ch. ix. 6 record His use of spittle in healing. And if St. +Matthew thought it irreverent to record the fact that the Jews called +Jesus "the carpenter," he might have naturally shrunk far more from +saying, as he does, that they named Him "the carpenter's son," a title +which might seem to imply an ignoring of His miraculous birth. + +It seems, therefore, that we must be content to acknowledge that we +cannot always determine the reasons which influenced St. Matthew and +St. Luke, but we can say that in some cases they were probably +influenced by the mere desire to abbreviate, and that they were also +influenced by the forms which the oral teaching of the Gospel had +assumed. We may also regard it as almost certain that St. Luke +sometimes altered words in St. Mark's narrative simply because he +preferred a more elegant and less homely form of Greek. The textual +criticism of the oldest manuscripts of the New Testament also points to +the fact that for a few generations, when reminiscences of our Lord and +His apostles were still handed down, writers occasionally tried to make +room for these reminiscences when they copied the books of the New +Testament. A famous instance of this is John vii. 53-viii. 11, which +was almost certainly not written by St. John, and is almost certainly a +genuine story which the apostle knew, and which Christians afterwards +inserted in his Gospel. We believe, then, that _all the Synoptic +Gospels are influenced by oral tradition_. This is the second +important conclusion. + +Thirdly, it seems that _Matt. and Luke, and perhaps Mark, made use of +written collections of Logia, or sayings of our Lord_. Evidence of one +such collection comes to us on the high authority of Papias. He says-- + + +Matthew then composed the Logia in the Hebrew tongue, and every one +interpreted them as he was able. + +{25} + +An equally important statement which Papias makes with regard to the +composition of Mark, is made on the authority of John the Presbyter who +had been a personal follower of the Lord and was an elder contemporary +of Papias. It is at least possible that Papias derived his information +about Matt. from the same authority. It is almost inconceivable that +between the time of Papias and that of Irenaeus, whose life probably +overlapped that of Papias, the name of Matthew became wrongly affixed +to our first Gospel. We may therefore regard it as certain that in our +first Gospel is contained the book of sayings, which St. Matthew +himself wrote. In our third Gospel we find that St. Luke has inserted +much information with regard to our Lord's teaching which is apparently +derived from a version of the Logia. The order of the sayings is more +original in Luke than in Matt. The reason for this assertion is the +following:-- + +The two evangelists arrange the sayings of our Lord differently. In +more than two-thirds of the instances in which they seem to employ some +collection of _Logia_, they place their materials in a different +setting. It has often been remarked that St. Matthew places the +discourses of our Lord together in large blocks, while St. Luke records +them separately, and in many cases records the circumstances which led +up to them. Instances of this are--The Lord's Prayer (Matt. vi. 9-13 +and Luke xi. 1-4); the treasure and the heart (Matt. vi. 19-21 and Luke +xii. 33, 34); God and Mammon (Matt. vi. 24 and Luke xvi. 13). It would +therefore seem plain that either one evangelist or the other altered +the places of these discourses. Examination makes it equally plain +that the alteration was made in Matt. Much of Matt. is arranged in +numerical forms, and this is especially true of those passages which +are not derived from Mark. The numbers 5, 10, and 7 are used as helps +to memory. Thus in Matt. we find _five_ chapters (called by the Jews +"Pereqs") of the sayings of our Lord, ending respectively at vii. 28; +xi. 1; xiii. 53, xix. 1; xxvi. 1. The {26} number five was a favourite +number with the Jews in such cases; thus we have five books of the +Pentateuch, five books of the Psalms, the five _Megilloth_ or festival +volumes, and the five parts of the _Pirqe Aboth_. In chs. viii. and +ix. we have a collection of _ten_ miracles, in spite of the fact that +three of these miracles are placed elsewhere by St. Mark and St. Luke. +The petitions of the Lord's Prayer are arranged as seven, there are +_seven_ parables in ch. xiii., _seven_ woes in ch. xxiii., and the +genealogy of our Lord is arranged in three _fourteens_. As these +numerical arrangements are specially characteristic of Matt., and +certainly appear to be caused by a desire to aid oral repetition, we +are led to the conclusion that the Logia are to be found in a less +artificial and therefore earlier form in Luke. We are also led once +more to the conclusion that though we cannot say that the whole of +Matt. owes its form to oral teaching, yet many sections of it are +moulded by oral teaching. + +It must lastly be noted that although the collection of Logia employed +in Luke contained much material which is also found in Matt., the +parallel passages vary considerably in style and language. Examination +of these passages seldom enables us to prove what expressions were +specially characteristic of the Logia. But we can assert with a fair +amount of confidence that the version, or versions, of the Logia so +employed, had a simple and Hebraic style; and that whereas Luke has +kept the order of the Logia better than Matt., the latter preserves the +style more faithfully. + +In addition to Mark and collections of the Logia, St. Matthew and St. +Luke employed other sources now unknown to us. The narratives of the +infancy and the Resurrection are independent, and are so different that +they point both to the fact that the two evangelists were here +employing different sources, and that each was unacquainted with the +Gospel written by the other. Also, St. Luke's account of our Lord's +ministry in Peraea and elsewhere, contained in ix. 51-xix. 28, is +peculiar to his Gospel. + +[Sidenote: The relation of St. John's Gospel to the Synoptic Gospels.] + +The difference between the theological tone of St. John's Gospel and +that which we find in the Synoptists is mentioned {27} in our account +of the separate Gospels. Besides this difference of tone, there is a +decided difference in the march of the events which are recorded and +some difference in the narrative of passages which are parallel. The +first rough impression which we gather from the Synoptists is that our +Lord did not visit Jerusalem until shortly before the Crucifixion. +Matthew and Mark refer to one Passover only for which Jesus comes to +Jerusalem. The scene of His ministry is Galilee. On the other hand, +the centre of interest in John is not Galilee, but Jerusalem and +Judaea. But a minute examination proves that the narrative of St. John +fits that of the Synoptists in a remarkable manner. In the first +place, the Synoptists give us hints of our Lord's earlier visits to +Judaea and Jerusalem. In Luke iv. 44 (see margin R.V.) we find Him +preaching in the synagogues of Judaea (cf. Acts x. 37). In Luke v. 17 +the presence in Galilee of Pharisees from _Jerusalem_ is a testimony to +the impression which Christ had produced in the holy city. Both Matt. +(xxiii. 37) and Luke (xiii. 34) record the lament of our Lord, "O +_Jerusalem_, . . . how _often_ would I," etc. So from John iv. 3, 43 +we learn of our Lord returning to _Galilee_ after His first visit to +Jerusalem. This second journey into Galilee recorded by St. John +brings us to a point corresponding with the early days of the ministry +in Galilee described by the Synoptists. In John vi.-vii. 9 we have +narratives connected with _Galilee_, and this section belongs to an +interval of time between the approach of Passover in March A.D. 28 and +the feast of Tabernacles in September A.D. 28. Of this period the +Synoptists give a much fuller account. + +The question of the length of our Lord's ministry is thus intimately +connected with that of the scene of His ministry. St. John marks the +length of our Lord's ministry, not by ordinary chronology, but by the +mention of various Jewish feasts. The dates of these feasts show that +His ministry lasted two years and a half. The absence of dates in the +Synoptists {28} has led to the opinion that they represent our Lord's +ministry as only extending over one year. This opinion may be +summarily dismissed. The mention of ripe corn in Mark ii. 23, and +green grass in vi. 39, implies two spring-times before the last +Passover. It is impossible to compress the teaching which the Synoptic +Gospels relate into the period of one year, and they show a hostility +towards Christ on the part of the ruling classes in Jerusalem which +could not have sufficiently fermented in the space of a few months. We +may also notice that there is a close agreement between the Synoptists +and St. John with regard to the points on which the conflict between +Christ and the Jews turned (cf. Matt. xvi. 1-4, Mark viii. 11-13, Luke +xi. 16, 29-32, with John ii. 18). The Jews specially charged Him with +being possessed by a devil (cf. Matt. xii. 24, Mark iii. 22, Luke xi. +15, with John viii. 48 and x. 19), and also with breaking the sabbath +(cf. Matt. xii. 9, Mark iii. 1, Luke vi. 6, xiii. 10, with John v. 10, +vii. 22, ix. 14). + +The dates of two important incidents have been the subjects of much +discussion. A cleansing of the temple by our Lord is related by the +Synoptists at the close of our Lord's ministry (Mark xi. 15). John ii. +14 places a cleansing of the temple at the very beginning of our Lord's +ministry. If we have to choose between one record and the other, we +should perhaps be inclined to say that the narrative in John is the +more probable. But there is no good reason for making such a choice. +No one who is at all familiar with the history of the abuses which took +place in some mediaeval churches would find a difficulty in believing +that the temple needed a second cleansing by our Lord. The first +cleansing is the natural outcome of His righteous indignation in +beholding for the first time the holiest place in the world given up to +common traffic, the second cleansing is appropriate in Him who had then +openly proclaimed His divine authority and Messiahship. + +The day of our Lord's death is a date about which there is an apparent +discrepancy between the Synoptists and St. John. {29} The discrepancy +has been elevated into momentous importance by the sceptics of the last +sixty years, and has been employed as one of the most formidable +arguments against the authenticity of St. John's Gospel. The argument +employed by these critics is as follows:--(1) The Synoptic Gospels +contain the original apostolic tradition, and they agree in stating +that Jesus celebrated the ordinary Jewish passover on the evening +between the 14th and 15th of the month Nisan; they therefore represent +the crucifixion as taking place on the 15th, after the passover had +been eaten. (2) The fourth Gospel places the Last Supper on the +evening between the 13th and the 14th of Nisan. It therefore +represents the crucifixion as taking place on the 14th, and tacitly +denies that Christ ate the usual Jewish passover. (3) The Churches of +the province of Asia, which were founded by St. John, were accustomed +in the 2nd century to keep their passover on the 14th of Nisan, and +declared that they derived their custom from St. John. They +consequently believed that Christ died on the 15th, and that He ate the +usual Jewish Passover. (4) Therefore the fourth Gospel was not written +by St. John, but by a forger who wished to emphasize the break between +Judaism and Christianity. + +This argument can be turned with fatal force against the critics who +made it. It is no doubt true that St. John by numerous indications +(xiii. 1; xviii. 28; xix. 14, 31) implies that the Last Supper was +eaten the day before the usual passover, and that Christ died on Nisan +14. But the usage of the Christians of the Asiatic Churches in the 2nd +century absolutely corroborates these indications. These Churches when +they celebrated the passover were not celebrating the anniversary of +the Last Supper, but the anniversary of the death of Christ, the true +Paschal Lamb. By doing this on Nisan 14, they showed that they +believed that Christ died on that day, and there is particularly strong +evidence of a belief among the early Christians that our Lord did die +on Nisan 14. Moreover, although the account of the Synoptists is not +free from {30} ambiguity, it bears many testimonies to St. John's +chronology. They record as happening on the day of Christ's death +several actions which the Jewish law did not permit on a feast day such +as Nisan 15, and which must presumably have taken place on Nisan 14. +The Synoptists make the Sanhedrim say that they will not arrest Jesus +"on the feast day," the guards and St. Peter carry arms, the trial is +held, Simon the Cyrenian comes from work, Joseph of Arimathaea buys a +linen cloth, the holy women prepare spices, all of which works would +have been forbidden on Nisan 15. Finally, the day is itself called the +"preparation," a name which would not be given to Nisan 15. The +conclusion is irresistible. It is that our Lord died on Nisan 14, that +St. John is correct, and that the Synoptists in most of the passages +concerned corroborate St. John. The only real difficulty is raised by +Mark xiv. 12 (cf. Matt. xxvi. 17; Luke xxii. 7), which seems to imply +that the Paschal lamb was sacrificed on the day before Christ died. If +so, this verse implies that Christ died on Nisan 15. But we must +observe that not one of the Synoptists says that the disciples ate a +lamb at the Last Supper, and also that, for all ceremonial purposes, +the day for killing the lamb began on the evening of Nisan 13. It is +therefore doubtful whether there is even as much as one verbal +contradiction on this point between the Synoptists and St. John. + +The omission of events which are of importance in the Synoptic Gospels +is a striking feature in St. John's Gospel. But these instances of +omission can be more reasonably explained by the hypothesis that the +author was content to omit facts with which the Christians around him +were well acquainted, than by the hypothesis that he was a +spiritualistic writer of the 2nd century who wished to make his Gospel +fit some fanciful theory of his own. In fact, the latter hypothesis +has proved a signal failure. The critics who say that the writer +omitted the story of our Lord's painful temptation as incompatible with +the majesty of the Divine Word, may be asked {31} why the writer gives +no fuller account of the glorious transfiguration than the hint in i. +14. Those who say that sentimental superstition induced the writer to +omit the agony the garden, may be asked why the writer records the +weariness of Christ at Samaria and His tears at the grave, of Lazarus. +There are gaps in the evangelist's narrative, but we cannot argue that +the Gospel is therefore a forgery. The evangelist is acquainted with +the Ascension (vi. 62), though he does not record it; and he knows that +Nazareth was the early home of Christ (i. 46), though he does not +narrate the story of the sacred infancy. The Gospel of St. John is +none the less genuine for being of the nature of a treatise, intended +to bring certain aspects of the life of our Lord to bear upon the +intellectual life of Ephesus. Much has been made of the fact that he +says nothing of the institution of the Eucharist. Nor does he record +the command of Jesus to baptize. Are we to suppose that a writer who +has told us how "the Word was made flesh" so shrank from believing +material things to be connected with a spiritual efficacy that he +rejected the sacraments? Is it not more probable that among people who +were perfectly familiar with both Baptism and the Eucharist he +preferred to tell what Christ had said about being born again (iii.), +and about the assimilation of His life by the believer (vi.)? This +seems to us more reasonable. The fourth Gospel, though it has a +character and purpose of its own, and might even have been written if +there had been no other Gospel, yet was intended to supplement either +the Synoptic Gospels or else a body of teaching corresponding with that +contained in those Gospels. + +The facts which St. John records in common with the Synoptists before +the Last Supper, the Passion, and the Resurrection are--the Baptism of +John (i. 26), the Feeding of the 5000 (vi. 10), the Walking on the Sea +(vi. 19), the Anointing at Bethany, with the action of Judas (xii. 1), +the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem (xii. 12). Even in connection with +these incidents St. John gives his additional details, and {32} +therefore the character of his work is here, as elsewhere, both +independent and supplemental. + +It remains to ask whether any words used by St. John seem to show that +he borrowed expressions from the Synoptic Gospels. + +The following passages may be noticed: John v. 8 f. (Mark ii. 11 f.), +vi. 7, 10, 19 f. (Mark vi. 37, 40, 49 f.), xii. 3, 5, 7 f. (Mark xiv. +3-6), xiii. 21 (Mark xiv. 18), xviii. 18, 17 (Mark xiv. 54, 69), xviii. +22 (Mark xiv. 65). For the quotation from Zechariah in xii. 15, cf. +Matt. xxi. 5. The words of our Lord in John xv. 18-xvi. 2 have been +compared with those in Matt. x. 17-22. Sometimes John has more points +of contact with Luke than with the other Synoptists; _e.g._ there is +the journey of Christ to Galilee before the death of John the Baptist, +the fact that the scourging of Christ by Pilate was intended to +restrain the Jews from demanding His death, and the visit of St. Peter +to the sepulchre. It has been thought that John xii. 3 is based upon +Luke vii. 38. The anointing of our Lord's _feet_ in both is certainly +remarkable. Sometimes John agrees with Matt. and Mark and not Luke, as +in recording the binding of Jesus, the crown of thorns, the purple +robe, and the custom of releasing a malefactor at the feast. Such +coincidences between John and the Synoptic Gospels are so slight and +disconnected that it seems doubtful whether the former uses any +material drawn from the latter. Nevertheless, the story contained in +the Synoptic Gospels, though not quoted, is presupposed. A good +instance is in John vi. 5, where St. John does not stop to explain that +the hour was late and the people therefore hungry. + + + +[1] _Apol._ i. 66. + +[2] The longest instance of a passage in Matt. and Luke being parallel +in these Gospels and without a parallel in Mark is the short passage, +Matt. iii. 7-10, Luke iii. 7-9. + +[3] This theory was first clearly expounded in 1818 by Gieseler, a +celebrated German Protestant Church historian. It has been more +popular in England than in Germany. + + + + +{33} + +CHAPTER III + +THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +St. Matthew is one of the least known of the Apostles. He was first +called Levi the son of Alphaeus, and was a "publican" or collector of +customs at Capernaum. At the call of Jesus, "he forsook all, and rose +up and followed Him." He then made a great feast, to which he invited +his old companions, no doubt that they too might come under the +influence of the Lord. After the appointment of the twelve Apostles, +he was put in the second of the three groups of Apostles. The New +Testament gives us no further information concerning him. An early +tradition narrates that the Apostles remained at Jerusalem until twelve +years after the Ascension, and certainly St. Paul does not seem to have +found any of the Apostles at Jerusalem when he was there in A.D. 56 +(Acts xxi. 17). According to Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 190, St. +Matthew led a rigorously ascetic life, such as is also recorded of St. +James. Nothing certain is known of his missionary labours. Parthia, +Ethiopia, and India were believed in the 4th and 5th centuries to have +been visited by St. Matthew. We learn from Clement of Alexandria that +he did not suffer martyrdom.[1] The fact that he disappears almost +completely from the realm of history is an additional reason for +believing the tradition which connects our first Gospel with his name. +A false tradition would have probably connected it with one of the more +favourite figures of early Christian story. + +{34} + +It is repeatedly asserted by the Fathers that St. Matthew wrote his +Gospel in _Hebrew_, which may either mean the sacred language of the +synagogues, or the popular language of Palestine which we now call +Aramaic. It should, however, be remembered that Papias, our earliest +authority, describes St. Matthew's composition by the word _Logia_, +which seems to point to a list of sacred sayings or "oracles" of our +Lord, rather than to a historical narrative. About A.D. 125, Papias +writes: "Matthew then composed the Logia in the Hebrew tongue, and +every one interpreted them as he was able." [2] About A.D. 185, St. +Irenaeus writes: "Matthew published a Gospel among the Hebrews in their +own dialect." [3] Origen and Eusebius make similar statements. St. +Jerome, in A.D. 392, writes: "Matthew, also called Levi, who from being +a publican became an apostle, first wrote a Gospel of Christ in Judaea, +and in Hebrew letters and words for the benefit of those of the +circumcision who believed. Who afterwards translated it into Greek is +not quite certain." [4] We naturally inquire what became of this +Hebrew Gospel? + +St. Jerome, in A.D. 392, believed that he had found it. He says that +it was still preserved at Caesarea, and that the Nazarenes, a Jewish +Christian sect of Palestine, allowed him to transcribe a copy of it at +Beroea (now Aleppo). In A.D. 398, he says that he had translated this +Gospel into Greek and Latin. It is known that it was used by the +Nazarenes and by the Ebionites, a Jewish sect which admitted that Jesus +was the Messiah, but denied that He was divine. Lastly, we find St. +Epiphanius, about the same time as St. Jerome, describing the Hebrew +"Gospel according to the Hebrews" as the Gospel written by St. Matthew. + +So at the end of the 4th century it was generally believed that the +Gospel used by the Nazarenes, and ordinarily known as "the Gospel +according to the Hebrews," was the original {35} Hebrew version of +Matt. The opinion arose from the two simple facts that it was known +that (1) St. Matthew originally wrote in Hebrew, and that (2) the +Nazarenes possessed _a_ Gospel in Hebrew. The conclusion was natural, +but it was false. Clement of Alexandria and Origen, who quote the +Gospel according to the Hebrews, do not represent it as the work of St. +Matthew. St. Jerome himself felt doubts. When he first discovered the +Hebrew Gospel, he felt the enthusiasm of a critic who has made an +important find. He believed that he had discovered the original +Gospel. He afterwards became more cautious. His later allusions to +the Gospel say that "it is called by most the original Matthew," [5] +and that it is "the Gospel according to the Apostles or, _as most +suppose_, according to Matthew." [6] In fact, this Hebrew Gospel, +which bore sometimes the title of "the Hebrews," sometimes "the +Apostles," sometimes "St. Matthew," was not the Hebrew original of our +present Matthew, nor could it have been written by an Apostle. The +fragments of it which now remain come from two versions. Both versions +show traces of a mixed Jewish and Gnostic heresy, and are plainly +apocryphal. The Holy Spirit is called the "mother" of Jesus, and +represented as transporting Him by a hair of His head to Mount Tabor, +and our Lord is represented as handing His grave-clothes to the servant +of the high-priest as soon as He was risen from the dead. The Gospel +certainly seems not only to be a forgery, but to betray a knowledge +both of our Greek Gospel according to St. Matthew and that according +to St. John.[7] We are obliged to conclude that it throws no light on +the origin of our Matt., and that the original Hebrew Matt. was lost at +an early date. + +On the other hand, it is certain that our Greek Matt. was {36} regarded +as authentic in the 2nd century, and it is plain that it records the +sayings of Christ with peculiar fulness. + +We must now return to what was stated in our previous chapter when +dealing with the Synoptic problem. We there saw that there is a great +mass of common material in all three Synoptic Gospels, and saw that +Mark was probably used as a groundwork for Matt. and Luke. We +therefore are led to the conclusion that the Gospel according to St. +Matthew is a combination of a Greek version of St. Matthew's original +Hebrew Logia--St. Matthew possibly wrote a Greek version of it as well +as the Hebrew--with the Gospel written by St. Mark. The combination +was apparently made either by the apostle himself, or by a disciple of +the apostle as the result of his directions. The Catholic Jewish +Christians, knowing that the Gospel contained St. Matthew's own Logia, +and that the rest of the Gospel was in accordance with his teaching as +delivered to them, called it "the Gospel according to Matthew." The +less orthodox Jewish Christians, as we have seen, invented a Gospel of +their own. + +A little help is given us by the internal evidence afforded by Matt. +The author appears to be writing for Greek-speaking converts from +Judaism, who need to have Hebrew words interpreted to them. Thus he +interprets "Immanuel" (i. 23), "Golgotha" (xxvii. 33), and the words of +our Lord on the cross (xxvii. 46). The numerous quotations from the +Old Testament have for a long time exercised the ingenuity of scholars, +who have believed that they enable us to determine how the Gospel was +written. On the whole these quotations suggest two conclusions: (1) +That the evangelist knew both Greek and Aramaic, (2) that the Gospel is +not a mere translation from the Aramaic or Hebrew. Roughly speaking, +the quotations which St. Matthew has in common with the other +Synoptists are from the Greek (Septuagint) version of the Old +Testament, while those which are peculiar to his {37} Gospel show that +the Hebrew has been consulted. Altogether the quotations number 45. +Of these there are 11 which are texts quoted by the evangelist himself +to illustrate the Messianic work of our Lord, and 9 of the 11 seem to +imply a knowledge of Hebrew. They are i. 23; ii. 15, iv. 15-16, viii. +17, xii. 18-21; xiii. 14-15; xiii. 35b; xxi. 5; xxvii. 9, 10. The +other 34 texts comprise the quotations which are made in the discourses +of our Lord, and they are sometimes called context-quotations or cyclic +quotations, as coming in the cycle of discourses. Perhaps 6 or 7 of +these 34 texts imply a knowledge of the Hebrew. But it is certain that +this class of quotations is far nearer to the Septuagint than the other +class. This conclusion remains good in spite of the fact that even the +Messianic quotations show the influence of the Septuagint, _e.g._ in i. +23 the writer uses the Septuagint, inasmuch as the Greek word +translated "virgin" _necessarily_ implies the unique condition of the +mother of our Lord, whereas the corresponding Hebrew word does not +_necessarily_ imply the same condition. Now, it is plain that if the +Gospel had been translated from the Hebrew, the context-quotations +would probably have been as near to the Hebrew as the quotations made +by the evangelist himself. This is not the case. The quotations in +Matt. show that the writer knew Hebrew but wrote in Greek, and based +part of his work on a Greek document. + +The fact that the Gospel was written in Greek does not prove that it +was not written in Palestine. It has been urged that it cannot have +been written in Palestine, because in ix. 26, 31 we find Palestine +called "_that_ land," but the phrase may refer only to a part of +Palestine, and therefore can hardly be urged as proving anything. It +is well known that educated persons in Palestine were acquainted with +Greek, although the majority spoke Aramaic. The two languages existed +side by side, very much as Welsh and English exist side by side in +North Wales. If the Gospel was not written in Palestine, it was +probably written in South Syria. + +{38} + +[Sidenote: Date.] + +The date must be shortly before A.D. 70. A favourite argument of +modern sceptics is that it contains a reference (xxii. 7) to the +burning of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70, and therefore must have +been written after that event. The argument rests upon the assumption +that our Lord could not have foreseen the event predicted--an +assumption which no Christian can accept. Even the favoured servants +of God in later ages have sometimes possessed the gift of prophecy. +Savonarola certainly foretold the fall of Rome, which took place in +A.D. 1527, and the prophecy was printed long before the event seemed +credible. Much more might the Son of God have foretold the fall of +that city which had so signally neglected His summons. Such +expressions as "the holy city," "the holy place," "the city of the +great King," suggest that when the Gospel was written it had not yet +become the home of "the abomination of desolation." And a far stronger +proof is afforded by the caution of the writer in xxiv. 15, "let him +that readeth understand." This is an editorial note inserted by the +evangelist, as by St. Mark, before our Lord's warning to flee from +Judaea. We learn from the early historians of the Church that the +Jewish Christians took warning from this statement to flee from Judaea +to Peraea before the Romans invested the holy city in A.D. 70. Now, it +would have been absurd for the evangelist to insert this note after the +Roman forces had begun the siege, as absurd as it would have been to +warn the Parisians to flee to England after Paris had been surrounded +by the Prussians in 1870, or to warn the English to leave Ladysmith in +1900 after it was surrounded by the Boers. Another and final proof +that the Gospel was written before A.D. 70 is given by the form in +which the evangelist has recorded our Lord's prophecy of the end of the +world (the so-called "eschatological discourse" in chs. xxiv.-xxv.). +The prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem and that of the last +coming of the Lord are placed side by side with no perceptible break. +Ch. xxiv. 29-31 refers to the {39} last coming of Christ, whereas the +verses which immediately precede it refer to the destruction of +Jerusalem, and so do vers. 32-34. It is impossible to resist the +conclusion that the evangelist believed that the judgment upon +Jerusalem would be immediately followed by the last judgment of the +world. He knows that our Lord foretold both, and both events loom +large in his mind. As a traveller in a valley sees before him two +great mountains which appear close to one another, though really +separated by many miles, so the evangelist sees these two events +together. After the fall of Jerusalem he would almost certainly have +made a definite break between the two subjects. + +[Sidenote: Literary Style.] + +We have already noticed in ch. ii. the fondness for numerical +arrangement, which is a marked characteristic of the style of this +Gospel. There are other proofs of the fact that this Gospel is more +Hebrew in tone than the others. In the other Gospels we find the +expression "the kingdom of God," but here we find it called "the +kingdom of heaven," an instance of the peculiarly Jewish reverence +which shrank from uttering the name of God. There are a few Aramaic +words found in this Gospel--_raca_ (v. 22), _gehenna_ (v. 22), _mammon_ +(vi. 24); and we should add the peculiar use of "righteousness" in vi. +1, where the word is used in the sense of "alms" in accordance with a +Jewish idiom. But the Greek phrases are often neat and clear-cut. +They sometimes seem to imply a play upon words, _e.g._ in vi. 16 and +xxiv. 30. This is another indication that the Gospel, as it stands, +was first written in Greek. The Greek is smoother than that of St. +Mark, though not so vivid. The evangelist writes with a joyous +interest in his work. The historical parts of it are full of beauty, +but he uses them mainly as a framework for the discourses of Jesus, +which he preserves with loving fidelity. + +In St. Matthew's Gospel the Old Testament is frequently quoted, that +the reader may see that Jesus is the realization of {40} the hopes of +the Jewish prophets. With set purpose the fair picture of the Servant +of Jehovah drawn by Isaiah is placed in the middle of the Gospel (xii. +18-21), that we may recognize it as the true portrait of Christ. Close +to it on either side the blasphemies of the Pharisees are skilfully +depicted as a foil to His divine beauty. We have already noticed the +bearing of these quotations on the origin of the Gospel, but we must +speak further of their bearing on the evangelist's view of the Old +Testament. His Messianic quotations are introduced by such phrases as +"that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet," or, "then +was fulfilled," etc. The tendency of modern scepticism to ridicule the +supernatural element in prophecy has caused some writers to depreciate +this method of quotation. And we find even a thoughtful Roman Catholic +writer speaking of it as "giving the impression that the supple and +living story of the life of Jesus is only a chain of debts which fall +due, and fulfilments which cannot be avoided." [8] In particular, it +has been alleged that the Greek word translated "that," or "in order +that," and prefixed to these quotations, implies this fatalistic +necessity. But this particular argument is mistaken. In later Greek +the use of the word was vaguer than it had been formerly.[9] It cannot +be narrowed down so as to prove that the evangelist thought that events +in the Old Testament only took place in order to be types which the Son +of God constrained Himself to fulfil. And, speaking more generally, we +may say that the evangelist shows an exquisite taste in his selection +of Messianic quotations. Convinced that Jesus sums up the history of +Israel, he does not hesitate to quote passages in the Old Testament, +whether they directly refer to the Messianic King, or only call up some +picture which has a counterpart in the life of Christ. + +{41} + +Thus the quotations in i. 23 and ii. 6 directly refer to one who is the +expected King, that in viii. 17 to one who is the ideal martyred +Servant, that in ii. 15 to Israel conceived of as the peculiar child of +God and so a type of Christ. In ii. 23 the evangelist finds in the +name of _Nazareth_ an echo of the ancient Messianic title _Netzer_ (a +branch). In ii. 18 we see that the tomb of Rachel near Bethlehem +reminds him of the mothers of Israel weeping over the death of their +children at the hands of the Babylonians; and as Jeremiah poetically +conceived of Rachel weeping with the mothers of his own day, so St. +Matthew conceives of her as finding her crowning sorrow in the massacre +of the Holy Innocents. + +Three other quotations deserve special notice: (1) That in xxvii. 9, +which the evangelist quotes from "Jeremiah." It is often said that +this is a mere mistake for Zechariah. But it is a quotation combined, +according to the Jewish method known as the Charaz, or "string of +pearls," from Zech. xi. 12 and Jer. xix. 1, 2, 6, the valley of the son +of Hinnom being regarded as typical of "the field of blood." (2) That +in xxvii. 34, from Ps. lxix. 21. It is said that the evangelist, in +order to make our Lord's action correspond with the words of the +Psalmist, makes Him drink "gall" instead of "myrrh" (Mark xv. 23), and +thus represents the soldiers as cruelly giving Him a nauseating draught +instead of a draught to dull His pain. The argument will hardly hold +good, for the Greek word translated "gall" can also signify a +stupefying drug, and thus Matt. and Mark agree. (3) That in xxi. 2-7, +where our Lord is represented as making use of both an ass and a colt +for His triumphal entry into Jerusalem. The other Synoptists mention a +colt only, and it is supposed that the evangelist altered his narrative +of the fact in order to make it agree with a too literal interpretation +of Zech. ix. 9. It must be admitted that the account in Mark and Luke +has an air of greater probability, and it has the support of the brief +account in John. But there is not a decisive contradiction between +Matt. and the other Gospels, and it is therefore unreasonable to pass +an unfavourable verdict on any of them. The story in Matt. cannot be +discredited as containing an apocryphal miracle, and the mere fact that +it is so independent of the other Gospels suggests that it is really +primitive. + + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The chief characteristic of this Gospel is the representation of Jesus +as _the Messiah_ in whom was fulfilled the {42} Law and the prophets. +It was probably placed first in the New Testament because this +Messianic doctrine is the point of union between the old covenant and +the new. St. Matthew's representation of the Messiah is the result of +very careful reflection, and it shows that the evangelist wrote in a +spirit which was philosophical and in one sense controversial. He is +philosophic because he is not a mere annalist. He groups incidents and +discourses together in a manner which brings out their significance as +illustrating the Messiahship of Jesus and the majestic forward movement +of the kingdom of God. He is in one sense controversial because he +wishes his picture of Christ to correct that false idea of the Messiah +and His reign which was ruining the Jewish people. The best kind of +controversy is that which is intent upon explaining the truth rather +than eager to expose and ridicule what is false. So the evangelist +presents to his readers Jesus as the Lord's Anointed with inspired +powers of persuasion. The manner in which he records our Lord's urgent +warnings against going after false Jewish Messiahs at the time when the +destruction of Jerusalem should draw near, is a witness to the depth of +his convictions. Like the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who +wrote shortly before him, he cannot endure the thought of any waverers +or deserters. The Jewish Christian must be loyal to Jesus, even +although the invasion of the holy land by Gentiles may sorely tempt him +to throw in his lot with his patriotic but unbelieving kinsmen. + +The very first verse suggests the nature of the Gospel--"The book of +the generation" (_i.e._ the genealogical tree) "of Jesus Christ, the +son of David, the son of Abraham." This "book" includes the first 17 +verses of the Gospel. While St. Luke traces the genealogy of our Lord +back to Adam, the head of the human race, St. Matthew desires to show +that our Lord, _as the son of Abraham_, is the child of promise in whom +all the families of the earth shall be blessed, and, _as the son of +David_, {43} is heir to the kingdom of spiritual Israel. The genealogy +is partly based on that of the Greek version of 1 Chron. i.-iii., and +is intended to teach certain special truths. It is arranged so as to +be a kind of summary of the history of the people of God, each group of +14 names ending with a crisis. Jesus is the flower and fulfilment of +that history. It furnishes a reply to Jewish critics. They would say +that Jesus could not be Messiah unless Joseph, his supposed father, was +descended from David. St. Matthew shows that St. Joseph was of Davidic +descent. Again, the Jews would say that in any case the Messiah would +not be likely to be connected with a humble carpenter and his folk. +The evangelist's reply is that David himself was descended from +comparatively undistinguished men and from women who were despised. +Thus St. Matthew meets both points raised by the Jews. + +Of recent years another criticism has been passed on this pedigree of +our Lord. A copy of the Old Syriac version of the Gospels, discovered +at Sinai and published in 1894, says that Joseph begat Jesus, and in +this way denies that Jesus was born of a pure virgin. Some writers who +wish to believe that our Lord was brought into the world in the same +manner as ourselves, have said that this Syriac version represents what +was actually the fact. There is, however, no reason for believing +anything of the kind. There is no ground for the notion that the +Syriac genealogy was taken from a primitive Jewish register. It is +merely a translation of the Greek, probably from some Western Greek +manuscript which had "Joseph begat Jesus." When the evangelist wrote +the genealogy, he can only have meant that Joseph was by Jewish law +regarded as the father of Jesus; for his whole narrative of our Lord's +infancy assumes that He was born of a virgin mother. The truth that +our Lord was born miraculously is asserted by St. Luke as well as by +St. Matthew. It is assumed by St. Paul, when he argues that the second +Adam was free from the taint of sin which affected the rest of the +first Adam's descendants. It {44} was also cherished from the earliest +times in every part of the Christian world where the teaching of the +apostles was retained, and was only denied by a few heretics who had +openly rejected the teaching of the New Testament on other subjects. + +Connected with the representation of Jesus as the Messiah is the record +of His continual teaching about the "kingdom of heaven." The "kingdom +of heaven" or "kingdom of God" signifies the reign and influence of +God. The meaning of it is best expressed by the words in the Lord's +Prayer: "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on +earth" (Matt. vi. 10). The second petition explains the first. The +kingdom comes in proportion as the righteous will of our loving Father +is done among men. The kingdom therefore includes the influence of God +in the heart of the believer, or in great movements in the world, or in +the organization and growth of His _Church_ (xvi. 18; xviii. 17). The +kingdom has both a present and a future aspect. In xii. 28 our Lord +says to His hearers that it "is come upon you," and in xxi. 31 He +speaks of people who were entering into it at the time. But the night +before He died He spoke of it as still future (xxvi. 29). It is plain +that He taught that it was already present, though its consummation is +yet to come. The kingdom is spiritual, "not of this world," it is +universal, for though the Jews were "the sons of the kingdom" (viii. +12) by privilege, it is free to others. The worst sinner might come in +(xxi. 31), if he came with repentance, humility, and purity of heart. +The teaching of Christ with regard to the kingdom was based upon an +idea of God's personal rule, which runs through nearly all the Old +Testament, beginning with the Books of Samuel and revealing itself in +Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel. But our Lord's teaching is original and +distinctive. And it is more distant from the popular Jewish idea of a +Hebrew counterpart to the Roman empire than the east is distant from +the west. + +Nowhere else is our Lord shown to have given such an unmistakable +sanction to the Law. It is here only that we {45} read, "Think not +that I came to destroy the Law, or the prophets: I came not to destroy, +but to fulfil" (v. 17).[10] Here, too, we find an allusion to the +observance of the sabbath _after_ the Ascension (xxiv. 20), a temporary +prohibition of preaching to the Gentiles and Samaritans (x. 5), and the +statement of our Lord, "I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the +house of Israel" (xv. 24). Most remarkable of all is the direction to +obey the scribes and Pharisees (xxiii. 3). On the other hand, there is +a rigorous denunciation of the rabbinical additions to the Jewish Law. +Mercy is preferable to sacrifice (xii. 7), the Son of man is Lord of +the sabbath (xii. 8), moral defilement does not come from a failure to +observe ceremonial (xv. 11), the kingdom will be transferred to a more +faithful nation (xxi. 43), even the strangers from the east and the +west (viii. 11), the Gospel will be for all people (xxiv. 14), and the +scribes and Pharisees are specially denounced (xxiii. 13). + +It has been said that there is an absolute opposition between these two +classes of sayings; that either Jesus contradicted Himself, or the +evangelist drew from one source which was of a Judaizing character, and +from another source which taught St. Paul's principle of justification +by faith _versus_ justification by the Law. But the same divine +paradox of truth which we find in Matt. runs through most of the New +Testament, and is found plainly in St. Paul. In the Epistle where he +exposes the failure of contemporary Judaism most remorselessly, he +asserts that "we establish the Law." The true inner meaning of the +divine revelation granted in the Old Testament _is_ fulfilled in +Christ. Not only so, but Christ Himself was "the servant of the +circumcision," living "under the Law." The limits which He imposed +upon His own ministry (xv. 24) and that of His apostles (x. 5) were +entirely fitting until Christ at His resurrection laid aside all that +was peculiarly Jewish with its limits and humiliations. + +{46} + +ANALYSIS[11] + +The infancy of our Lord: i. 1-ii. 23.--Genealogy from Abraham, +announcement to Joseph, birth, visit of Magi, flight into Egypt, +massacre of innocents, settlement at Nazareth. + + +A. + +Winter A.D. 26 till after Pentecost 27. + +The preparation for the ministry: iii. 1-iv. 11.-- + +The ministry of John the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus, the +threefold temptation. + + +B. + +Pentecost A.D. 27 till before Passover 28. + +The preaching of the kingdom of God by Jesus in Galilee: iv. 12-xiii. +58.--The call of the four fishermen, Jesus preaches and heals (iv.). +The Sermon on the Mount--Jesus fulfils the law, the deeper teaching +concerning the commandments (v.). False and true almsgiving, prayer +and fasting, worldliness, trust in God (vi.). Censoriousness, +discrimination in teaching, encouragements to prayer, false prophets, +the two houses (vii.). The ministry at Capernaum and by the lake is +illustrated by the record of many works of _Messianic healing power_ +(viii.-ix.), the apostles are chosen and receive a charge (x.), and the +ministry is illustrated by words and parables of _Messianic wisdom_ +(xi.-xiii.). We find a growing hostility on the part of the scribes +and Pharisees (ix. 11; ix. 34; xii. 2, xii. 14; xii. 24). Jesus +returns to Nazareth (xiii. 53-58). + +[Perplexity of Herod and death of John the Baptist, xiv. 1-12.] + +{47} + +C. + +Passover A.D. 28 till before Tabernacles 28. + +Climax of missionary work in Galilee: xiv. 13-xviii. 35.--Christ feeds +the 5000, walks on the sea, heals the sick in Gennesaret (xiv.). +Christ now labours chiefly in the dominions of Herod Philip, the +journeys are more plainly marked in Mark. Teaching about defilement, +the Canaanite woman, Christ feeds the 4000 (xv.). + +Leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, Peter's confession of Christ, +Christ's first prediction of His death (xvi.). Transfiguration, +lunatic boy cured, second prediction of death, the shekel in the fish's +mouth (xvii.). Treatment of children, Christ saving lost sheep, +forgiveness (xviii.). + + +D. + +Tabernacles, September A.D. 28 until early 29. + +The ministry in Peraea; xix. i-xx. 34.--Christ forbids divorce, He +blesses children, the rich young man, the difficulties of the rich +(xix.). Parable of the labourers, Christ's third prediction of His +death, the request of the mother of Zebedee's children, the two blind +men of Jericho (xx.). + + +E. + +Passover A.D. 29. + +Last days at Jerusalem, and afterwards: xxi. 1-xxviii. 20.--Entry into +Jerusalem, the cleansing of the temple, the withered fig tree, Christ +challenged, parable of the vineyard (xxi.). The marriage feast, three +questions to entrap Christ, His question (xxii.). On not seeking chief +places, denunciation of scribes and Pharisees, lament over Jerusalem +(xxiii.). + +Predictions of destruction of temple, siege of Jerusalem, the second +coming (xxiv.), three discourses on the judgment (xxv.). + +{48} + +The Council discuss how they may arrest Jesus, the woman with the +ointment, Judas' bargain, the Passover, Gethsemane, the betrayal, the +trial before Caiaphas, Peter's denial (xxvi.). Jesus delivered to +Pilate, Judas' suicide, Jesus tried by Pilate, Jesus and Barabbas, the +mockery, crucifixion, burial by Joseph of Arimathaea, guard granted by +Pilate (xxvii.). + +The women at the sepulchre, the angel, Jesus meets them, the guard +bribed, Jesus meets the eleven in Galilee, His commission to baptize +and teach (xxviii.). + + +_Note on the Date of Matthew._--Irenaeus, apparently following Papias, +says, "Matthew published a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their +own dialect, Peter and Paul preaching the Gospel at Rome" (_Adv. Haer._ +iii. 1). This would fix the date of the Hebrew Matt. about A.D. 63, if +it was the intention of Irenaeus to give chronological information in +this sentence. But the context makes it more probable that this is not +the case, and that he simply wished to make it clear that the teaching +of the four chief apostles, Peter and Paul, Matthew and John, has come +down to us in writing. That of Matthew and John survives in their +Gospels, that of Peter and Paul, though they wrote no Gospels, survives +in Mark and Luke. Eusebius, in his _Chronicle_ dates the composition +in A.D. 41. This he probably does in order to make it fit with the +supposed departure of the apostles from Jerusalem after twelve years +from the Crucifixion. His statement is very improbable. At any rate +our Greek Matt. must have been written after Mark. The frequent +quotations from it in primitive literature from the Epistle of Barnabas +and the _Didaché_ onwards, bear witness both to its early date and its +high authority. Internal evidence points to the same conclusion. In +addition to what is said above (p. 38), we may note some passages +likely to perplex the reader. Such are ii. 23, "the ass _and the +colt_" in xxi. 7, the "three days and _three nights_ in the belly of +the whale" mentioned as typical of Christ's rest in the tomb (xii. 40), +the absence of all reference to the _burning_ of the temple in xxiv. 2, +the reference to Zachariah the son of Barachiah (xxiii. 35; contrast 2 +Chron. xxiv. 20). Such verses would probably have been altered if the +Gospel had not gained an authoritative position at a very early date. + + + +[1] Strom. iv. 9. + +[2] Eusebius, _H. E._ iii. 39. + +[3] _Adv. Haer._ iii. 1. + +[4] _De Vir, Ill._ 3. + +[5] _In Matt._ xii. 13. + +[6] _Con. Pelag._ iii. 1. + +[7] So Prof. Armitage Robinson, _Expositor_, March, 1897. + +[8] Batiffol, _Six Leçons sur les Evangiles_, p. 48. + +[9] Burton, _Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of New Testament Greek_, +pp. 92-95. + +[10] In this Gospel only is sin called "lawlessness." + +[11] These analyses of the Gospels are not complete, but are arranged +with the hope that the readers, by studying all the four, may gain a +clearer conception of the life of our Lord. + + + + +{49} + +CHAPTER IV + +THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +John Mark was the son of a Mary who was an influential member of the +Church at Jerusalem, as the Church met in her house (Acts xii. 12). He +was a cousin of Barnabas (Col. iv. 10), who had been a man of some +property. It has been thought that Mark was the "young man" referred +to in the account given by this Gospel of the arrest of Jesus in the +garden. To others the incident would probably have appeared +insignificant. He lived at Jerusalem during the famine in A.D. 45, and +Barnabas took him to Antioch on returning thither from Jerusalem at +that time. He accompanied St. Paul and St. Barnabas on St. Paul's +first missionary journey, and laboured with them at Salamis in Cyprus. +It is possible that Acts xiii. 5 means that John Mark had been a +"minister" of the synagogue at Salamis. At any rate, the Greek can be +so interpreted. After crossing from Paphos to the mainland of Asia +Minor, the missionaries arrived at Perga. Here St. Paul made the great +resolve to extend the gospel beyond the Taurus mountains. St. Mark +determined to leave him. Perhaps he was not prepared for so +magnificent an undertaking as a "work" which included the conversion of +the Gentiles (Acts xiv. 27), or for the substitution of the leadership +of St. Paul for that of St. Barnabas. + +St. Mark returned to Jerusalem, and was again at Antioch about the time +of St. Paul's rebuke of St. Peter. Possibly St. Mark followed the +example of most of the Jewish Christians at Antioch in inducing St. +Peter and St. Barnabas to withdraw from {50} fellowship with the +Gentile converts. Whether he did so or not, it is certain that St. +Paul refused to take St. Mark with him on his second missionary +journey, A.D. 49. St. Barnabas then went home to Cyprus with St. Mark. +We hear no more of the future evangelist until A.D. 60, when we find +that he is with St. Paul in Rome, and completely reconciled to him. He +is the apostle's "fellow-worker" and his "comfort" (Col. iv. 11; +Philem. 24). About four years later, St. Paul, in writing shortly +before his martyrdom to Timothy, requests him to come to Rome by the +shortest route, and to take up Mark on the way, "for he is useful to me +for ministering" (2 Tim. iv. 11). The last notice that we have of St. +Mark in the New Testament illustrates how complete a harmony had been +effected between the expansive theology of St. Paul and the once +cramped policy of St. Peter and St. Mark. In his First Epistle St. +Peter refers to "Mark, my son," and his words make it certain that the +two friends were then together at Babylon, _i.e._ Rome. + +In the 4th century it was widely believed that St. Mark was the founder +of Christianity in Alexandria, and the first bishop of the see which +was afterwards ruled by St. Athanasius and St. Cyril. It is important +to notice that this tradition appears first in Eusebius, and is not +mentioned in the extant works of Clement and Origen, the great +luminaries of the early Alexandrian Church. But it seems to be too +well supported by the great writers of the 4th century for us to regard +it as a fabrication. If the tale is true, St. Mark must have brought +Christianity to Alexandria either after the death of St. Peter about +A.D. 65, or about A.D. 55, in the interval between his separation from +St. Paul and his stay with him at Rome. + +The early Fathers, so far as their testimony remains, are unanimous in +ascribing this Gospel to St. Mark, and they are equally unanimous in +tracing the work of St. Mark to the influence of St. Peter. Justin +Martyr speaks of the "Memoirs of Peter" when referring to a statement +which we find in {51} Mark iii. 17. Papias closely associates the two +saints in his account of the Gospel, and gives us his information on +the authority of John the Presbyter, who was a disciple of the Lord. +Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen say practically +the same thing. This evidence is overwhelming, and it is +uncontradicted by any early authority. The statement of Papias is as +follows: "And the elder said this also: Mark, having become the +interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately everything that he +remembered of the things that were either said or done by Christ; but, +however, not in order. For neither did he hear the Lord, nor did he +follow Him; but afterwards, as I said, he attended Peter, who adapted +his instructions to the needs of his hearers, but had no design of +giving a connected account of the Lord's words. So then Mark committed +no error in thus writing down certain things as he remembered them; for +he made it his special care not to omit anything that he heard, or to +set down any false statement therein." [1] By calling St. Mark an +_interpreter_, Papias perhaps means that he translated statements made +in Aramaic into Greek, which was the language most used by the +Christians of Rome until the 3rd century after Christ. By saying that +St. Mark wrote _not in order_, Papias probably means that the Gospel is +not a systematic history of all our Lord's ministry, or an orderly +arrangement of subjects placed together with a view to instruction like +those in Matthew. So far as we are able to test them, the facts are +related chronologically in the great majority of cases. + +Papias does not tell us when St. Mark wrote his Gospel. Irenaeus +writes: "Matthew also published a written Gospel among the Hebrews in +their own dialect, Peter and Paul preaching the Gospel at Rome, and +laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the +disciple and interpreter of Peter, delivered to us in writing the +things that had been preached by Peter." [2] {52} St. Peter and St. +Paul probably died not later than A.D. 65. Eusebius quotes from +Clement of Alexandria "that Peter having publicly preached the word at +Rome, and having spoken the Gospel by the Spirit, many present exhorted +Mark to write the things which had been spoken, since he had long +accompanied Peter, and remembered what he had said; and that when he +had composed the Gospel, he delivered it to them who had asked it of +him, which when Peter knew, he neither forbad nor encouraged it." [3] +Clement is here relying upon "the presbyters of old," and the antiquity +of the tradition is proved by the fact that it does not claim St. +Peter's direct sanction for the Gospel. Both Irenaeus and Clement were +probably born about A.D. 130, or earlier. Irenaeus was acquainted with +Rome, where St. Peter taught, while Clement lived at Alexandria, where +St. Mark was probably bishop. Moreover, Clement's office of +head-catechist at Alexandria had been previously held by at least three +predecessors, who must have handed down traditions of first-rate value. +The testimony of Clement with regard to St. Mark is not inconsistent +with that of Irenaeus. The Gospel was probably written while St. Peter +was alive, and when he was dead, was given to the Church. Possibly it +underwent some revision before publication. Now, as St. Peter +evidently had not taught in Rome when St. Paul wrote the Epistle to the +Romans in A.D. 56, and as St. Mark was in Rome when he wrote the +Epistle to the Colossians in A.D. 60, we may reasonably date this +Gospel about A.D. 62. It seems to be later than Colossians, as there +is no indication of St. Peter's being in Rome when that Epistle was +written. + +[Sidenote: Literary Style.] + +The internal evidence afforded by the Gospel strongly corroborates the +belief that it was based upon the discourses of one who had been with +our Lord during His ministry. It is marked by a vivid and dramatic +realism. There is a fondness for rapid transitions from one scene to +another, as may be illustrated by the {53} fact that the Greek word for +"immediately" occurs no less than forty-one times. In i. 27 the actual +form of an original dialogue is shown in the abrupt and broken +sentences employed. St. Mark uses different tenses of the Greek +verb--present, perfect, imperfect, and aorist--with singular freedom, +not because he did not know Greek well enough to write with more +regularity, but because he is carried away by his interest in the facts +which he relates. The student will find good instances of this +interchange of tenses in v. 15 ff.; vi. 14 ff.; viii. 35; ix. 34 ff. +St. Mark's language shows that he was well acquainted with the Greek +version of the Old Testament, which has exercised considerable +influence on his style. + +There are many picturesque phrases, such as "the heavens rent" (i. 10) +and "devour houses" (xii. 40). There are little redundancies in which +the author repeats his thoughts with a fresh shade of meaning, as "at +even, when the sun did set" (i. 32); "he looked steadfastly, and was +restored, and saw all things clearly" (viii. 25); "all that she had, +even all her living" (xii. 44). There is a frequent use of popular +diminutives, such as words for "little boat," "little daughter," +"little dog." This is probably due to provincial Custom, and may be +compared with the fondness shown in some parts of Scotland for words +such as "boatie," "lassie" or "lassock," etc. There are several +Hebraisms. Some of the Greek words are frankly plebeian, such as a +foreigner would pick up without realizing that they were inelegant. +There are also some Aramaic words and phrases which the writer inserts +with a true artistic sense and then interprets--_Boanerges_ (iii. 17), +_Talitha cumi_ (v. 41), _Corban_ (vii. 11), _Ephphatha_ (vii. 34), +_Abba_ (xiv. 36), and _Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani_[4] (xv. 34). The +Greek also contains numerous grammatical irregularities which betray +the hand of a foreigner, {54} as in ii. 26; iv. 22; vi. 52; vii. 4, 19; +ix. 18, xi.32; xiii. 34. The use of participles is clumsy, especially +in the account of the woman with the issue of blood (v. 25 ff.). +Finally, there are more Latin words and idioms than in any of the other +Gospels. Latin idioms may be seen in v. 23 and xv. 15, and instances +of Latin words are _speculator_ (vi. 27), _centurion_ (xv. 39), +_sextarius_ (vii. 4), _denarius_ (vi. 37), _quadrans_ (xii. 42). In +xii. 42, xv. 16, Greek words are explained in Latin. + +These facts corroborate the tradition that the writer was a Palestinian +who stayed in Rome, and knew personally some one who had exceptional +knowledge of our Lord's actual words. + +The narrative is particularly fresh, and abounds in vivid details such +as would have been likely to linger in St. Peter's memory. The green +grass whereon the crowds sat, and the appearance of flower-beds which +they presented in their gay costume (vi. 39, 40); the stern of the +boat, and the pillow whereon our Lord slept (iv. 38); the Gerasene +demoniac cutting himself with stones (v. 5); the woman who was a +Syro-Phoenician but spoke Greek (vii. 26); Jesus taking children in His +arms (ix. 36; x. 16); the street where the colt was tied (xi. 4); the +two occasions on which the cock crew (xiv. 68, 72); and St. Peter +warming himself in the light of the fire (xiv. 54);--such are some of +the instances of the writer's fidelity in recording the impressions of +his teacher. This Gospel also abounds in proper names, both of places +and persons. Among the latter may be mentioned the name of Bartimaeus, +the blind beggar (x. 46); the names of Alexander and Rufus, the sons of +Simon of Cyrene (xv. 21); Salome, the mother of Zebedee's children (xv. +40); and Boanerges, their surname (iii. 17). Equally remarkable is the +manner in which the emotions of our Lord and others are recorded. We +notice the indignation and grief which He felt in the synagogue (iii. +5); His compassion for the unshepherded people (vi. 34); His deep sigh +at the sceptical demand for a sign from heaven (viii. 12), {55} His +displeasure at the disciples for keeping the children from Him (x. 14); +His undisguised love for the rich young man who yet lacked one thing +(x. 21); His tragic walk in front of the apostles (x. 32); the +intensity of feeling with which He was driven into the wilderness (i. +12), and overturned the tables and seats in the temple (xi. 15). St. +Mark always seems to be painting our Lord from the life. + +In spite of the fact that St. Mark shows that he knew well how to +compress the material which was at his disposal, there is hardly a +story which he narrates in common with the other synoptists without +some special feature. We may notice the imploring words of the father +of the lunatic boy (ix. 2), the spoken blessing on little children (x. +16), the view of the temple (xiii. 3), and Pilate's question of the +centurion (xv. 44). None of these things are narrated in the other +Gospels. In ix. 2-13 we have the story of the Transfiguration, with +the statement that the garments of our Lord "became glistering, +exceeding white; _so as no fuller on earth can whiten them_." We are +also told that St. Peter then addressed our Lord as "Rabbi," and that +"he wist not what to answer." The same significant phrase, "they wist +not what to answer Him," occurs in St. Mark's account of the agony in +the garden (xiv. 40). These are only a few instances out of many which +show St. Mark's originality, and they are just such personal +reminiscences as we might expect St. Peter to retain. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +Just as the style is realistic and the narrative circumstantial, so the +contents are practical. "He went about doing good" is the impression +which this Gospel gives us of our Lord. The teaching which He +announced to the people is made less prominent than in Matt. If we +count even the shortest similitudes as parables, we find only nine +parables in Mark. Equally remarkable is the absence of quotations made +by the writer. He records numerous references made by our Lord to the +Old Testament, though fewer than Matt. or Luke, but the only quotations +made by St. Mark {56} himself are in i. 2, 3 (Mal. iii. 1; Isa. xl. 3) +and xv. 28 (Isa. liii. 12). On the other hand, we find eighteen +miracles, only two less than in the much longer Gospel of St. Matthew. +The theological tone of Mark may be described as neutral. There is no +trace of the innocent preferences which Matt. and Luke show toward this +or that aspect of the teaching of Jesus. In Mark we do not find so +strong an approval of the more permanent parts of the Jewish Law, or so +strong a denunciation of the Pharisees who exalted the external +adjuncts of the Law, as we find in Matt. Nor do we find such parables +as the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal Son, by which Luke lays emphasis +upon the truth that the Jews have no monopoly of holiness, and that the +outcast is welcome to the gospel. Mark is less Jewish than Matt., less +Gentile and Pauline than Luke. It used to be said that this was the +result of "trimming," and intended to bridge over the differences +between two different schools of theology. But the charge has broken +down. St. Mark, though not anti-Jewish, regards Christ as above the +law of the sabbath (ii. 28), and teaches the necessity of new external +religious forms (ii. 22). Though he is not Jewish, and though he omits +the statement made in Matt. xv. 24, a statement indicating that the +Jews had the first right to be taught by the Messiah, he does record, +like Matt., the still harder statement of the same fact made to the +Syro-Phoenician woman (vii. 27). The truth is that St. Mark is neutral +simply in the sense that he faithfully records a story which was +moulded before doctrinal conflicts had taken place between Christian +believers. The doctrine of St. Mark is archaic. + +One of the most distinctive features of this Gospel is the decisive +clearness with which it shows how Jesus trained and educated His +disciples. The simplicity with which St. Mark describes the faults of +the friends of our Lord is as remarkable as the vigour with which the +gestures and feelings of our Lord are portrayed. St. Mark relates how +that early in the ministry of Jesus, His friends (iii. 21) said that He +was mad, and that "His {57} mother and His brethren" (iii. 31) sought +to bring Him back. The discipline and education of the disciples are +recorded with a plain revelation of their mistakes and their spiritual +dulness. When they had settled in Capernaum Christ shows them that He +must find a wider sphere of work (i. 38); He meets with a significant +silence their obtrusive remonstrance when the woman with the issue of +blood caused Him to ask, "Who touched My clothes?" (v. 30, 31); He +tells them with affectionate care "to rest a while," when they had been +too busy even to eat (vi. 31); He rebukes them gravely when they put a +childish interpretation upon His command to beware of the leaven of the +Pharisees and of Herod, the formalists and the Erastian (viii. 17); +they are unintelligent and uninquiring when He prophesies His death and +resurrection (ix. 32), and after this prophecy they actually dispute +about their own precedence (ix. 34); when Christ goes boldly forward to +Jerusalem, they follow with fear and hesitation (x. 32); He rebukes the +niggardly criticism of those who were indignant with the "waste" of the +perfume poured upon His head (xiv. 6); and in Gethsemane "they all left +Him and fled" (xiv. 50). + +Among these disciples, St. Peter is prominent, and though his +confession of the Messiahship of Jesus is recorded, a confession which +is necessarily central in the Gospel (viii. 29), St. Mark neither +records that our Lord designed him as the rock, nor his commission to +feed the Lord's lambs and sheep. On the other hand, St. Mark inserts +things which were often of a nature to humble St. Peter. He records +the crushing reprimand which he received when he criticized the Lord's +mission (viii. 33); it was Peter's fanciful plan to erect three +tabernacles on the scene of the Transfiguration (ix. 5), it was Peter +who informed the Lord that the fig tree had withered after His curse +(xi. 21), it was Peter whom Christ awoke in Gethsemane by uttering his +name "Simon" (xiv. 37); and Peter's denial appears doubly guilty in +this Gospel, inasmuch as he did not repent until the cock crew _twice_ +(xiv. 68, 72). At the {58} beginning (iii. 16) and at the end (xvi. 7) +Peter occupies a special position. But the conduct of Peter is +narrated in a fashion which renders the notion of fiction quite +impossible. The Gospel cannot have been written by a hero-worshipper +wishing to glorify a saint of old, but must surely have been written by +"the interpreter of Peter." + +In comparing the contents of Mark with those of Matt. and Luke, we are +struck by the absence of many of our Lord's discourses. Yet we find an +eschatological discourse about the second coming in xiii., though much +shorter than those in Matt. xxiv. and xxv. The genuineness of Mark +xiii. has been assailed, and it has been described as an apocalyptic +"fly-sheet," which was somehow inserted in the Gospel. There is no +reason for believing this theory to be true. The chapter was in Mark +when it was incorporated into Matthew, and its teaching agrees with +that attributed to our Lord in the collections of Logia. We have also +the beginning of the charge given to the apostles (vi. 7-11; cf. Matt. +x.). There are a few echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and only a +specimen of the final denunciation of the Pharisees, which occupies a +whole chapter in Matt. (Mark xii. 38-40, cf. Matt. xxiii.). We find a +few statements made by our Lord which are peculiar to this Gospel: +_e.g._--"the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath" +(ii. 27), "foolishness" coming from the heart (vii. 22); "every +sacrifice shall be salted with salt" (ix. 49); "Father, all things are +possible unto Thee," in the touching filial appeal during the agony +(xiv. 36). Here alone have we the tiny parable about the growth of the +blade of corn (iv. 26), and that of the porter commanded to watch until +the master's return (xiii. 34). There are two miracles peculiar to +Mark, the cure of the deaf-mute (vii. 32) and of the blind man at +Bethsaida (viii. 22). Among the miracles recorded in Mark, the cures +of demoniacs are prominent. This is in peculiar contrast with John, +where we find no cure of demoniacs recorded. + +In marked contrast to St. Luke, St. Mark appears indifferent {59} to +the political conditions of the countries where our Lord worked. Thus +Herod Antipas is simply called "the king" (vi. 14), whereas both in +Matt. and Luke he is correctly called by the title of "tetrarch," which +only implies governorship of a portion of a country. Yet the narrative +of St. Mark shows that he was quite aware of facts which can only be +explained by the political conditions which he does not describe. He +knows that Tyre and Sidon, Caesarea Philippi and Bethsaida, which were +not under Herod Antipas, were more safe for our Lord than Capernaum. +And he knows that in travelling to Jerusalem He was in greater danger +than while He remained in Galilee, and was meeting His doom at the +sentence of Gentile officials. Although St. Mark is silent as to the +names of many of the places which our Lord visited, he gives us +numerous indications of the various scenes of our Lord's labours. We +are thus able to fix the geographical surroundings of nearly all the +more important events, and construct an intelligible plan of our Lord's +ministry. We can see how He made the shores of the lake of Gennesaret +the focus of His mission, and went on evangelistic journeys from +Capernaum into Galilee. The time of these journeys was largely +determined by circumstances, such as the unregulated enthusiasm of the +mob, the spite of the scribes at Capernaum, or the anger of Herod's +court at Tiberias. Towards the end of the ministry in Galilee our Lord +devoted Himself to the deeper instruction of His Apostles and their +initiation into the mystery of His death (vii. 24 ff.; viii. 27 ff.). +For such teaching the mountain slopes of Lebanon and Hermon afforded +scenes of perfect calm and beauty. + + +{60} + +ANALYSIS + +A. + +Winter A.D. 26 till after Pentecost 27. + +The preparation for the ministry; i. 1-13.--The mission of John the +Baptist and the baptism of Jesus, the temptation. + + +B. + +Pentecost A.D. 27 till before Passover 28. + +The ministry of Jesus in Galilee, journeys from Capernaum; i. 14-vi. +13.--The call of the four fishermen, Jesus preaches and heals at +Capernaum (i. 14-34). + +_First missionary journey, in towns of Galilee_: leper cleansed, return +to Capernaum (i. 38-ii. 1). Work in Capernaum, five grounds of offence +against Jesus, Jesus followed by crowds of hearers on the sea-shore +(ii. 2-iii. 12). Appointment of the twelve, Christ accused of alliance +with Satan, the unpardonable sin, Christ's relation to His mother and +brethren. He begins to teach in parables about the kingdom (iii. +13-iv. 34). + +_Second missionary journey, on the eastern shore of the lake of +Gennesaret_: the storm calmed, Gerasene demoniac and swine (iv. 35-v. +20). Return to the western shore, the cure of the woman who touched +His garment, Jairus' daughter raised (v. 21-43). + +_Third missionary journey, in the western highlands_, including +Nazareth, where He is rejected, and adjacent villages, the mission of +the twelve (vi. 1-13). + +[Perplexity of Herod and death of John the Baptist, vi. 14-29.] + +{61} + +C. + +Passover A.D. 28 till before Tabernacles 28. + +Climax of missionary work in Galilee, journeys from Capernaum; vi. +30-ix. 50.--Christ in a desert place feeds the 5000, visits Bethsaida, +walks on the sea, returns to Gennesaret, heals many (vi. 30-56). +Teaching about defilement (vii. 1-23). + +_Fourth missionary journey, to the north-west into Phoenicia_: the +Syro-Phoenician woman, departure from Tyre and Sidon, approach to the +sea of Galilee through Decapolis, cure of the deaf-mute (vii. 24-37). +Christ feeds the 4000 (viii. 1-9) Christ takes ship to Dalmanutha, +Pharisees seek a sign, Jesus takes ship to the other side, the leaven +of the Pharisees and of Herod, cure of a blind man at Bethsaida (viii. +10-26). + +_Fifth journey, to towns of Caesarea Philippi, special teaching of the +select few_: Peter's confession of Christ, Christ's first prediction of +His death (viii. 27-ix. 1). Transfiguration, lunatic boy cured, +journey through Galilee, second prediction of death, arrival at +Capernaum, the value of a child's example, the danger of causing one to +stumble (ix. 2-50). + + +D. + +Tabernacles, September A.D. 28 until early 29. + +Journey to Jerusalem through Peraea: x.--Christ forbids divorce, +blesses children, the rich young man, the difficulties of the rich, +Christ's third prediction of His death, the request of Zebedee's sons, +Christ's announcement of His mission to serve, blind Bartimaeus cured +at Jericho. + + +{62} + +E. + +Passover A.D. 29. + +Last days at Jerusalem, and afterwards; xi. 1-xvi. 20.--Entry into +Jerusalem, the withered fig-tree, cleansing of the temple, the duty of +forgiveness, Christ challenged (xi.). The parable of the vineyard, +three questions to entrap Christ, His question, denunciation of +scribes, the widow's mites (xii.). + +Predictions of destruction of temple, of woes and of the second coming +(xiii.). + +The Council discuss how they may arrest Jesus, the woman with the +ointment, Judas' bargain, the Passover, Gethsemane, the betrayal, the +trial before the Council, Peter's denial (xiv.). Jesus delivered to +Pilate, trial, Jesus and Barabbas, the mockery, crucifixion, burial by +Joseph of Arimathaea (xv.). + +The women at the sepulchre, the angel (xvi. 1-8). + +Appendix with summary of appearances of the Lord (xvi. 9-20). + + +_Note on the Concluding Section._--The origin of xvi. 9-20 is one of +the most difficult of questions, (a) The section is not found in the +two famous Greek MSS., the Vatican and the Sinaitic, nor is it found in +the very ancient Sinaitic Syriac MS. It is also lacking in one Latin +MS. (k), which represents the Latin version used before St. Jerome made +the Vulgate translation, about A.D. 384. The great scholar Eusebius, +A.D. 320, omitted it from his "canons," which contain parallel passages +from the three Gospels. (b) The language does not resemble the Greek +employed in other parts of the Gospels, differing from it in some small +particulars which most strongly suggest diversity of authorship. (c) +Much of the section might have been constructed out of the other +Gospels and Acts; _e.g._ ver. 9 is thought to be derived from John xx. +14, and ver. 14 from John xx. 26-29. (d) Mary Magdalene is introduced +as though she had not been mentioned previously; but she has already +appeared thrice in Mark (xv. 40, 47; xvi. 1). On the other hand, it is +obvious that the Gospel could never have ended with the words "for they +{63} were afraid," in ver. 8. All the old Latin MSS. contain the +present section except k, and perhaps originally A. The evidence of +the Vatican and the Sinaitic MSS. is not so strong as it appears to be +at first sight. The end of Mark in the Sinaitic was actually written +by the same scribe as the man who wrote the New Testament in the +Vatican MS. And the way in which he has arranged the conclusion of the +Gospel in both MSS. suggests that the MSS. from which the Sinaitic and +the Vatican were copied, both contained this or a similar section. +Moreover, there is considerable reason for thinking that he acted under +the personal influence of Eusebius. The verses are attested by +Irenaeus, and apparently by Justin and Hermas, and were therefore +regarded as authentic, or at least as truthful, by educated men at +Lyons and Rome, in the 2nd century. A possible solution is offered by +an Armenian MS. (A.D. 986), which assigns the section to the "presbyter +Ariston." This is probably the presbyter Aristion whom Papias +describes as a disciple of the Lord (Eusebius, _H. E._ iii. 39). The +conclusion of St. Mark's MS. probably became accidentally detached, and +vanished soon after his death, and the Church may well have requested +one who knew the Lord to supply the deficiency. + + + +[1] Eusebius, _H. E._ iii. 39. + +[2] _Op. cit._ iii. 39. + +[3] Eusebius, _H. E._ vi. 14. + +[4] Also in Matt. xxvii. 46. Observe also the explanation of Beelzebub +(iii. 22), Gehenna (ix. 43), Bartimaeus (x. 46), Golgotha (xv. 22). +Also the explanation of Jewish customs in vii. 3, 4; xiv. 12. + + + + +{64} + +CHAPTER V + +THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The evidence for believing that the third Gospel was written by St. +Luke, the friend of St. Paul, is very strong. In the 2nd century both +this Gospel and Acts were attributed to him. St. Irenaeus, about A.D. +185, writes: "Luke, also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the +gospel preached by him." [1] A few years earlier the author of the +_Muratorian Fragment_ wrote the words, "The third book of the Gospel, +that according to Luke." + +According to Eusebius and Jerome and an unknown writer of the 3rd +century, St. Luke was a native of Antioch in Syria. Of this we seem to +have confirmation in the full account given in Acts of the Church at +Antioch. It is shown by Col. iv. 14 that he was a Gentile, as there is +a distinction drawn between him and those "of the circumcision." From +the same passage we learn that he was a physician. Traces of his +profession have been discovered in the frequency with which he +describes the _healing_ wrought by Christ and His apostles (iv. 18, 23; +ix. 1, 2, 6; x. 9; xxii. 51), and the occasional use of terms which a +physician was more likely to employ than other people (iv. 38; v. 12; +vi. 19; xxii. 44). It is very possible that it is St. Luke who is +described (2 Cor. viii. 18) as "the brother whose praise in the gospel +is spread through all the Churches." This tradition can be traced as +far back as Origen. The fact that he was a dear friend of St. Paul is +{65} shown by the epithet "beloved" in Col. iv. 14; by the fact that he +is one of the "fellow-workers" who send greetings from Rome when St. +Paul, who was imprisoned there, wrote to Philemon; and by the touching +statement in 2 Tim. iv. 11, where St. Paul, as he awaits his death, +writes, "Only Luke is with me." + +St. Luke's relations with St. Paul are further illustrated from Acts. +The literary resemblances between this Gospel and Acts are so numerous +and so subtle that the tradition which ascribes both books to one +author cannot reasonably be controverted. The passages in Acts which +contain the word "we" show that the writer of Acts accompanied St. Paul +from Troas to Philippi in A.D. 50, when the apostle made his first +missionary journey in Europe (Acts xvi. 10-17). The apostle left him +at Philippi. About six years afterwards St. Paul was again at +Philippi, and there met St. Luke, who travelled with him to Jerusalem +(Acts xx. 5-xxi. 18); he also was with the apostle when he made the +voyage to Rome, and was shipwrecked with him at Malta. A writer of the +3rd century (quoted in Wordsworth's _Vulgate_, p. 269) tells us that +St. Luke had neither wife nor children, and died in Bithynia at the age +of seventy-four. A writer of the 6th century asserts that St. Luke was +a painter, and attributes to him a certain picture of the Blessed +Virgin. Another such picture is preserved in the great church of S. +Maria Maggiore at Rome. The legend finds no support in early Christian +writers. At the same time, it bears witness to the fact that this +Gospel contains the elements of beauty in especial richness. It is the +work of St. Luke that inspired Fra Angelico's pictures of the +Annunciation, and the English hymn "Abide with me." + +Although St. Irenaeus is the first writer who names St. Luke as the +author of the third Gospel, the Gospel is quoted by earlier writers. +Special mention must be made of (1) _Justin Martyr_. He records +several facts only found in this Gospel, _e.g._ Elisabeth as the mother +of John the Baptist, the census {66} under Quirinius, and the cry, +"Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit." (2) _Celsus_, the pagan +philosopher, who opposed Christianity. He refers to the genealogy +which narrates that Jesus was descended from the first man. (3) The +_Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne_, written in A.D. 177. (4) +_Marcion_. He endeavoured to found a system of theology which he +pretended to be in accordance with the teaching of St. Paul. He +rejected the Old Testament as the work of an evil god, and asserted +that St. Paul was the only apostle who was free from the taint of +Judaism. The only Gospel which he kept was that according to St. Luke, +which he retained as agreeing with the teaching of St. Paul. The +contents of Marcion's Gospel can be largely discovered in Tertullian. +The differences which existed between Marcion's Gospel and our Luke can +be easily accounted for. Here, as in St. Paul's Epistles, he simply +altered the passages which did not agree with his own interpretation of +St. Paul's doctrine. For instance, in Luke xiii. 28, instead of +"Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob," he put "the righteous." The account +of our Lord's birth and infancy he omitted, because he did not believe +that our Lord's human body was thoroughly human and real. An +interesting modern parallel to Marcion's New Testament can be found in +England. At the beginning of the 19th century the English Unitarians +circulated large numbers of an English version of the New Testament in +which were altered all the passages in the English Authorised Version +which imply that Jesus is God. The translators of this Unitarian +version accepted the Gospels of the New Testament as genuine, although +they used unscrupulous methods to support their assertion that the New +Testament is Unitarian. In the same way Marcion, although he made +unscrupulous alterations in Luke in order to prove that it was really +Marcionite, obviously accepted it as a genuine work of the apostolic +age. + +The Preface of the Gospel begins with a ceremonious dedication to a +person of high rank, named Theophilus. He is {67} called by the title +"most excellent," which ordinarily implies that the person so +designated is a member of the "equestrian order." The evangelist tells +Theophilus that many had taken in hand to draw up a narrative of those +things which are "most surely believed among us." The preface shows us +that many attempts to give an account in order of what our Lord did and +said had already been made. The literary activity of the earliest +Christians is thus demonstrated to us. The preface suggests to us that +substantial accuracy marked these early efforts, and, in a still higher +degree, St. Luke's own Gospel. He does not speak of the earlier works +as inaccurate, and he does distinctly give his reader to understand +that he possesses peculiar qualifications for his task. He asserts +that his information is derived from "eye-witnesses and ministers of +the Word," and that he has himself "traced the course of all things +accurately from the first." This preface certainly shows us that the +writer took real pains in writing, and that he had personally known men +who accompanied our Lord. + +The date can hardly be later than A.D. 80, unless the evangelist wrote +in extreme old age. And the date must be earlier than Acts, as the +Gospel is referred to in that work (Acts i. 1, 2). Can we fix the date +more accurately than this? Many critics think that we can. They say +that it must be later than the fall of Jerusalem, A.D. 70. It is said +that the Gospel presupposes that Jerusalem was already destroyed. The +arguments for this are: (1) In Luke xxi. 20-24 the utter destruction of +Jerusalem is foretold with peculiar clearness. We have already seen +that a similar argument is employed by many in speaking of Matt., an +argument which seems to imply that our Lord did not foretell that +destruction because He could not. This argument must be dismissed. +(2) In Luke xxi. 20 there is no editorial note like that in Matt. xxiv. +15, to emphasize the necessity of paying peculiar attention to our +Lord's warning about the coming destruction, and in Luke xxi. 25 the +final judgment is not so {68} clearly connected with the fall of +Jerusalem as in Matt. xxiv. 29, where it is foretold as coming +"immediately, after the tribulation of those days." Moreover, xxi. 24 +suggests that the writer was well aware that an interval must elapse +between the two great events. This is the only good argument for +placing Luke later than Matt., and it certainly deserves careful +attention. At the same time, we must observe the following facts: (a) +St. Luke probably did not know St. Matthew's Gospel, otherwise he would +not have given such very different, though not contradictory, accounts +of the infancy and the resurrection of our Lord; (b) St. Luke may +perhaps owe the superior accuracy of his report of the eschatological +discourse of Christ to persons whom he knew at Jerusalem in A.D. 56; +(c) St. Luke himself possibly thought that the end of the world would +follow soon after the destruction of Jerusalem, for in xxi. 32 he seems +to connect the final judgment with his own generation. But the +statement is not so strong as in Matt. and Mark. For St. Luke says, +"This generation shall not pass away till all be accomplished," while +Matt. and Mark say, "until all _these_ things be accomplished," +evidently including the final judgment. + +On the whole, it seems reasonable to date the Gospel according to St. +Luke soon after A.D. 70, but it contains so many primitive touches that +it may be rather earlier. It has been urged that both the Gospel and +Acts betray a knowledge of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus, and must +therefore be later than A.D. 94. This theory remains wholly unproved, +and the small evidence which can be brought to support it is far +outweighed by the early features which mark St. Luke's books. + +[Sidenote: Literary Style.] + +The style is marked by great delicacy and power. It is in better Greek +than the other Synoptic Gospels, and the evangelist seems to +deliberately avoid some of the racy, popular words which are employed +by St. Mark. But the beginner should be warned that this Gospel is not +very easy to translate, for it contains a good {69} many words with +which he is not likely to be familiar. The language of St. Luke +contains many proofs that he is writing as a Gentile for Gentiles. +Thus he calls the Apostle Simon, who belonged to the fanatically devout +party known as the "Cananaeans," by the corresponding Greek name +"Zealot" (vi. 15); he seldom uses the Hebrew word "Amen," and he never +uses the word "Rabbi" as a form of address. He adds the word "unclean" +before the word "devil" (iv. 33), as the Greeks believed that some +devils were good and kind, while the Jews believed all devils to be +evil. He also substitutes the word "lawyer" for "scribe." But while +the preface is written in what is perhaps the best Greek in the New +Testament, the evangelist allows his language to be penetrated by his +visions of Jewish scenes. Partly from his study of the Old Testament, +partly from his knowledge of the books and the lives in which he found +a testimony to Jesus, he acquired the art of breathing into his Greek +the simple manner and the sweet tone of a Hebrew story. There is +nothing in all literature more perfectly told than the story of the +walk to Emmaus. Nothing can be better than the delineation of +character which is suggested to us in the story of Zacharias, or of +Anna, or of Zacchaeus. There is always a freshness to remind us that +the Gospel is "good tidings of great joy" (ii. 10), and the Magnificat +(i. 46-55), the Benedictus (i. 68-79), the Gloria in Excelsis (ii. 14), +and the Nunc Dimittis (ii. 29-32), have become for ever part of the +praises of the Christian Church. More often than in any other Gospel +we find such expressions as "glorifying God," "praising God," "blessing +God." Again, St. Luke, in choosing incidents from the life of home, +and more especially in choosing incidents in which women are prominent, +gives a new solemnity to a life which men had hitherto despised. We +always think of the Blessed Virgin as "highly favoured," of Martha +"cumbered about much serving" (x. 40), of the widow with the two mites, +of the daughters of Jerusalem weeping on the way of the cross (xxiii. +28), of the double joy of Elisabeth {70} to bear a son in her old age +and to be visited by the mother of her Lord (i. 43); and we think all +this because St. Luke has told us their story. These passages with +their smiles and tears, their simplicity and their depth, are a divine +contrast to the grotesque passage in the Jewish liturgy, where the men +thank God that they are not women. + +The last point in St. Luke's literary style is his use of phrases which +resemble phrases in St. Paul's Epistles. He writes as a man who has +lived in familiar intercourse with St. Paul. There is a striking +similarity between the words attributed to our Lord in _the institution +of the Eucharist_ (xxii. 19, 20) and those in 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25, a +similarity which is probably to be accounted for by the fact that St. +Luke must often have heard the apostle use these words in celebrating +this Sacrament. Besides this, there are phrases which are parallel +with phrases in every Epistle of St. Paul. A few instances are--Luke +vi. 36 (2 Cor. i. 3); Luke vi. 39 (Rom. ii. 19); Luke viii. 13 (1 +Thess. i. 6); Luke x. 20 (Phil. iv. 3); Luke xii. 35 (Eph. vi. 14); +Luke xxi. 24 (Rom. xi. 25); Luke xxii. 53 (Col. i. 13). + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +It has been well said that St. Matthew's Gospel is in a peculiar sense +_Messianic_, St. Mark's is in a peculiar sense _realistic_, and St. +Luke's is in a peculiar sense _Catholic_. And while St. Matthew takes +pains to connect Christianity with the religion of the past, and St. +Mark allows his interest in the past and the future to be overshadowed +by his resolve to speak of Jesus as actually working marvels, St. Luke +seems, like St. Paul, to be essentially progressive and to have a wider +horizon than his predecessors. He does not manifest the least +antipathy towards Judaism. He has none of that intolerance which so +often marks the men who advertise their own breadth of view. He +represents our Lord as fulfilling the Law, as quoting the Old +Testament, and declaring that "it is easier for heaven and earth to +pass away than for one tittle of the Law to fail" (xvi. 17). But he +writes as a representative Gentile {71} convert. He takes pleasure in +recording all that can attract to Christ that Gentile world which was +beginning to learn of the new religion. We may note the following +points which illustrate this fact: (1) Luke traces the genealogy of our +Lord, not like Matt. by the legal line to Abraham, the father of the +Jews, but by the natural line to _Adam_, the father of humanity (iii. +38), thus showing Jesus to be the elder Brother and the Redeemer of +every human being. (2) While the true Godhead of our Lord is taught +throughout, His true _manhood_ is brought into prominence with peculiar +pathos. We note His condescension in passing through the various +stages of a child's life (ii. 4-7, 21, 22, 40, 42, 51, 52), the +continuance of His temptations during His ministry (xxii. 28), His +constant recourse to prayer in the great crises of His life, His deep +_sobbing_ over Jerusalem (xix. 41), His sweat like drops of blood +during His agony in Gethsemane (xxii. 44), a fact recorded by none of +the other evangelists. St. Luke seems to be filled with a sense of the +divine compassion of Jesus, and thus he relates the facts which prove +the reality of the grace, the undeserved lovingkindness, of God to man. +Rightly did the poet Dante call him "the scribe of the gentleness of +Christ." (3) Corresponding with this human character of the incarnate +Son of God, we find the offer of _universal salvation_. St. Luke +alone--for the words are wrongly inserted in Matt.--records the tender +words of Jesus, "The Son of man came to seek and to save that which was +lost" (xix. 10). St. Paul knew no distinction between Jew and Greek, +rich and poor, but taught that to be justified by God is a privilege +which can be claimed not by birth but by faith; and what St. Paul +enforces by stern arguments which convince our minds, St. Luke instils +by the sweet parables and stories which convince our hearts. It is +here that we find kindness shown to the _Gentile_ (iv. 25-27; xiii. 28, +29), and the _Samaritan_ (ix. 51-56; xvii. 11-19); here we are told of +the publican who was "justified" rather than the Pharisee (xviii. 9), +the story of the penitent {72} thief who had no time to produce the +good works which his faith would have prompted (xxiii. 43), of the good +Samaritan who, schismatic though he was, showed the spirit of a child +of God (x. 30). Last, and best, there is the parable of the Prodigal +Son (xv. 11), and the story of the woman who was a sinner (vii. 37). +To her Christ says, "Thy faith hath saved thee," and to His host He +says, "Her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved +much"--words which no one but the Son of God could dare to say of any +"woman who was in the city, a sinner." In recording these words, St. +Luke proves that Jesus Christ Himself taught the Pauline doctrine that +man is saved by faith; and yet not by an empty faith, but by "faith +working through love" (Gal. v. 6). In this Gospel Jesus is especially +the Refuge of sinners, and the teaching of our Lord may be best +described by the happy phrase which records His address in the +synagogue of Nazareth: "words of grace." + +It is important to notice that in no Gospel do we find such an especial +sympathy shown for the poor. The poverty of the holy family (ii. 7, 8, +24); the beatitude on the poor[2] (vi. 20), with the corresponding woes +pronounced upon the rich (vi. 24 ff.); the parable of Dives and Lazarus +(xvi. 19), the invitation of the poor to the supper of the King (xiv. +21), show this sympathy. In consequence of this, St. Luke's Gospel has +been said to show an _Ebionite_ tendency. But the word is misleading. +It is possible that some early Christians may have called themselves by +the name _Ebionim_, a Hebrew word which designated the poor and +oppressed servants of God. And it is known that in the 2nd century and +afterwards there was a heretical semi-Christian Jewish sect of that +name. But St. Luke's Gospel is utterly opposed to the main tenets of +these heretics, which were a repudiation of Christ's real Divinity and +an insistence upon the necessity of circumcision for all Christians. + +{73} + +Perhaps it is the gentleness of the evangelist, and his preference for +all that is tender and gracious, which causes his account of the twelve +apostles to differ considerably from that in Mark. Their slowness, +their weakness of faith, their rivalries, are set in a subdued light. +He does not tell us that Christ once called St. Peter "Satan," or that +Peter cursed and swore when he denied Christ. He omits the rebuke +administered to the disciples in the conversation concerning the leaven +(Mark viii. 17), the ambitious request of the two sons of Zebedee, and +the indignation of the disciples at Mary's costly gift of ointment +(Matt xxvi. 8). When St. Mark speaks of the failure of the disciples +to keep awake while their Master was in Gethsemane, he says that they +were asleep, "for their eyes were heavy" (xiv. 40). When St. Luke +speaks of it, he says that they were "sleeping for _sorrow_" (xxii. +45). Doubtless both accounts are true, and we can reverently wonder +both at the rugged honesty with which St. Peter must have told St. Mark +about the faults of himself and his friends, and at the consideration +shown by St. Luke towards the twelve in spite of the fact that he was +more closely connected with St. Paul than with them. + +About one-third of this Gospel is peculiar to itself, consisting mainly +of the large section, ix. 51-xviii. 14. St. Luke here seems to have +used an Aramaic document; the beginning of the section is full of +Aramaic idioms. In places where St. Luke records the same facts as the +other Synoptists, he sometimes adds slight but significant touches. +The withered hand restored on the sabbath is the _right_ hand (vi. 6); +the centurion's servant is one _dear_ to him (vii. 2); and the daughter +of Jairus an _only_ daughter (viii. 42; cf. the son of the widow at +Nain, an _only_ son, vii. 12). Among the remarkable omissions in this +Gospel we may notice two sayings which are found in Matt. and Mark, and +which seem to us to have been peculiarly appropriate for St. Luke's +general purpose. The first is the saying of Christ that He had come +"not to be ministered unto, {74} but to minister, and to give His life +a ransom for many" (Matt. xx. 28; Mark x. 45). The second is the +statement that the Gospel "shall be preached in the whole world" (Matt. +xxvi. 13; Mark xiv. 9). With the omission of these sayings we may +compare the omission of any record of the visit of the Gentile wise men +to the cradle of the infant Saviour of the world--an incident which +would probably have appealed most strongly to the heart of St. Luke, if +he had known it. Its absence from this Gospel is one of the many +proofs that St. Luke was not familiar with the Gospel according to St. +Matthew. + +We have already noticed that much of the freshness of this Gospel is +due to its being in a peculiar sense the Gospel of praise and +thanksgiving. It is also peculiarly the Gospel of _prayer_. All the +three Synoptists record that Christ prayed in Gethsemane. But on seven +occasions St. Luke is alone in recording prayers which Jesus offered at +the crises of His life: at His baptism (iii. 21); before His first +conflict with the Pharisees and scribes (v. 16); before choosing the +Twelve (vi. 12); before the first prediction of His Passion (ix. 18); +at the Transfiguration (ix. 29); before teaching the Lord's Prayer (xi. +1); and on the Cross (xxiii. 34, 46). St. Luke mentions His insistence +on the duty of prayer in two parables which no other evangelist has +recorded (xi. 5-13; xviii. 1-8). He alone relates the declaration of +Jesus that He had made supplication for Peter, and His charge to the +Twelve, "Pray that ye enter not into temptation" (xxii. 32, 40). + +As the Gospel according to St. Luke is more rich in parables than any +other Gospel, we may conclude by giving a few words of explanation +concerning our Lord's parables. The word "parable" means a +"comparison," or, more strictly, "a placing of one thing beside another +with a view to comparing them." In the Gospels the word is generally +applied to a particular form of teaching. That is to say, it means a +story about earthly things told in such a manner as to teach a {75} +spiritual truth. The Jews were familiar with parables. There are some +in the Old Testament, the Book of Isaiah containing two (v. 1-6; +xxviii. 24-28). The rabbinical writings of the Jews are full of them. +But the Jewish parable was only an illustration of a truth which had +already been made known. The parables of our Lord are often means of +conveying truths which were not known. They must be distinguished from +(a) fables, (b) allegories, (c) myths. A fable teaches worldly wisdom +and prudence, not spiritual wisdom, and it is put into somewhat +childish forms in which foxes and birds converse together. An allegory +puts the story and its interpretation side by side, and each part of +the story usually has some special significance. A myth takes the form +of history, but it relates things which happened before the dawn of +history, as they appear to the child-mind of primitive men. + +The parables of our Lord were intended to teach the secrets of the +kingdom of God (see p. 44). They unfold these secrets and at the same +time veil them in the illustrations which are employed. These +illustrations attract the attention and inquiry of those who are +spiritually receptive. On the other hand, those who are unworthy or +hardened do not recognize the truth. Nevertheless, the parables were +such miracles of simplicity and power, were so easy to remember, and so +closely connected with everyday objects, that even the dullest man +would awake to the truth if he retained a spark of life. It is +difficult to divide the parables into separate groups. But they may +perhaps be divided into two groups. The first group is drawn from +man's relations with the world of nature and from his simpler +experiences, and the second is drawn from man's relations with his +fellow-men, relations which involve more complicated experiences. The +parables of the second group were sometimes spoken in answer to +questions addressed to our Lord in private; such is the parable of the +good Samaritan, and that of the rich fool. If we desire to study the +parables in special relation to the kingdom of God, {76} we can divide +them into three groups. The first consists of those collected in Matt. +xiii., delivered in and near Capernaum, and referring to the kingdom of +God as a whole. The second consists of those collected in Luke +x.-xviii., delivered on Christ's journeys from Galilee to Jerusalem, +and referring to the character of the individual members of the +kingdom. The third consists of parables spoken during our Lord's last +days at Jerusalem, and referring to the judgment of members of the +kingdom. + +It is difficult to decide whether some of the shorter parables ought to +be regarded as parables or not, but the number is usually estimated at +about thirty, of which eighteen are peculiar to Luke. In John there +are no parables, strictly so called, and St. John never uses the word +"parable." But he uses the word _paroimia_, or "proverb," and records +several proverbial sayings of our Lord which are rather like parables +(John iv. 34; x. i-3; xii. 24; xv. 1-6; xvi. 21). + + + +ANALYSIS + +The infancy of our Lord: i. 1-ii. 52.--Similarity and contrast between +the predictions of the birth of John the Baptist and Jesus, and also +between their birth. The circumcision, the visit of Jesus to the +temple in boyhood. + + +A. + +Winter A.D. 26 till after Pentecost 27. + +The preparation for the ministry: iii. 1-iv. 13.--The ministry of John +the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus, the genealogy from Adam, the +threefold temptation. + + +B. + +Pentecost A.D. 27 till before Passover 28. + +Missionary work of Jesus in Galilee: iv. 14-ix. 6.--Jesus preaches, is +rejected at Nazareth, goes to Capernaum, various miracles (iv.). Call +of Simon, leper cleansed, five {77} grounds of offence against Jesus +(v.-vi. 11). Appointment of the twelve, the sermon (vi.). The +centurion's servant, the widow's son, Christ's description of John and +of the age, the penitent (vii.). Parables, Christ's relation to His +mother and brethren, various miracles (viii.). The mission of the +twelve (ix. 1-6). + +[Perplexity of Herod, ix. 7-9.] + + +C. + +Passover A.D. 28 till before Tabernacles 28. + +Climax of missionary work in Galilee: ix. 10-50.--Christ feeds the +multitude, Peter's confession, Christ's first prediction of His death, +transfiguration, lunatic boy cured, second prediction of death, two +rebukes to apostles. + + +D. + +Tabernacles, September A.D. 28 until early 29. + +Later ministry, chiefly in Peraea: ix. 51-xix. 28.--Jesus rejected by +Samaritans, discouragements (ix.). Mission of the seventy, lament over +cities of Galilee, the good Samaritan, Mary and Martha (x.). Prayer +and the Lord's Prayer, Jesus accused of alliance with Beelzebub, His +saying about His mother, denunciation of a generation which will not +believe without signs, and of the Pharisees and lawyers (xi.). The +leaven of the Pharisees, confidence in God, warnings against +covetousness, anxiety and lack of watchfulness, Christ's coming +"baptism," signs of the times (xii.). The meaning of calamities, +parable of the fig tree, cure on the sabbath, the mustard seed and the +leaven, Gentiles to replace Jews, the Pharisees try to persuade Jesus +to leave the dominions of Herod, Christ's first lament over Jerusalem +(xiii.). + +Lawfulness of healing on the sabbath, humility, inviting the poor, the +King's supper, counting the cost (xiv.). Parables to {78} illustrate +Christ's care for the lost (xv.). The use and abuse of money (xvi.). +Occasions of stumbling, the increase of faith, the truth that we cannot +purchase God's favour by doing more than He commands, the ten lepers, +the coming of the Son of man (xvii.). Answer to prayer, the Pharisee +and publican, little children, the rich young man, Christ's third +prediction of His death, the blind beggar at Jericho (xviii.). +Zacchaeus, the parable of the pounds (xix. 1-28). + + +E. + +Passover A.D. 29. + +Last days at Jerusalem, and afterwards: xix. 29-xxiv. 53.--Entry into +Jerusalem, Christ's second lament over Jerusalem, cleansing of the +temple (xix. 29-xx.). Christ challenged, parable of the vineyard, two +questions to entrap Christ, His question (xx.). The widow's mites, +predictions of the destruction of the temple, siege of Jerusalem, the +second coming (xxi.). Judas' bargain, the Passover, agony on the mount +of Olives, the betrayal, Peter's denial, Jesus tried before the elders +(xxii.). Jesus before Pilate, Herod, Pilate again, Simon of Cyrene, +the daughters of Jerusalem, the crucifixion, burial by Joseph of +Arimathaea (xxiii.). + +The women at the sepulchre, and Peter, the walk to Emmaus, Jesus +appears to the disciples and eats, His commission, the Ascension +(xxiv.). + +The Date of our Lord's Birth.--It is fairly well known that the dates +of our Lord's Birth and of His Death are both, in all probability, +misrepresented in popular chronology. The best ancient chronology +fixes the date of the Crucifixion in A.D. 29. The Birth was probably +about six years before the commencement of our present era. Various +reasons make this date probable, including the fact that there was at +that time a conjunction of Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars, which must have +presented a most brilliant appearance in the sky, and would {79} +certainly have attracted the star-loving sages of the East. The great +astronomer Kepler was of opinion that this conjunction was followed by +the brief appearance of a new star, which is the star mentioned in +Matt. ii. 2. This is of importance in considering the statements of +St. Luke. Several objections have been made to his account of the +census held under Quirinius. (1) It is said that Quirinius was not +governor of Syria when Jesus was born; his administration was from A.D. +6 to A.D. 9, and Quinctilius Varus was governor in A.D. 1. But St. +Luke cannot be proved to say that Quirinius was governor; he describes +his office by a participle which may mean "acting as leader," and there +is proof that Quirinius was engaged in a military command in the time +of Herod, and also proof that some high official twice governed Syria +in the time of Augustus. St. Luke's expression might fit either of +these two facts. (2) It is said that Herod was reigning as king in +Palestine, and that his subjects would not be included in a Roman +census. But in the year 8-7 B.C. Augustus wrote to Herod, saying that +he would henceforth treat him as a subject. His dominions must +henceforth have been treated like the rest of the dominions of +Augustus. (3) It is said that no census took place at that time, and +that if there had been a census, it would have been carried out by +households, according to Roman custom, and not by families. But there +seems to have been a census in Egypt and Syria in B.C. 8, and after +Augustus determined to put Herod under his authority, the census would +naturally be extended to Judaea. Herod would probably be allowed to +carry out the census on his own lines, so long as it was really carried +out. And he would plainly prefer to do it in the Jewish fashion, so as +to irritate the Jews as little as might be. + +The question is still involved in some obscurity, but St. Luke's +accuracy has not been in the least disproved by the controversy. He is +the only evangelist who connects his narrative with the history of +Syria and of the Roman empire, and we have every reason to believe that +he did his work with care as well as sympathy. + + + +[1] _Adv. Har._ iii. 1. + +[2] Matt. v. 3 has "poor in spirit." The same Aramaic word might be +used for both "poor" and "poor in spirit." + + + + +{80} + +CHAPTER VI + +THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +We learn from the Gospels that St. John was the son of Zebedee, a +Galilean fisherman, and was a follower of the Baptist before he joined +our Lord. The Synoptists show that he was one of the most prominent +and intimate of our Lord's followers. With St. Peter and St. James he +was permitted to witness the raising of Jairus' daughter, and to be +present at the Transfiguration, and with them was nearest to Christ at +the agony in Gethsemane. With St. Peter he was sent to prepare the +last Passover. Like his brother St. James, he shared in the fervour of +his mother, Salome, who begged for them a special place of dignity in +the kingdom of Christ. They both wished to call down fire on a +Samaritan village, and St. John asked Jesus what was to be done with +the man whom they found casting out devils in His name. Their fiery +temperament caused our Lord to give them the surname of Boanerges +("sons of thunder"). In the fourth Gospel the name of John the son of +Zebedee is never mentioned, but there are several references to an +apostle whose name is not recorded, but can be intended for no other +than St. John. At the crucifixion this apostle was bidden by our Lord +to regard Mary as henceforth his mother, and the writer claims to have +been an eye-witness of the crucifixion. In the last chapter very +similar words are used to assert that the writer is he whom Jesus loved. + +In Acts St. John appears with St. Peter as healing the lame {81} man at +the Beautiful Gate of the temple, and with St. Peter he goes to Samaria +to bestow the Holy Ghost on those whom Philip had baptized. He was +revered as one of the pillars of the Church when St. Paul visited +Jerusalem in A.D. 49 (Gal. ii. 9). It is remarkable that the Synoptic +Gospels, the fourth Gospel, Acts, and Galatians, all show St. John in +close connection with St. Peter. St. John's name occurs in the +Revelation, which has been attributed to him since the beginning of the +2nd century. + +Numerous fragments of tradition concerning St. John are preserved by +early Christian writers. Tertullian, about A.D. 200, says that St. +John came to Rome, and was miraculously preserved from death when an +attempt was made to kill him in a cauldron of boiling oil. Tertullian +and Eusebius both say that he was banished to an island, and Eusebius +tells us that the island was Patmos, and that the banishment took place +in the time of Domitian. On the accession of Nerva, St. John removed +from Patmos to Ephesus, where he survived until the time of Trajan, who +became emperor in A.D. 98. Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, writing +about A.D. 190, speaks of St. John's tomb in that city, and says that +he wore the _petalon_, the high priest's mitre used in the Jewish +Church. We are told by other writers how he reclaimed a robber, how he +played with a tame partridge, how when too old to preach he was carried +into church and would repeat again and again, "Little children, love +one another." On one occasion a spark of his youthful fire was seen. +It was when the old man indignantly refused to stay under the roof of +the same public baths as Cerinthus, the heretic who denied that Mary +was a virgin when she bore our Lord, and asserted that the Divinity of +Jesus was only a power which came upon Him and went from Him. + +The residence of St. John at Ephesus is attested by the Revelation. +Even if that book were a forgery, no forger at the close of the 1st +century would have ventured to place the hero of his book in a +neighbourhood where he had not lived. {82} Many threads of evidence +lead us back to the statement made by Polycrates about the apostle's +tomb. It was not until long after that date that the Christians began +to carry the relics of saints from place to place, and churches +rivalled one another in producing shrines for the severed members of +one body. There is therefore no reason whatever to doubt that the tomb +at Ephesus marked the resting-place of the apostle. It was known two +hundred years later in the time of Jerome, and visited in 431 by the +members of the great Church Council which met at Ephesus. The Emperor +Justinian built a sumptuous church on the site, and near a modern +Turkish mosque may still be seen the remnants of the church of St. John. + +Until the end of the 18th century the authorship of this Gospel was not +seriously challenged. The only party which ever denied that it was +written by the Apostle St. John was an ignorant and insignificant body +of people mentioned by Irenaeus and Epiphanius. They were known as the +_Alogi_, or "unbelievers in the Word." Their views in no wise +undermine the tradition of the Catholic Church. For the Alogi asserted +that this Gospel was written by Cerinthus, who lived at Ephesus where +St. John lived, and was himself a contemporary of St. John. We have +sufficient knowledge of the teaching of Cerinthus to be perfectly +certain that he could not have written a Gospel which so completely +contradicts his own theories. Therefore the opinion of the Alogi is +absolutely worthless where it negatives the tradition of the Church, +and on the other hand it agrees with that tradition in asserting that +the book was written in the apostolic age. + +During the last hundred years the men who deny that Jesus Christ was +truly "God of God, Light of Light," have strained every nerve to prove +that the fourth Gospel was not written by St. John. It is, of course, +almost impossible that they should admit that the writer was an apostle +and an honest man and continue to deny that the Christ whom he depicts +claimed to be the Lord and Maker of all things. During the controversy +{83} which has been waged during the last three generations with regard +to St. John's Gospel, it has been evident throughout that the Gospel +has been rejected for this very reason. The book has driven a wedge +into the whole band of New Testament students. The critics who deny +that Jesus was God, but are willing to grant that He was the most holy +and the most divine of men, have been forced to side with those who are +openly Atheists or Agnostics. The clue to their theories was +unguardedly exposed by Weizsäcker, who said, with regard to St. John's +Gospel, "It is impossible to imagine any power of faith and philosophy +so great as thus to obliterate the recollection of the real life, and +to substitute for it this marvellous picture of a Divine Being." [1] +This remark shows us that the critic approached the Gospel with a +prejudice against the doctrine of our Lord's Divinity, and rejected the +Gospel mainly because it would not agree with his own prejudice. But +the determination to fight to the uttermost against the converging +lines of Christian evidence has now driven such critics into a corner. +Many have already abandoned the position that the book is a +semi-Gnostic forgery written in the middle of the 2nd century, and they +are now endeavouring to maintain that it was written about A.D. 100 by +a certain John the Presbyter, whom they assert to have been afterwards +confounded with the Apostle John. + +Of John the Presbyter very little indeed is known. Papias, about A.D. +130, says that he was, like Aristion, "a disciple" of the Lord, and +that he had himself made oral inquiries as to his teaching. He seems +to have been an elder contemporary of Papias. Dionysius of Alexandria, +about A.D. 250, mentions that there were two monuments in Ephesus +bearing the name of John, and we may reasonably suppose that one of +these was in memory of the presbyter mentioned by Papias. But a little +reflection will soon convince us that nothing has been gained by the +conjecture that this John wrote the Gospel. If John {84} the Presbyter +was personally acquainted with our Lord, as some writers understand +Papias to mean, then the sceptics are forced to admit that one who +personally knew Jesus, describes Jesus as a more than human Being--as, +in fact, the Divine Creator. This is the precise fact which keeps +these writers from admitting that an apostle wrote the Gospel. If, on +the other hand, they suppose, as some do, that John the Presbyter was +very much younger than the apostles, the sceptics are confronted with +the following difficulties:-- + +(a) There is the important external evidence which shows how widely the +Gospel was regarded in the early Church as the work of St. John. + +(b) There is the minute knowledge displayed of the topography, customs, +and opinions of Jerusalem and the Holy Land as they existed in the time +of Christ. + +(c) There is the impossibility of supposing that Irenaeus, who was +probably not born a year later than A.D. 130, would not have known that +the Gospel was written by John the Presbyter. + +(d) There is the fact that the evidence for St. John having lived in +Ephesus is better than the evidence for a renowned presbyter of the +same name having lived in Ephesus. This has been wisely pointed out by +Jülicher, even though he himself denies that the apostle wrote St. +John's Gospel. And the justice of this argument proves that it is +sheer paradox to maintain, as some now maintain, that the _only_ John +who lived in Ephesus was the Presbyter. + +It is constantly urged by the opponents of the authenticity of this +Gospel that, as it was published at Ephesus at a late period, it cannot +be the work of the apostle, because he never went to Ephesus, and "died +early as a martyr." [2] This is a most unscrupulous use of an inexact +quotation made by some later Greek writers from a lost book of Papias. +It can be {85} traced to Philip of Side (5th century), and it is to the +effect that "John the Divine and James his brother were killed by the +Jews." Papias does not say that they died together, and his statement +is compatible with the belief that St. John survived his brother very +many years. We know from Gal. ii. 9 that he was alive some time after +his brother's death, which was about A.D. 44. And George Hamartolus, +one of the Greek writers who quote the above passage in Papias, +expressly says that the Emperor Nerva (A.D. 96) recalled John from +Patmos, and "dismissed him to live in Ephesus." + +[Sidenote: The External Evidence.] + +The external evidence for the authenticity of this Gospel is in some +respects stronger than that which is to be found in the case of the +other Gospels. Thus the Christian may recognize with gratitude that +his Divine Master has especially added the witness of the Church to the +work of His beloved disciple. All through the 2nd century we have the +links of a chain of evidence, and after A.D. 200 the canon of the +Gospels is known to have been so fixed that no defender of the faith is +called upon to show what that canon was. The earliest traces of the +phraseology of St. John are to be discovered in the _Didaché_, which +was probably written in Eastern Palestine or Syria about A.D. 100. The +prayers which are provided in this book for use at the Eucharist are +plainly of a Johannine type, and are probably derived from oral +teaching given by the apostle himself before he lived at Ephesus. In +any case, the _Didaché_ seems sufficient to disprove the sceptical +assertion that theological language of a Johannine character was +unknown in the Christian Church about A.D. 100. The letters attributed +to St. Ignatius, the martyr bishop of Antioch, are now universally +admitted to be genuine by competent scholars. They may most reasonably +be dated about A.D. 110, and they are deeply imbued with thought of a +Johannine type. It has been lately suggested that this tendency of +thought does not prove an actual acquaintance with the Gospel of St. +John. But when we find Christ {86} called "the Word," and the devil +called "the prince of this world," and read such a phrase as "the bread +of God which is the flesh of Christ," it is almost impossible to deny +that the letters of Ignatius contain actual reminiscences of St. John's +language. Nor is there the least reason why Ignatius should not have +been acquainted with this Gospel. His younger contemporary St. +Polycarp, whose letter to the Philippians was also written about A.D. +110, quotes from the First Epistle of St. John. And Papias, who +probably wrote about A.D. 130, and collected his materials many years +earlier, also quoted that Epistle, as we learn from Eusebius. Now, the +connection between the Gospel and the Epistle is, as has been cleverly +remarked, like the connection between a star and its satellite. They +are obviously the work of the same author. If Polycarp, who had +himself seen St. John, knew that the Epistle was genuine, he must have +known that the Gospel was genuine. + +The evidence which can definitely be dated between A.D. 120 and A.D. +170 is of extreme interest. It proves conclusively that a belief in +the authenticity of this Gospel was so firmly engrained in the +Christian mind that men holding the most opposite opinions appealed to +its authority. It is true that the "irrational" Alogi rejected it, and +that Marcion repudiated it, not because it was not by an apostle, but +because St. Paul was the only apostle whom he admired. But it was used +by the Catholics, the Gnostics, and the Montanists. St. Justin Martyr +was acquainted with it, and before he wrote, Basilides, the great +Gnostic of Alexandria, borrowed from it some materials for his +doctrine. The equally celebrated Gnostic Valentinus used it, and his +followers also revered it. About A.D. 170 Heracleon, an eminent +Valentinian, wrote a commentary upon this Gospel, of which commentary +some fragments still remain. The Montanists arose in Phrygia about +A.D. 157. Montanus, their founder, endeavoured to revive the power of +prophecy, and his followers maintained that "the Paraclete said more +things in Montanus than Christ {87} uttered in the Gospel." It can +easily be proved that their teaching was an attempt to realize some of +the promises of our Lord contained in St. John's Gospel. And the fact +that the Montanists were strongly opposed to the Gnostics makes it all +the more remarkable that both sects regarded this Gospel as so +important. Somewhat before A.D. 170 St. John's Gospel was inserted by +the great Syrian apologist, Tatian, in his _Diatessaron_, or harmony of +the Gospels, and the apocryphal Acts of John composed near the same +date contain unmistakable allusions to this Gospel. + +The evidence of Irenaeus is the culminating proof of the genuineness of +the Gospel according to St. John. He became Bishop of Lyons in A.D. +177, and remembered Polycarp, who suffered martyrdom at Smyrna in A.D. +156, at the age of eighty-six. Irenaeus, in writing to his friend +Florinus, says, "I can describe the very place in which the blessed +Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed, and his goings-out and his +comings-in, and his manner of life, and his personal appearance, and +the discourses which he held before the people, and how he would +describe his intercourse with John and the rest who had seen the Lord, +and how he would relate their words. And whatsoever things he had +heard from them about the Lord and about His miracles, Polycarp, as +having received them from eye-witnesses of the life of the Word, would +relate, altogether in accordance with the Scriptures." [3] + +Now, it is perfectly certain that Irenaeus, like his contemporaries +Heracleon and Tatian, accepted the fourth Gospel as the work of the +Apostle John. And can we believe that he would have thus accepted it, +if it had not been acknowledged by his teacher Polycarp, who knew St. +John, and was nearly thirty years old at the time of St. John's death? + +{88} + +[Sidenote: The Internal Evidence.] + +The Gospel itself contains manifest tokens that it was written by a Jew +of Palestine, by one who held no Gnostic heresy, and by a contemporary +of our Lord. + +I. _The author was a Jew and not a Gentile._ + +He makes frequent quotations from the Old Testament, and some of these +quotations imply an acquaintance with the Hebrew. This is especially +the case in the verse from the 41st Psalm (xiii. 18), and in that (xix. +37) from Zech. xii. 10, "They shall look on Him whom they pierced." +The Septuagint of Zech. xii. 10, translating from a different form of +the Hebrew, has, instead of the words "whom they pierced," "because +they mocked." It is, therefore, plain that John xiii. 18 is not +derived from the Septuagint. The Gospel is also Hebraic in style. The +sentences are broken up in a manner which is at variance with Greek +idiom. Whereas in St. Luke's two writings the style becomes more Greek +or more Hebraic in proportion to his writing independently or employing +the writings of Jewish Christians, the style of this Gospel is the same +throughout. We may particularly notice the Hebraic use of the word +"and" to signify both "and" and "but" (_e.g._ in v. 39, 40, where "and +ye will not come" means "but ye will not come"). We may also notice +the correct use of certain Hebrew proper names: _e.g._ Judas is called +"the son of Iscariot," showing that the writer did not regard the word +Iscariot as the fixed name of Judas only, but knew that it might be +applied to any man of Kerioth. In fact, the Greek of St. John is +exactly like the English of a Scottish Highlander who has only spoken +Gaelic in his earlier days, and, when he has acquired English, shows +his origin by the continued use of a few Gaelic idioms and his +knowledge of Highland proper names. + +He shows a minute acquaintance with Jewish social and ceremonial +customs. We may notice iii. 25; iv. 9, 27; vii. 2, 23, 37; x. 22; xi. +44; xix. 7, 31; and especially the waterpots (ii. 6), the purification +previous to the Passover (xi. 55), the fear {89} of our Lord's accusers +to defile themselves by entering the praetorium (xviii. 28), and the +Jewish method of embalming (xix. 40). Jewish opinions are faithfully +reflected, _e.g._ as to the importance attached to the religious +schools (vii. 15); the disparagement of the Jews of the "dispersion" +(vii. 35); the scorn felt by many Jews for the provincials of Galilee +(i. 46; vii. 41, 52), and the idea of the soul's pre-existence (ix. 2). + + +II. _The author was a Jew of Palestine._ + +He shows a minute acquaintance with the geography of the Holy Land. At +the present day elaborate guide-books and histories make it possible +for a very clever writer to disguise the fact that he has not visited +the land in which he lays the scene of his story. But even at the +present day such procedure is dangerous, and likely to be detected. In +ancient times it was almost impossible. Yet no one has ever detected +an error in the geography of this Gospel. The writer mentions Cana of +Galilee (ii. 1, 11), a place not noticed by any earlier writer, and +Bethany beyond Jordan (i. 28); he knows the exact distance from +Jerusalem to the better-known Bethany (xi. 18); the "deep" well of +Jacob at Sychar (iv. 11); the city of Ephraim near the wilderness (xi. +54); Aenon near to Salim, where John baptized (iii. 23). This word +Aenon is an Aramaic word signifying "springs," and even Renan ridicules +the notion of such a name having been invented by Greek-speaking +sectaries at Ephesus. The place was too obscure to be known to +ordinary travellers, and, on the other hand, such a name cannot have +been invented by a Gentile. + +The topography of Jerusalem is described with equal nicety. We may +notice viii. 20; ix. 7; x. 23; xviii. 1, 15; xix. 17, 41; and +particularly the pool near the sheep-gate, having five porches (v. 2), +and the place which is called the Pavement, "but in the Hebrew +Gabbatha" (xix. 13). Even a person who had heard of Solomon's porch +and of Golgotha might well have been ignorant of the sheep-gate and the +Pavement, unless he had been in Jerusalem. + +Lastly, the writer shows an acquaintance not only with the {90} Jewish +feasts, but also with facts connected with them which imply special +knowledge on his part. He could not have gathered from the Old +Testament the fact that the later Jews were in the habit of keeping a +feast in honour of the dedication of the temple after its profanation +by Antiochus Epiphanes (x. 22), nor would he have learned how to +introduce an allusion to the rite of pouring forth water from the pool +at Siloam at the Feast of Tabernacles (vii. 37). + +The only important argument which can be urged against the author +having been a Jew is that founded on the use of the phrase "the Jews," +which is said to imply that the writer was not a Jew. Now, in some +passages (as vii. 1), "the Jews" may mean the inhabitants of Judaea, as +distinct from those of Galilee, and such passages are therefore +indecisive. But in other passages the phrase "the Jews" does not admit +this interpretation, and is used with a decided suggestion of dislike. +But when we remember the bitter hostility which the Jews soon +manifested towards the Christians, and remember that in Asia Minor this +hostility was active, the phrase presents no real difficulty. St. Paul +was proud to reckon himself a Jew, but long before the Jews had shown +their full antagonism to Christianity, St. Paul spoke of "the Jews" (1 +Thess. ii. 14-16) with the same condemnation as the writer of the +fourth Gospel. + + +The only important arguments in favour of the author having absorbed +Gnostic views are drawn: (1) _From the alleged Dualism of the Gospel_. +In theology the word Dualism signifies the doctrine that the world is +not only the battle-ground of two opposing forces, one good and the +other evil, but also that the material world is itself essentially +evil. Such was the doctrine of the great Gnostic sects of the 2nd +century. But this Gospel, in spite of the strong contrast which it +draws between God and the world, light and darkness, is not Dualist. +It teaches that there is one God, that the world was made by the Word +who is God, that this Word was made flesh and came to save the world. +In thus teaching that the material world was made by the good God, and +that God took a material human body, this Gospel opposes the +fundamental tenet of Gnostic Dualism. (2) _From the alleged +condemnation of the Jewish prophets by Christ in x. 8_. Other passages +make it perfectly plain that this is not a condemnation of the Jewish +prophets, but of any religious pretenders who claimed divine authority. +In this Gospel an appeal is made to Moses (v. 46), to Abraham (viii. +56), to Isaiah {91} (xii. 41), and, what is most remarkable of all, our +Lord says, "Salvation is of the Jews," _i.e._ the knowledge and the +origin of religious truth came from the Jews. The Jewish Scriptures +are ratified (v. 39; x. 35). It is impossible to find a shred of the +anti-Jewish theories which the Gnostics taught. And though it is true +that some Gnostics were fond of using such words as "life" and "light" +in their religious phraseology, it is much more probable that they were +influenced by the fourth Gospel than that this Gospel was tinged with +Gnosticism. + + +We conclude, therefore, that the author was a Jew of Palestine, and +that he was not a Gentile or in any sense a Gnostic. + +III. _The author was a contemporary and an eye-witness of the events +described._ + +His knowledge of Jerusalem and of the temple, which we have already +noticed, strongly suggests that he knew the city before its destruction +in A.D. 70. So far as can be tested, his treatment of the Messianic +ideas of the people is exactly accurate, and of a kind which it would +have been difficult for a later writer to exhibit. This Gospel +represents the people as pervaded by a nationalist notion of the +Messiah as of a king who would deliver them from foreign powers (vi. +15, xi. 48; xix. 12), a notion which was dispelled in A.D. 70, and +apparently did not revive until the rising of Bar Kocheba in A.D. 135, +a date which is now almost universally recognized as too late for this +Gospel to have been written. We also find the two contradictory ideas +as to the place of the Messiah's origin then current (vii. 27, 42), and +the writer distinguishes "the prophet" (i. 21, 25; vi. 14; vii. 40), +who was expected to precede Christ, from Christ Himself. At a very +early date the Christians identified "the prophet" with Christ, and it +is in the highest degree improbable that any but a contemporary of our +Lord would have been aware of this change of belief. + +It is claimed that the author is an eye-witness in i. 14; xix. 35; and +xxi. 24. We may add 1 John i. 1, for the author of the Epistle was +obviously the author of the Gospel. Numerous details, especially the +frequent notes of time, suggest the hand {92} of an eye-witness. And +the delicate descriptions of the inner life of the disciples and of +Christ Himself point to the same conclusion. The description of the +Last Supper and the words spoken at it suggest with overwhelming force +that the writer knew the peculiar manner of seating employed at this +ceremony. Another Jew would have known where the celebrant sat, but he +would scarcely have been able to make the actions of our Lord and +Judas, St. John and St. Peter, fit their places at the table with such +perfection.[4] + +The Gospel claims that the disciple who "wrote these things" is the +disciple "whom Jesus loved," and who reclined "in Jesus' bosom" at the +Supper. It was not Peter, for Peter did not recline "in Jesus' bosom." +The presumption therefore is that it was either James or John, these +two being with Peter the closest friends of Jesus. It could hardly +have been James, who was martyred in A.D. 44, as the whole weight of +tradition and external evidence is against this. It must, then, have +been John, or a forger who wished to pass for that apostle. And to +suppose that an unknown forger, born two generations, or even one +generation, later than the apostles, could invent such sublime +doctrine, and insert it in so realistic a story, and completely deceive +the whole Christian world, including the district where St. John lived +and died, is to show a credulity which is without parallel in the +history of civilization.[5] + +Now that we have reviewed the internal evidence for the authenticity, +we are able to return with renewed vigour to deal with the popular +rationalistic hypothesis that the author was a Christian who had +learned some genuine stories about Jesus current in the Church at +Ephesus, and then wove them into a narrative of his own composing. We +have observed that the marks of an eye-witness and contemporary of +Jesus are {93} scattered over the whole surface of the Gospel. If the +Gospel is not by St. John, only one other explanation is possible. It +must be composed of three distinct elements: (a) some genuine +traditions, (b) numerous fictions, (c) a conscious manipulation of the +narrative contained in the Synoptists. But the internal evidence is +absolutely opposed to any such theory. We can trace no manipulation of +the Synoptic narrative. The writer seems to be aware of St. Mark's +Gospel, and possibly the other two, but he evidently did not write with +them actually before him. He plainly had a wholly independent plan and +an independent source of information. And if we turn to the passages +which tell us facts not recorded by the Synoptists, it is quite +impossible to separate the supposed fictions from the supposed genuine +traditions. Both style and matter proceed from one and the same +individuality. One passage alone can be separated from the rest +without interrupting the flow of the story, and that passage is absent +in the best manuscripts. It is the story of the woman taken in +adultery (vii. 53-viii. 11). It seems to have been originally placed +after Luke xxi. 36, and was inserted into St. John's Gospel after it +was completed. We cannot apply the same process to any other passage +in the Gospel. It is an organic whole, as much as any play of +Shakespeare or poem of Tennyson. And over the whole book we find the +same morsels of history and geography. They are of a kind which +tradition never hands down unimpaired, and which no Ephesian disciple +of an apostle would be likely to commit to memory. In spite of all +attempts to divide the Gospel into parts derived straight from an +apostle and parts invented by later minds, the Gospel remains like the +seamless coat which once clothed the form of the Son of man. + +[Sidenote: Date.] + +It is important to observe that even the most hostile criticism has +tended to recede in its attempt to find a probable date for this +Gospel. Baur fixed it about A.D. 160-170, Pfleiderer at 140, +Hilgenfeld 130-140; Jülicher and Harnack will not date it later than +110, {94} and the latter grants that it may be as early as 80. The +year 80 is as early a date as the most orthodox Christian need desire, +and we can reasonably believe that it was written by the apostle at +Ephesus between A.D. 80 and A.D. 90. We learn from Irenaeus that St. +John survived until A.D. 98. + +[Sidenote: Literary Style.] + +Several points in the literary style of the apostle have been noticed +in dealing with the internal evidence which they afford to the +authenticity of his Gospel. But it is necessary to add something more, +for there is no writer to whom we can more fitly apply the profound +saying that "the style is the man." The language of St. John is the +result of a long and impassioned contemplation. Whether he writes down +his own words, or records the words and deeds of our Lord, his language +shows the result of careful reflection. + +The teaching of Jesus exhibits a development different from that in the +Synoptists. We find in chs. ii., iii., and iv. that our Lord +definitely taught that He was the Son of God and Messiah quite early in +His ministry, while in the earlier part of Mark our Lord's teaching +about His Messiahship is far less definite. And the method of teaching +is also different. In the Synoptists we find picturesque parables and +pointed proverbs, while in John we find long discourses and arguments. +In the Synoptists the teaching is generally practical, in John it is +much more openly theological. This difference between the Synoptists +and St. John can be partly accounted for by the fact that St. John's +Gospel contains much more of the instruction given by our Lord to His +intimate friends, and that this instruction was naturally more profound +than that which was given to the multitude. But there is another +reason for the difference. If we attend to such passages as xiv. +15-21, 25-26; xv. 26-27, we see that our Lord teaches that there are +two manifestations of His Person, one during the time between His birth +and His death, and the other after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. +The Spirit is not a substitute {95} for an absent Christ; His coming +brings with it an inward presence of Christ within the Christian soul +(xiv. 18). By the aid of the Spirit, St. John condenses and interprets +the language of our Lord in a manner which can be understood by the +simplest of simple souls who live the inner life. In St. John we find +a writer who is writing when Jesus spoke no longer in parables and +proverbs, but "plainly" (xvi. 25, 29). He records the teaching of +Jesus, as it had shaped itself _in_ his own mind, but not so much _by_ +his own mind as by perpetual communion with the ascended Christ. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +We have noted on p. 31 the fact that St. John's Gospel shows that he +was acquainted with facts in the Synoptic Gospels which he does not +himself narrate. Yet the broad difference between the character of the +Synoptic writers and that of St. John is that the Synoptists are +historical, he is mystical. We do not mean that St. John does not +trouble about historical accuracy. His history is often more minute +than that of the Synoptists. But his purpose is to bring his readers +into deeper life through union with the God who is in Christ and is +Christ. The true mystic ever desires to maintain the knowledge of this +inward union in life with God. It is a knowledge which is made +possible by obedience, made perfect by love, and causes not new +ecstasies, but a new character. St. John adjusts all his material to +this one purpose. "These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is +the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in His +name" (xx. 31). + +The Introduction or Prologue (i. 1-18) teaches that Jesus Christ is +that personal manifestation of God to whom the Jews had given the name +of the Word. The Palestinian Jews were accustomed to describe God +acting upon the world by the name _Memra_, or "Word" of the Lord. The +Alexandrian Jews also were in the habit of giving the title _Logos_, +which means both "Word" and "Reason," to an idea of God which perfectly +expressed all that God is. The Greek Stoics had {96} used the name in +a similar sense, and thus St. John, having realized that Jesus is truly +God made manifest, called Him by a name which every educated Jew and +Greek would understand. Unlike Philo, the great Alexandrian Jew who +tried to combine Greek philosophy with Jewish religion, St. John +teaches that this divine Word is a Person, and took human flesh and +revealed Himself as the Messiah. The whole Gospel shows how this +revelation met with increasing faith on the part of some, and +increasing unbelief and hatred on the part of others. The crises of +this unbelief are represented chiefly in connection with our Lord's +visits to Jerusalem, when He made His claims before the religious +leaders of Judaism. His revelation is attended by various forms of +_witness_. There is that of the apostle himself (i. 14); that of the +other apostles who also witnessed His "glory," as displayed by His +miracles (ii. 11). There is that of John the Baptist (i. 34); and when +we remember that there had existed at Ephesus an incomplete +Christianity which had only known the baptism given by John the Baptist +(Acts xix. 3), we see how fit it was that the apostle should record the +Baptist's testimony to Christ's superiority. There is the witness of +His works, and that which the Father Himself bore (v. 34-36). We +should notice that the miracles are called "signs," and are carefully +selected so as to give evidence to the reader concerning particular +aspects of our Lord's glory.[6] Even the Passion is described as +containing an element of glory (xii. 28, 32), it contains a secret +divine triumph (cf. Col. ii. 15), and is a stage towards the glory of +the Ascension. The "darkness" contends with the {97} divine "light," +but cannot "suppress" it. After the "world" has done its worst, the +final victory of faith is seen in the confession of St. Thomas, "My +Lord and my God" (xx. 28). + +We find other points of doctrine corresponding with the mystical +teaching that "eternal life" does not begin after the last judgment, +but may be enjoyed here and now by knowing "God and Jesus Christ whom +He hath sent" (xvii. 3). Thus the judgment is shown to be executed in +one sense by the mere division which takes place among men when they +come in contact with Christ, according as they are good or bad (v. 30; +viii. 16; ix. 39). The principle of this moral testing is made plain +in iii. 19. Those who stand the test, and believe in Christ, undergo a +resurrection here (xi. 26). On the other hand, there is also a future +judgment (v. 22, 29) and a future consummation (v. 28, 29; vi. 39 f., +xiv. 3). + +Similar beautiful paradoxes are found in the teaching that the "work" +which God requires of us is to believe in His Son (vi. 28, 29); and +that to fulfil God's will is the mark not of servants but of friends +(xv. 14). And those who hope that they are numbered among the friends +of Jesus will find in this Gospel all the deepest experiences of the +soul--the new birth, the finding of the living water and the true +light, and that abiding in Christ which is made complete by the eating +of His flesh and the drinking of His blood. + +To realize the meaning of Jesus it is necessary to follow the guidance +of the Holy Spirit. The Synoptists tell us comparatively little of His +work, though they show us the Spirit descending on Christ at His +baptism, driving Him into the wilderness to be tempted, speaking in His +disciples, pervading His work (Luke iv. 18), and possessed of a +personality into which the Christian is baptized (Matt. xxviii. 19), +and against which blasphemy is unpardonable (Luke xii. 10). In John we +find a much fuller doctrine of the Holy Spirit. The fact that He is +not a mere impersonal influence of God is very clearly shown. And it +is impossible to accept the modern rationalistic {98} hypothesis that +the Holy Spirit is only a phrase for describing the idea which the +apostles had about the invisible presence of Christ. He is called +"another Advocate" (xiv. 16). Christ was an Advocate or Helper; the +Spirit will be another. Again, it is the work of the Spirit to refresh +the memory and strengthen the apprehension of the disciples concerning +Christ (xiv. 26); and our Lord definitely says, "If I go, I will send +Him unto you" (xvi. 7). With regard to the unbelieving world, the +Spirit will prove the sinfulness of opposition to Christ, will convince +the world of His righteousness as testified by the Father's approval +manifested in the Ascension, and will procure the verdict of history +that by the crucifixion the evil spirit who inspires worldliness was +condemned (xvi. 8-11). The Spirit's work is the same in kind as the +work of Christ, but the two Persons are distinct. That Christ +continues His advent and His work in the world through the Spirit +implies neither that the Spirit is an impersonal influence nor that He +is personally identical with Christ. + +This Gospel gives us invaluable help in determining the chronology of +our Lord's ministry. His ministry is connected with six Jewish feasts +(ii. 13; v. 1; vi. 4; vii. 2; x. 22; xii. 1). All are named except +that in v. 1, which is probably Pentecost, A.D. 27. The forty-six +years in ii. 20 are correct. Herod began to rebuild the temple in +20-19 B.C. Therefore the Passover in ii. 13 cannot be before A.D. 27. + + +ANALYSIS + +Introduction: i. 1--i. 18.--The Word ever with God and Himself God, +manifested in creation, in conscience, in the incarnation. + + +A. + +Winter A.D. 26 till after Passover 27. + +The preparation and beginning of the ministry: i. 19-iv. 54.--The +testimony of John the Baptist to Jesus {99} and his baptism of Jesus, +his disciples come to Jesus, the gathering of other disciples, the +promise of seeing heaven opened (i.). Jesus and Mary at the marriage +at Cana, the disciples believe. Jesus at Capernaum. At the Passover +Jesus goes to Jerusalem and cleanses the temple (ii). At Jerusalem +Jesus teaches Nicodemus of the new birth, He labours in Judaea while +John is at Aenon (iii.). The woman of Samaria converted; Jesus returns +and is welcomed in Galilee, is again at Cana, cures the Capernaum +nobleman's son (iv.). + + +B. + +Pentecost A.D. 27 till before Passover 28. + +The increased self-revelation of Jesus at Jerusalem: v.--Jesus cures +the infirm man at the pool of Bethesda, is accused of sabbath-breaking. +He co-ordinates His work and His honour with the work and honour of the +Father, claims to give life now and execute judgment, claims the +testimony of John, of His own miracles, of the Scriptures. + + +C. + +Passover A.D. 28 till before Tabernacles 28. + +Full self-revelation of Jesus in Galilee: vi.--Christ sustains physical +life by feeding the 5000, the people wish to make Him King. He again +shows power over nature by walking on the sea. He reveals Himself as +the Bread sustaining all spiritual life, commands the eating of His +flesh and drinking of His blood. The effect of this teaching is +increased enmity, the desertion by nominal disciples, and intensified +faith as shown by Peter's confession. + + +D. + +Tabernacles, September A.D. 28 till early 29. + +Further self-revelation at Jerusalem: conflict: journey to Peraea; vii. +1-xi. 57.--Jesus at the feast, {100} is accused of having a devil, +defends His former action on the sabbath, attempt to seize Him, His +invitation to all who thirst, the people divided, the officers refuse +to arrest Him (vii.). [Interpolated story of the woman taken in +adultery, vii. 53-viii. 11.] + +Jesus reveals Himself as the Light of the world, the Jews no longer +Abraham's children, the Jews reject His claim to pre-existence, and +attempt to stone Him (viii.). Jesus gives sight to the blind man at +Siloam, discussion about healing on the sabbath (ix.). Jesus the good +Shepherd, at the feast of the Dedication in December the Jews try to +stone Him and He goes east of Jordan (x.). + +Jesus as Conqueror of death goes to Bethany, raises Lazarus and +proclaims Himself as the Resurrection and the Life. On the advice of +Caiaphas, the Council propose to put Jesus to death. After raising +Lazarus Jesus retires to Ephraim, a city on the edge of the wilderness +to the north-east of Jerusalem (xi.). + + +E. + +Passover A.D. 29. + +Last public ministry at Jerusalem: xii.--Mary anoints Jesus for burial, +the entry into Jerusalem, the Greeks who desire to see Jesus, a voice +from heaven promises to glorify Him. Rejecting or receiving Christ. + +Full self-revelation of Jesus to His apostles: xiii.-xvii.--At the +Passover He washes the disciples' feet. Judas pointed out and departs. +The question of Peter (xiii. 37), of Thomas (xiv. 5), of Philip (xiv. +8), of Judas (xiv. 22). The work of the Advocate who is to come (xiv. +26). Abiding in Christ, the new commandment to love one another, the +hatred of the world, future testimony of the Spirit of truth (xv.). +The Spirit will convict the world, guide the disciples. Sorrow only +for a little while, final assurances, warm expression of faith on the +part of the apostles, Christ's warning (xvi.). + +Christ's intercession (xvii.). + +{101} + +The death of Jesus, the apparent triumph of unbelief: +xviii.-xix.--Betrayal in the garden, trial before Annas and Caiaphas, +Peter's denial, trial before Pilate, Jesus or Barabbas (xviii.). + +The scourging, Pilate's futile endeavour to release Jesus, his +political fears, the crucifixion, "behold thy mother," the +spear-thrust, the writer's personal testimony, the burial by Joseph of +Arimathaea (xix.). + +The resurrection, the victory over unbelief: xx.--Mary Magdalene, Peter +and the writer at the sepulchre, the writer records his own conviction. +Jesus manifests Himself to the Magdalene, to the ten disciples, most of +whom had deserted Him, and to Thomas who doubted. Thomas is convinced +of the Divinity of Jesus, the writer states that this Gospel was +written "that ye might believe." + +Epilogue: xxi.--The manifestation of Jesus by the sea of Galilee, the +solemn charge to Peter. The editors of the Gospel assert that the +author was the beloved disciple. + + +(John xxi. 24 was probably written by the Ephesian presbyters who knew +St. John. The rest of the chapter is evidently by the apostle himself, +although, it may have been added at a time later than the rest of the +Gospel, which seems to come to an end with the impressive words in xx. +31. The most contradictory hypotheses have been broached by writers +who have denied the authenticity of ch. xxi. Some have held that it +was added in order to exalt St. John, the apostle of Asia Minor, over +St. Peter, the patron of Rome. Others have held that it was added to +exalt St. Peter. Those who deny the authenticity of the whole Gospel +are compelled to regard ch. xxi. 24 as deliberate false witness.) + + +_St. John's Oral Teaching._--It seems that before St. John wrote his +Gospel, he had adapted it to oral teaching. This is shown by the +arrangement of facts in combinations of 3, possibly suggested by the 3 +manifestations of the Word recorded in the Introduction. There are 3 +Passovers recorded, 3 feasts besides the Passovers, 3 journeys to +Judaea, 3 discourses on the last day of Tabernacles before the address +to believing Jews (viii. 31), 3 sayings from the Cross. If we regard +ch. xxi. as added later by St. John, we find in the rest of the Gospel +3 miracles in Judaea, 3 in Galilee, and 3 appearances of the risen Lord. + + + +[1] _Apostolic Age of the Church_, vol. ii. p. 211. (English +translation.) + +[2] Dr. James Moffat, _Introduction to the Literature of the New +Testament_, p. 601. + +[3] Eusebius, _H. E._ v. 20. It is worth noting that Dr. Moffat, _op. +cit._ p. 609, admits that "if Irenaeus is correct, his testimony to +John the Apostle is of first-rate importance." So he adds, "he must be +held to have mistaken what Polykarp said, and to have confused John the +Presbyter with John the Apostle." + +[4] See Edersheim, _Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah_, vol. ii. p. +494. + +[5] The difficulties which arise from the difference between the +history of our Lord's ministry as given by St. John, and by the +Synoptists, have been discussed on p. 27, ff. + +[6] He changes the good into better (ii. 9); saves the dying (iv. 50); +gives power (v. 8); gives food (vi. 11); gives sight (ix. 7); is Lord +over death (xi. 44); blesses the work done in faith (xxi. 11). It +should be noticed that St. John never mentions that our Lord cured any +one possessed with a devil, which according to the Synoptists was a +common kind of miracle. But St. John does not therefore contradict the +other evangelists. He recognizes that there are visible works of the +devil (viii. 41; cf. 1 John iii. 8), and mentions "the prince of this +world" as causing the trials of our Lord. + + + + +{102} + +CHAPTER VII + +THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The Christian Church has never attributed the Book of Acts to any other +writer than St. Luke. The external proofs of the primitive date of the +book are important, and point to the apostolic age as the date of its +composition. St. Clement of Rome, about A.D. 95, in referring to Ps. +lxxxviii. 20, quotes it in words which are almost certainly based on +Acts xiii. 22. There are two apparent quotations from Acts in the +letters of St. Ignatius and one in the letter of St. Polycarp. It is +also quoted in the works of Justin Martyr, Tatian, and Athenagoras, and +in the letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons written in A.D. 177. +It was evidently read throughout the 2nd century, and it is definitely +assigned to St. Luke by Irenaeus, the _Muratorian Fragment_, +Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria. + +In opposition to this tradition, a persistent effort has been made to +prove that the book belongs to the early part of the and century. +There are certain passages in which the writer uses the _first person +plural_, implying that he was personally present on the occasions +described. The sections of the book in which that peculiarity is found +are ordinarily called the "we sections," and it has been asserted that +though the "we sections" are primitive they have been worked into the +narrative of a later writer.[1] Furthermore it is asserted that {103} +the book was deliberately intended to be a fictitious account of the +primitive Church, and that its special purpose was to balance the story +of St. Peter with that of St. Paul in such a manner as to completely +disguise the fundamental antagonism of the two apostles. + +The force of this argument has been weakened by the general admission +of non-Christian writers that the differences of opinion between the +two apostles were grossly exaggerated by the critics of fifty years +ago. It is therefore granted that there was less necessity for the +forgery than there was said to be by the critics in question. It is +also very obvious that we cannot fairly charge a historian with +dishonesty because he wishes to balance one great character with +another. No one would assert that a modern writer was a partisan or a +liar because he devoted in the same book twenty appreciative pages to +the Evangelical Revival and twenty appreciative pages to the Oxford +Movement. In spite of this fact, the trustworthy character of the book +is still vigorously assailed. It is said that no statement in the book +deserves ready belief except the "we sections," that those sections +were written by an unknown companion of St. Paul, and impudently +"appropriated" by a Christian who wrote between A.D. 105 and A.D. 130. + +This argument about the "we sections" can be completely overthrown by a +consideration of the _linguistic evidence_ of Acts. If language +implies anything, the peculiarities of Acts imply that the author of +the "we sections," who was a companion of St. Paul, was the author of +the whole book. And they also show that the author of the whole book +was the person who wrote the third Gospel. There are many words and +phrases found only in the "we sections" and in the rest of Acts. There +is, too, a large number of words and phrases in the "we sections" which +are rarely used in those books of the New Testament which are _not_ +attributed to St. Luke, and occur frequently in the rest of Acts and in +St. Luke's Gospel. If {104} we compare Acts with St. Luke's Gospel, we +find that Acts contains 108 out of 140 which are characteristic of this +Gospel, whereas it contains only about a half of those which are +characteristic of Matt. and Mark. There are 58 Greek words which are +found in both Acts and Luke and nowhere else in the New Testament.[2] +Among the terms which serve as connecting links between St. Luke's +Gospel and Acts, including the "we sections," occur various medical +phrases. It is becoming more and more widely recognized that these +phrases imply that the writer was a physician, such as we know St. Luke +to have been (Col. iv. 14). It is all the more remarkable that many of +the words peculiar to Acts are found in St. Luke's contemporary, the +physician Dioscorides. + +It is true that the sections taken from Mark show numerous "Lucan" +characteristics as they appear in our third Gospel, but these +characteristics are due to the third evangelist, and not to St. Mark. +So, it can be urged, the "Lucan" characteristics in the "we sections" +are due not to the author, but to an expert editor of a later time. In +reply, we can answer that the cases are not strictly parallel. For if +the "we sections" are not by the writer of Acts, he must have almost +entirely rewritten them, and, at the same time, have been guilty of a +gross fraud, which he stupidly dropped in passages where it could have +been effectively used. + +To this linguistic evidence of authenticity we can add _archaeological +evidence_. The discoveries of the last thirty years have greatly +confirmed the accuracy of the writer in points where a writer of the +2nd century would have betrayed his ignorance. In fact, we are able to +compare his accuracy with the inaccuracy of the writing known as the +_Acts of Paul and Thecla_, a 2nd century blend of sensationalism and +piety based on a document of the 1st century. Now, in almost every +point where we are able to test the knowledge possessed by the author +of Acts with regard to the topography of Asia {105} Minor and the +details of Roman government, it can be pronounced correct. This has +been admirably shown by Prof. Ramsay's works on _The Church in the +Roman Empire and St. Paul_. St. Luke knows that Cyprus was governed by +a pro-consul, which had ceased to be the case early in the 2nd century; +that the magistrates at Philippi were called _strategoi_, and were +attended by lictors, while those at Thessalonica were called +_politarchai_ (xvii. 6), a title which has been verified by +inscriptions. He is aware that the governor of Malta was only called +the head-man (xxviii. 7). He knows that Derbe and Lystra, but not +Iconium, were cities of Lycaonia, and that "great Artemis" was the cry +used at Ephesus in invoking the patronal goddess of the city (xix. 28). +We must not assert that these and similar details absolutely prove that +the writer was a companion of St. Paul; but we can say that he was +peculiarly well acquainted with the life of that period. The account +of St. Paul's voyage and shipwreck is equally accurate. + +A very favourite argument against the genuineness of Acts is that Acts +xv., in its account of St. Paul's third visit to Jerusalem, A.D. 49, is +inconsistent with Gal. ii. It is asserted that the author deliberately +falsified the story in order to represent the older apostles as +promoting the union of Gentile and Jewish Christians, some modern +critics assuming that the apostles would never have done anything so +Catholic. But there is no real discrepancy between the two accounts, +if we are ready to believe that St. Luke gives the public and exterior +view of the proceedings, while St. Paul, as is natural, describes the +personal aspect of those proceedings. According to Acts xv. 2, St. +Paul and St. Barnabas were _deputed_ to go to Jerusalem by the Church +at Antioch; according to Gal. ii. 2, St. Paul went there "by +revelation." The internal motive is surely compatible with the +external. Again, both Acts xv. and Gal. ii. show that the momentous +Council at Jerusalem included private and public meetings. The two +accounts fit one another all the better in consequence of the fact that +Acts {106} lays stress upon the public settlement (xv. 7 f.) and +Galatians upon a private conference (ii. 2). Acts shows that there was +much dispute, and Galatians shows that the dispute included opposition +to St. Paul's methods. Acts shows that St. Paul greatly desired to be +on good terms with the older apostles, Galatians shows that they gave +him the right hand of fellowship. The historical situation, the +occasion of dispute (viz. the attempt to impose circumcision on the +Gentiles), the chief persons concerned and the feelings which they +entertained, are the same in both books.[3] + +As to the fact that St. Paul in Galatians makes no mention of a second +visit to Jerusalem about A.D. 46, he ignores it because it was devoted +to the specific business mentioned in Acts xi. 30; xii. 25. Nothing +arose out of it affecting his relations with the first apostles or his +own apostleship. A description of this visit was therefore quite +beside the argument of Galatians. We cannot therefore say that its +omission in Galatians proves that it was an invention of the author of +Acts. + +The fact that Acts does not depend upon St. Paul's writings and +nevertheless shows many undesigned points of contact with them, leads +us to a very important conclusion. This conclusion is that the writer +of Acts was a companion of St. Paul. It is incredible that a later +writer, who took an eager interest in St. Paul's adventures, should +have made no use of St. Paul's letters. Those letters made a deep +impression upon St. Paul's contemporaries (cf. 2 Cor. x. 10), and they +were carefully treasured by all succeeding generations. We can only +explain the relation between Acts and the Pauline Epistles by the +theory that the author of Acts was sufficiently intimate with the +apostle to be able to write his book without feeling the necessity of +enriching it by references to those Epistles. The theory, then, fits +with the theory which is suggested to us by the "we sections." The +only remaining question is whether this companion was, or was not, St. +Luke. {107} He was evidently with St. Paul at Rome, and this makes it +impossible to attribute the authorship of Acts to Titus, as there is no +hint in the New Testament of Titus being there. Nor was the author +Silas, for Silas was not with St. Paul on the third missionary journey, +while the author of Acts was. Acts xx. 5, 6 seems to prove that the +book was not written by Timothy. No one seems so likely to have been +the author as St. Luke. For the writer of Acts xxvii. 1-xxviii. 16 +evidently accompanied St. Paul to Rome, and we learn from Col. iv. 14 +and Philem. 24 that St. Luke was with the apostle during his first +imprisonment in that city. We may therefore say that every line of +evidence points to the truth of the ancient tradition that St. Luke +wrote Acts. + +The sources of information employed by St. Luke can sometimes be +determined with a high degree of probability. Where he did not draw +upon his own recollections he could often rely upon those of St. Paul. +The apostle was, as we should expect, in the habit of narrating his own +experiences (cf. 2 Cor. i. 8-10; xii. 9; Gal. i. 11-ii. 14; Phil. iii. +3-7; Rom. xv. 16-32). Acts xxi. 19; xiv. 27; xv. 3, 12, 26, show how +St. Paul related his travels. Acts i.-v. probably incorporates an +early Jewish Christian document, and contains features which +unmistakably point to the truthfulness of the record. A good deal of +information was probably obtained from John Mark: it was to the house +of Mark's mother that St. Peter made his way after his escape from +prison recorded in ch. xii. As St. Mark was with St. Luke and St. Paul +at Rome, and acted as St. Peter's interpreter, St. Luke had the +opportunity of learning from him many facts concerning St. Peter. St. +Barnabas also perhaps furnished some details concerning the history of +the early Church at Jerusalem. Some of the converts who fled from +Judaea to Antioch (xi. 19) were probably men who witnessed the wonders +of the Day of Pentecost. And if St. Luke was a Christian of Antioch, +as tradition says, he may have made inquiries of these converts. + +{108} + +From Philip the evangelist, St. Luke may have learnt the history of +events with which Philip was concerned, as he stayed with him at +Caesarea (xxi. 8-12), and he also knew Mnason, who was one of the +"original" disciples of Pentecost (xxi. 16). Finally, we notice that +St. Luke had intercourse with St. James, the Bishop of Jerusalem, +himself (xxi. 18). + +[Sidenote: Date.] + +We have seen above (p. 68) that St. Luke's Gospel was probably written +soon after A.D. 70. As Acts i. 1 shows that Acts was written later +than the Gospel, and as there is just enough difference in style +between the two books to encourage the idea that Acts was not written +immediately after the Gospel, we may reasonably place Acts between A.D. +75 and 80. + +One obvious objection to placing the date of Acts so late is the fact +that the writer does not record the death of St. Paul. This is +certainly startling, for the martyrdom of the great apostle would have +formed an impressive conclusion to the book. But there are several +reasons which may be appropriately suggested to account for the +omission. Possibly the author intended to write a third "treatise," in +which the story of the martyrdom of his two great heroes, St. Peter and +St. Paul, would be recounted; possibly Acts, which ends very abruptly, +was never completed by the author. It is also possible that, after +showing that the Roman civil power had generally been tolerant towards +Christianity, he did not wish to endanger the circulation of his book +by giving an account of Nero's brutal persecution of the Christians. +If the book had contained any such history, the possession of it would +have been regarded as no small offence by the civil authorities. +Several years later, when the Church was probably much stronger, St. +John, in writing the Revelation, disguised his description of Nero in +symbolical language. In any case, St. Luke may have wished both to +show Theophilus that Christianity was compatible with loyalty to the +government, {109} and that the government had for a long time been +tolerant towards Christianity. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The general plan of the book may easily be seen by a glance at the +Analysis printed below. We may describe it by saying that the ruling +ideas are the progress and the continuity of the Church. That is to +say, St. Luke shows how the Church, the divinely organized society +which promotes the kingdom of God, lives and develops through various +stages and crises. It spreads from one upper room in Jerusalem to +Rome, the world's mightiest city. From the election of Matthias, the +new apostle, until the decision reached by the Council at Jerusalem +twenty years afterwards, and recorded in ch. xv., we behold a slow but +sure progress. The secret of this progress is dependence upon the +risen Christ. We cannot conceive how the apostles could ever have come +out of the perplexity and dismay caused by the death of their Lord, and +laboured with such enthusiasm, unless they were certain that the Lord +was indeed risen. Without the resurrection, the Church would have +collapsed at once. Knowing that it could not be possibly disproved, +the apostles appeal to it as their reason for advancing out of Judaism. +Two points with regard to the doctrine implied in chs. i.-xv. deserve +special attention. + +(1) _The doctrine of Christ's Person_. The doctrine is of the simplest +kind, but the facts asserted by the apostles imply that He is divine. +He is the Messiah, anointed by God, and the Holy One, and He is in a +special sense the Holy Servant or Child of God (iii. 14; iv. 27). He +is seated at the right hand of God (v. 31), He is Prince and Saviour. +He fulfils divine functions. It is He who has poured out the Holy +Spirit (ii. 33). He is the object of man's faith, and His name or +revealed personality is declared to have just restored a lame man to +soundness (iii. 16); signs and wonders are expected to be done through +Him (iv. 30). There is "salvation" in none other (iv. 12), and He is +to be "the Judge of quick and dead" {110} (x. 42). St. Stephen in +dying prays to Him. He is perpetually called Lord, and the fact that +the same name is applied to Jehovah in the Septuagint makes it +impossible to suppose that Christ is not regarded as possessed of +divine attributes. + +(2) _The doctrine of the salvation of the world_. Rationalist critics +have asserted that the first apostles had no idea that the gospel was +meant for the world, and that they limited its light to the children of +Abraham. The unfairness of this assertion is shown by the consistent +manner in which the same doctrine of the salvation of all men is +interwoven in different parts of Acts, including the early chapters, +which are generally acknowledged to be derived from an early Jewish +Christian source. The doctrine is that salvation is offered to the +Jews first (iii. 26), but "all that are afar off" may share in it (ii. +39; iii. 25). This is exactly the doctrine expressed by St. Paul in +Rom. i. 16. And the conversion of Gentiles of different classes, as +recorded in Acts, testifies that the apostles acted up to the doctrine. +They did not doubt that the Gentiles had a right to the gospel. The +point which did agitate them was, how much of the Jewish ceremonial +ought the Gentiles to be required to observe. When the Gentile +converts became numerous the question became acute, being sharpened by +the demand of certain Jewish Christians that all converts should be +circumcised. + +St. Peter and St. James set their faces against this demand, and it was +determined on their advice that the Gentiles should only be required to +abstain from "meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things +strangled, and from fornication" (xv. 29). The rule was primarily +meant for Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia. It prohibits complicity in +idolatry, and in the immorality with which Syrian idolatry had been +historically associated. And it prohibits the eating of blood and +things strangled, a practice which might cause friction in the presence +of Jewish communities. Nothing is said about circumcision or the +sabbath. It is impossible to reconcile Acts xv. with the {111} theory +that the original apostles were merely Jewish Unitarians who detested +St. Paul. And the Rationalists who have propagated this theory gain no +help either from Galatians or from Acts xxi. For St. Paul, in writing +to the Galatians, asserts the two central facts which we find in Acts +xv., viz. (i.) that his policy of an open gospel was opposed by a party +which appealed to the original apostles, (ii.) that the original +apostles gave him the hand of fellowship and repudiated the Judaizers. +In Acts xxi. 24 we find St. Paul himself performing a Jewish ceremonial +act at the request of St. James. The request was made in order to +counteract the falsehood that he had been trying to make the Hebrew +converts desert the old Jewish customs. It cannot be interpreted as a +proof of the supposed blind Judaism of St. James. For St. Paul +_voluntarily_ performed a similar act at Cenchreae, and we have no +ground for believing that he always claimed for himself that entire +freedom from Jewish usages which he always claimed for his Gentile +converts. His own words contradict such a notion emphatically (1 Cor. +ix. 20). + +The truth is that it is only by doing violence to all the evidence +which we possess, that anything can be done to support either the +theory of Baur and his school that the apostles of the Church were +divided with regard to the _Law_, or the more recent theory of Harnack +and others that they were divided with regard to the _Person of +Christ_. All the apostles believed that the gospel was for all men on +equal terms, and that Christ was the divine Lord of all. + +In addition to these points, it is necessary to say a few words about +_the ministry of the Church_ which is described in Acts. It is +asserted by such writers as Martineau, Sabatier, and Schmiedel, that +the state of the Church and the ministry in Acts betrays the fact that +the author did not write in the apostolic age. It is said that +"hierarchical ideas" or "hierarchical pretensions" can be detected in +such passages as i. 17, 20; viii. 14-17; xv. 28; xx. 28, and that such +ideas {112} could not have been entertained by the apostles. It is not +possible to give a full discussion of such a theory in this book.[4] +We must be content with noting that, in order to give it any appearance +of validity, it is necessary to reject every part of the New Testament +which does not happen to agree with it. Schmiedel, who places Acts +between A.D. 110 and 130, says that "Acts xx. 18-35 has many ideas in +common with those of the Pastoral Epistles," but that "the author has +not yet reached the stage in the development of Church government which +characterizes the First Epistle to Timothy." [5] He says this simply +because that Epistle, which he regards as a late forgery, shows a form +of Church government practically identical with Episcopacy, while he +thinks that Acts xx. shows a form of government intermediate between +the genuine apostolic form and Episcopacy. To this we may make two +answers; (a) that the Church government in Acts and 1 Timothy is +practically the same, the work of the apostle being in r Timothy partly +delegated to an apostolic vicar; (b) as there is excellent evidence for +regarding 1 Timothy as a genuine writing of St. Paul, it gives us an +additional cause for believing that the description of Church +government in Acts is not fictitious. + + +ANALYSIS + +The outline of the book is laid down in the words of our Lord quoted in +i. 8, "Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon +you: and ye shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, +and Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth." + +{113} + +A. + +From A.D. 29 to ? 34, + +The Church at Jerusalem: i.-viii. 1.--Introduction; the commission to +the apostles, the Ascension, choice of Matthias in place of Judas (i.). +Outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, Peter's speech, the unity +of the Church (ii.). Cure of a lame man, Peter's speech on the +occasion (iii.). Peter and John imprisoned and before the Council, +their dismissal and return to the Church, community of goods in the +Church (iv.). Ananias and Sapphira, miracles of healing, especially by +Peter, second imprisonment of Peter and John, Peter's speech, +Gamaliel's advice to refrain from persecution (v.). Appointment of the +seven deacons, Stephen's ministry and arrest (vi.). Stephen's defence, +in which he shows that the Jews have always opposed the chief servants +of God and that _true worship is independent of the Jewish temple_, +Stephen's martyrdom (vii.-viii. 1). + + +B. + +From A.D. ? 34 to 46. + +Christianity spreads through Judaea and Samaria and to the Gentiles, +St. Paul's conversion: viii.-xii.--Church scattered by persecution, +Philip in Samaria, Simon Magus, Peter and John at Samaria, Philip +baptizes an Ethiopian proselyte to Judaism (viii.). Conversion of +Paul, his baptism, he is introduced to the apostles, Peter at Joppa and +Lydda, raising of Tabitha by Peter (ix.). Peter and Cornelius, Peter's +trance, he eats with and has baptized _Gentiles_ who had previously +believed in God but were _uncircumcised_ (x.). He explains his conduct +and the Church approves (xi. 1-18). + +Christianity spreads to Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, where it is +preached to _pagan Greeks_ (xi. 19-30). Herod's {114} persecution, +murder of James, Peter's third imprisonment and escape, death of Herod +in A.D. 44, Paul returns from his second visit to Jerusalem (xii.). + + +C. + +From A.D. 47 to 49. + +St. Paul's First Missionary Journey: xiii. 1-xv. 35.--Barnabas and Paul +receive the laying on of hands at Antioch, journey through Cyprus, +Elymas the sorcerer blinded, visit to Antioch in Pisidia, Paul's speech +in the synagogue, he turns to the Gentiles (xiii.). Paul preaches at +Iconium, cures lame man at Lystra, is stoned, returns to Antioch +(xiv.). _Persecution of the Christians by Jews_. + +The Jerusalem Church Council decides that _Gentiles need not be +circumcised_ (xv. 1-35). + + +D. + +From A.D. 49 to 52. + +St. Paul's Second Missionary Journey: xv. 36-xviii. 22.--Paul with +Silas visits the Churches founded during the first journey, Timothy +circumcised (xv. 36-xvi. 5). Paul crosses to Europe, imprisoned at +Philippi, conversion of the jailor (xvi.). At Thessalonica and Beroea, +at Athens, Paul's speech at the Areopagus (xvii.). At Corinth, brought +before Gallic the Roman proconsul, travels by Ephesus and Caesarea to +Jerusalem and Antioch (xviii. 1-22). _Persecution by Jews, or by +Gentiles whose pockets are affected_ (xvi. 19). + + +E. + +From A.D. 52 to 56. + +St. Paul's Third Missionary Journey: xviii. 23-xxi. 16.--Paul revisits +Galatia and Phrygia; Apollos, a converted {115} Jew, defends +Christianity at Corinth (xviii. 23-28). Paul stays at Ephesus, great +riot (xix.). _Roman officials tolerant to Christianity, craftsmen +whose pockets are affected show violence_. Journey to Macedonia and +Greece, Paul at Troas, Eutychus' fall and cure, journey to Miletus +where Paul meets the presbyters of Ephesus (xx.). Voyage to Tyre and +Caesarea (xxi. 1-16). + +F. + +From A.D. 56 to 61. + +St. Paul arrested at Jerusalem, imprisoned at Caesarea, voyage to Rome: +xxi. 17-xxviii. 31.--Paul visits James and the presbyters, the Jews try +to kill him, he is rescued and taken to the castle (xxi. 17-40). His +speech to the Jews, is removed by the chief captain (xxii.). His +speech before the Jewish Council, is taken to Caesarea (xxiii.). +Appears before the procurator Felix (xxiv.). Appears before the +procurator Festus, appeals to the emperor, speaks before Agrippa (xxv., +xxvi.). _Roman officials still tolerant, but obliged to interfere_. +The voyage and shipwreck (xxvii.). Paul at Melita (xxviii. 1-10). He +journeys to Rome and expounds the gospel at Rome, where the Jews had +not previously heard anything against him. He preaches the kingdom of +God for two years (xxviii. 11-31). + + +Similar Characteristics of St. Luke's Gospel and Acts.--Among such are +the continued interest in Samaritans (Acts i. 8; viii. 5-25) John the +Baptist (Acts i. 22; x. 37; xiii. 24; xviii. 25; xix. 3), women (Acts +i. 14; ix. 36; xii. 12; xvii. 4), the poor (Acts ii. 45; iii. 3; iv. +32; ix. 39, etc.). In both books Christ is specially called "Lord," +and is the great Prophet (Luke vii. 16, 39; xxiv. 19-27; cf. Acts iii. +22; vii. 37), also the suffering "Servant" (Luke xxiv. 36, 45; cf. Acts +iii. 13, 18; iv. 27; viii. 32). Notice, too, in both books the long +reports of prayers and speeches. + + + +[1] The "we sections" contain 97 verses. They are xvi. 10-17, xx. +5-15; xxi. 1-18, xxvii. 1-xxviii. 16. + +[2] See Rev. Sir John C. Hawkins, Bart., M.A., _Horae Synopticae_. + +[3] See Lightfoot, _Commentary on Galatians_. + +[4] The reader is referred to Dr. Gore, _The Church and the Ministry_, +p. 234 f. (fourth edition). + +[5] _Encyclopaedia Biblica_, vol. i. p. 49. + + + + +{116} + +CHAPTER VIII + +THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL + +Although the Christian cannot regard the Epistles contained in the New +Testament as having quite the same importance as the Gospels which +record the life and sayings of his Divine Master, he must regard them +as having a profound significance. They deal with the creed and the +conduct of the Church with an inspired insight which gives them an +undying value, and they are marked by a personal affection which gives +them an undying charm. They lend, too, a most powerful support to the +historical evidence of the truth of Christianity. We have already +noticed that the earliest Gospel was probably not written before A.D. +62, while St. John's Gospel is probably as late as A.D. 85. But +several of the twenty-one Epistles in the New Testament are certainly +earlier than A.D. 62, and out of the whole number only the three by St. +John can be confidently placed at a later date than St. John's Gospel. +Now, these twenty-one Epistles assume the truth of the story contained +in the Gospels. They do more than this. For they prove that during +the lifetime of men who had personally known Jesus Christ, there were +large numbers of earnest men and women who were at home with the same +ideas as those which Christians have cherished until modern times. +Some of these ideas explain what we find in the Gospels. For instance, +the doctrine of the Atonement is more plainly expounded in the Epistles +than in the Gospels. This doctrine, together with those which concern +the Person of Jesus Christ, the Holy {117} Trinity, the sacraments, the +Church, and the ministry, could be shown to have existed about A.D. 60, +even if the Gospels had perished or were proved to be forgeries. The +indirect evidence which the Epistles give to the life and teaching of +our Lord is therefore of immense importance. If the infidel says that +these doctrines are mere theories, we can ask him how these theories +arose, and challenge him to produce a cause which so adequately +accounts for them as the incarnation of the Son of God. + +The origin of "spiritual letters" or "epistles" was perhaps due to the +wisdom and originality of St. Paul. At any rate, there is nothing +improbable in this conjecture, nor need it draw us into any sympathy +with the recent attempts to use it as a means for discrediting those +Epistles in the New Testament which bear the names of other authors. +It is possible that the earliest Epistle is that of St. James, and we +have no means of telling whether St. Paul did or did not anticipate him +in writing Epistles. In any case, if St. Paul is not the pioneer, he +is the captain of epistle-writers. St. Cyprian, St. Jerome, St. +Bernard, and in modern times Archbishop Fenelon and Dr. Pusey, have +illustrated the power of making a letter the vehicle of momentous +truths. But on the greatest of them there has fallen only a portion of +the mantle of St. Paul. + +We possess thirteen Epistles written by St. Paul. There is no real +reason for doubting the genuineness of any of them, and a remarkable +change has lately taken place in the manner in which the opponents of +orthodox Christianity have treated them. When the ingenious attempt +was made, sixty years ago, to prove that St. Paul invented a type of +Christianity which was not taught by Christ, it was held that only +Galatians, Romans, and 1 and 2 Corinthians were genuine. The other +Epistles attributed to St. Paul were said to be forgeries written after +St. Paul's death, and intended to act as certificates for the Catholic +faith of the 2nd century. Since then criticism has grown wiser. The +genuineness of Philippians and 1 Thessalonians was first conceded. +Then it became necessary to {118} admit the genuineness of Colossians +and Philemon; and 2 Thessalonians and Ephesians are now being placed in +the same list even by some extreme critics. In fact, the use made of +St. Paul's Epistles in the 2nd century, and the impossibility of +finding any one who had the genius to personate the great apostle, are +two things which have disabled fancy-criticism. The Epistles to +Timothy and Titus are still confidently rejected by some authors, but +this confidence is being undermined. Some special attention is given +to the question of their genuineness in this book. + +The writings of St. Paul fall into four groups, each group being shaped +by something which is unmistakably novel and by something which it has +in common with the other groups. + +I. A.D. 51. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. + +II. A.D. 55-56. 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Romans. + +III. A.D. 59-61. Colossians, Philemon, Ephesians, Philippians. + +IV. A.D. 61-64. 1 Timothy, Titus, 2 Timothy. + +St. Paul was in the habit of dictating his letters. In Rom. xvi. 22 +occurs the name of Tertius, who was then acting as his secretary. But +St. Paul wrote the little letter to Philemon himself, and in Gal. vi. +11-18 we find a postscript which the apostle wrote in his own large +handwriting. Similar instances are found in 1 Cor. xvi. 21-24 and Col. +iv. 18, while in 2 Thess. iii. 17 he shows us that he sometimes made +these additions in order to protect his converts from being deceived by +forged letters written in his name. + +In order to enter into the spirit of St. Paul's letters it is necessary +to understand his history, a brief outline of which will now be given. + +Saul, who changed his name to Paul, was born at Tarsus in Cilicia, a +city which prided itself upon its good education. The language of the +city was Greek; Saul's father was a Jew and a Roman citizen. He was +trained at Jerusalem by {119} Gamaliel, a renowned Pharisee. The +future apostle was therefore born a member of the most religious race +in the world, spoke the language of the most cultivated race in the +world, and lived under the most masterly and fully organized +government. All these three influences left their mark on a soul which +was always impressible towards everything great and noble. But his +nature was not only impressible; it was endowed as well by God with a +strong pure heat which could fuse truths together into an orderly and +well-proportioned form, and purge away the falsehoods which clung to +truths. It is plain that he was not a Pharisee of the baser sort, even +when he believed that the Messiah was a pretender. Righteousness was +his ideal, and because he hated sin, a struggle raged between his +conscience and his lower instincts (Rom. vii. 7-25). He fiercely +persecuted the Christians, whom he regarded as traitors to their race +and their religion. On his way from Jerusalem to Damascus with a +warrant from the high priest to arrest the Christians, he was converted +(about A.D. 35) by a direct interposition of the risen Lord. Every +effort has been made by modern rationalists to explain this revelation +as either an imaginary vision or an inward light in his conscience. +The fact remains that St. Paul never speaks of it as a merely inward +reality, that he does not number his conversion among the ecstatic +states to which he was subject (2 Cor. xii. 1), and that he reckons the +appearance of Christ to himself as an outward appearance like the +appearances to the older apostles (1 Cor. xv. 5-8). We cannot get +behind the statements made by St. Paul and those made in Acts by his +friend, St. Luke. They show that he was met and conquered by Christ. +The appearance of Christ changed his whole career, transformed his +character, convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah, and that salvation +can only be obtained by faith in Him--that is, by a devoted adherence +to His Person and His teaching. After preaching Christ in Damascus, he +retired into the keen air and inspiring solitude of the Arabian desert. +{120} During this period the outline of his creed seems to have grown +clear and definite. It afterwards expanded and developed, as truly as +youth passes into manhood, but there is no evidence for any material +alteration having taken place after his return from Arabia. Many +Christians doubted the sincerity of his conversion, but St. Barnabas, a +conciliatory and kind evangelist, introduced him to St. Peter and St. +James at Jerusalem, A.D. 38. His life being threatened by the +Greek-speaking Jews, he departed for Tarsus. In due time he was +brought by St. Barnabas to aid the new mission to the Gentiles at +Antioch, a large and splendid city, admirably adapted for the first +propagation of the gospel among the heathen. In A.D. 46 he paid with +Barnabas a second visit to Jerusalem, taking thither a contribution +from Antioch to relieve the famine which raged there. In A.D. 47 he +went from Antioch in company with Barnabas on his first missionary +tour, visiting Cyprus and part of Asia Minor. On his return, A.D. 49, +he attended the Council at Jerusalem (Acts xv.; Gal. ii.), at which he +insisted that converts from paganism should not be required to submit +to circumcision and the other ceremonial rules of the Jewish Church. +Only once again has any Council of the Church had to discuss such a +burning and weighty question, and that once was at the Council of +Nicaea in 325, when it was determined to describe the fact that Jesus +is God in language which would admit of no possible mistake or +jugglery. At Jerusalem, in A.D. 49, the Church had to determine +whether it was sufficient for a man to be a Christian, or necessary for +him to become a Jew and a Christian simultaneously. Some Judaizing +Christians maintained the latter. Faithful to the teaching of our +Lord, who laid on no Gentile the necessity of adopting Judaism, the +Church decided that Gentile converts need not be circumcised. + +In A.D. 49, soon after the Council at Jerusalem, St. Paul began a +second missionary journey, and crossed over into Europe, where he +founded several Churches, including those of Philippi and Thessalonica. +At Athens he seems to have made {121} but little impression, but at +Corinth, the busy and profligate centre of Greek commerce, he was more +successful. He stayed there for eighteen months, and during this stay +he wrote the Epistles to the Thessalonians. They are marked by the +attention given to _eschatology_, or doctrine of "the last things"--the +second coming of Christ, the resurrection of mankind, and the judgment. + +This second journey closed with a visit to Jerusalem, and was followed +by an incident which shows that the apostle's long warfare with Judaism +was not over. The Judaizers had been defeated at the Council of +Jerusalem, and they were aware that the Gentiles were pouring into the +Church. So they attempted a new and artful plan for securing their own +predominance. They no longer denied that uncircumcised Christians were +Christians, but they tried to gain a higher status for the circumcised. +They asserted that special prerogatives belonged to the Messiah's own +people, and to the apostles whom He had chosen while He was on earth. +When St. Paul went from Jerusalem to Antioch in A.D. 52, St. Peter, +fearing to offend these Judaizers, was guilty of pretending to believe +that he agreed with them.[1] He refused to eat with Gentile +(uncircumcised) Christians. He thereby tried to compel the Gentiles to +"Judaize" (Gal. ii. 14), treating them as if they were an inferior +caste. St. Barnabas was carried away by St. Peter's example. St. Paul +then openly rebuked the leader of the apostles. It is on this incident +that F. C. Baur and the Tübingen school founded their fictitious +history of a doctrinal struggle between St. Paul and the original +apostles. The fundamental falsehood of this history lies in the fact +that there was no real difference of opinion between St. Peter and St. +Paul. The latter rebuked the former for "dissembling," _i.e._ for +acting on a special occasion in a {122} manner contrary to his +convictions and openly professed principles. + +The Judaizing party not only tried to inoculate the Church with +Judaism, but strained every nerve to undermine the authority of St. +Paul. They said that he had no authority to preach Christ unless it +was derived through the Twelve, and they showed "letters of +commendation" (Gal. ii. 12; 2 Cor. iii. 1), to the effect that they +represented the first apostles and came to supply the defects of St. +Paul's teaching. With these opponents he was in conflict during his +third missionary journey, which began about August, A.D. 52. On this +journey he revisited Galatia and Phrygia, made a long stay at Ephesus, +and went to Macedonia and Greece. During this third missionary journey +he wrote 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans. It is hard to +determine the exact order in which they were written, as Galatians may +have been written before 1 Corinthians. These Epistles are the noblest +work of St. Paul. The persistent efforts of his opponents compel him +to defend both his principles and his character. Amid the perplexity +of the time, his clear and clarifying mind formulated Christian +doctrine so perfectly that he compels his readers to see what he sees. +This group of Epistles is mainly devoted to _soteriology_, or the +method by which God saves man. It contains abundant teaching about +God's purpose of saving us, the use of the Jewish law, the struggle +between our flesh and our spirit, the work of Jesus Christ in dying and +rising for us, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the morals and worship +of the Church. St. Paul's arguments are mainly addressed to believing +Christians, whom he wishes to preserve from Jewish or heathen error. +They are marked by the strongest light and shade. Nowhere does sin +appear more awful, and the love of God to undeserving man appear more +generous. At one moment the apostle writes as a logician, at another +as a mystic. Now he is stern, and now he is pathetic. In compass, in +variety, in depth, these four Epistles are great works of art, and all +the greater {123} because the writer esteems his intellectual powers as +nothing in comparison with the story of the Cross. + +In May, A.D. 56, St. Paul was arrested at Jerusalem, after which he was +detained by the Roman procurator Felix for two years at Caesarea, and +then sent to Rome because he appealed to have his case tried by the +emperor. He arrived at Rome early in A.D. 59, and was imprisoned for +two years in his own hired house before his trial. During this +imprisonment he wrote the Epistles to the Colossians, Ephesians, and +Philippians, and the exquisite private letter to Philemon. In +Philippians there is a strong reprimand of the infatuation of trusting +in Jewish privileges, but it is plain from Colossians and Ephesians +that Gentile Christianity was already firmly established, and that in +Asia Minor the Judaizing heresies were becoming fainter and more +fanciful. St. Paul criticizes a Judaic Gnosticism, a morbid mixture of +Jewish ritual with that Oriental spiritualism which fascinated many +devotees in the Roman empire at this period. The Philippians do not +seem to have been infected with the same religious malaria as the +Christians who dwelt in the valley of the Lycus. But St. Paul in +writing to them, as to the Colossians and Ephesians, takes great pains +to show who Christ is and what our relation towards Him ought to be. +This group is therefore distinguished by its _Christology_. + +St. Paul was released from his first imprisonment at Rome, though we +know no details of his release. He again resumed his missionary life, +and wrote the First Epistle to Timothy and that to Titus. According to +a tradition of very great antiquity, he visited Spain. But the changed +attitude of the Roman government towards the Christians soon cut short +his work. Earlier in his career the Roman officials had regarded the +new religion with easy though somewhat supercilious toleration. In 2 +Thessalonians we find St. Paul apparently describing the Roman +authorities as the restraining power which hindered the malice of +antichristian Judaism from working revenge upon {124} the Church. At +Ephesus he had been personally protected from the mob by the men who +were responsible for the public worship of the Roman emperor. But +under Nero an active persecution of the Christians was set on foot, and +St. Paul was again imprisoned at Rome. During this last imprisonment +he wrote his Second Epistle to Timothy. This letter, like the First +Epistle to Timothy and that to Titus, deals specially with the +organization and ministry of the Church, and was intended to +consolidate the Church before the apostle's death. The martyrdom of +the apostle probably took place in A.D. 64. His tomb, marked by an +inscription of the 4th century, still remains at Rome in the church of +"St. Paul outside the walls," which stands near the scene of his +martyrdom. Unless the relics were destroyed by the Saracens who sacked +Rome in 846, they probably remain in this tomb. The festival of June +29, which in mediaeval times was kept in honour of St. Peter and St. +Paul, and which in our present English Prayer-book is wrongly dedicated +to St. Peter only, is probably not the day on which either of the +apostles suffered. It is the day on which their relics were removed +for safety to the catacombs in the time of the persecution of the +Christians by the Emperor Decius, A.D. 258. + + + +[1] The above account places the dispute at Antioch before the third +missionary journey. Some writers of deserved repute place it in the +winter of A.D. 48, before the Council of Jerusalem. + + + + +{125} + +CHAPTER IX + +1 AND 2 THESSALONIANS + +THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +Among all schools of thought there has been an increasing conviction +that this Epistle is genuine. It was included in Marcion's +_Apostolicon_, or list of Pauline writings, it is contained in the +_Muratorian Fragment_, it is quoted by the great Fathers of the close +of the 2nd century, and is found in the Old Latin and Peshitta Syriac +versions of the New Testament. The earnest and affectionate tone of +the Epistle is thoroughly Pauline, and the argument that it is not +genuine because it does not contain the same pronounced anti-Jewish +teaching as we find in Romans is precarious, though it has seemed to +some sceptics to be convenient. The argument might be turned in the +opposite direction. For it would be just as reasonable to say that the +absence of anti-Jewish doctrine proves that the Epistle was written +before the great conflict with the semi-Christian Jews began, as to say +that it proves that it was written by a forger after the conflict was +over. One paragraph in the Epistle points decisively to an early date. +In iv. 13-18 we find that some Thessalonians were under the delusion +that it would be an exceptional thing for a Christian to die before the +second coming of our Lord, and that those who did so die would miss +some of the felicity appointed for the rest. Such a delusion must have +been dispelled at a very early date. Moreover, the {126} comfort which +St. Paul administers to those who are agitated by this notion gives us +the idea that he expected Christ to return in his own lifetime. In +this respect he writes to the Thessalonians something very different +from what he writes in his later Epistles (Phil. i. 21-24; 2 Tim. iv. +6), or even in 2 Cor. v. 1. We need not be surprised that God left the +great apostle in ignorance of an event which it is not given even to +the angels to understand (Matt. xxiv. 36). But a forger, living after +the apostle's death, would not be at all likely to represent his hero +as falling into such a mistake. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +Thessalonica, the modern Saloniki, was the capital of part of +Macedonia, situated in the middle of the bend of the Thermaic Gulf, and +not far from Mount Olympus, the snow-clad home of the gods of Greece. +It was a busy mercantile town, and in ready communication with Italy, +as the great road called _Via Egnatia_ passed through its walls. It +contained then, as now, a considerable number of Jews among its +inhabitants. In Christian times it became a great ecclesiastical +centre, and was influential in the conversion of the Slavs and +Bulgarians. It is still famous for its splendid Byzantine churches, +though the finest have long since been converted into mosques by the +Turks. + +The Church was planted there by St. Paul on his second missionary +journey, in A.D. 50 (Acts xvii.). He preached first to the Jews, and +after his third visit to the synagogue he was rejected by the Jews, and +he turned to the Gentiles. Some of these Thracian Gentiles were +converts to Judaism, but they were people whose character could be +trusted. In the mean time his Philippian converts twice sent aid to +him (Phil. iv. 16). Previous to this the apostle had been earning his +own bread, no doubt by tent-making. St. Paul was forced to leave +Thessalonica in consequence of a riot stirred up by the Jews. He +visited it again before his last journey to Jerusalem in A.D. 56. + +1 Thess. i. 9 shows that the majority of the Christians had {127} been +Gentile idolaters, though there were a few of Jewish blood. It was +among the sturdy people of Macedonia that St. Paul won his steadiest +recruits for Christ. Here, as in the letter to Philippi, we find that +he uses words of more than ordinary affection. These converts are to +St. Paul his "joy and crown" (1 Thess. ii. 19; Phil. iv. 1). He +compares his relation with them to that of a nurse with her own +children (1 Thess. ii. 7). When he wrote to the Corinthians he +displayed his Macedonians as brilliant examples of Christian liberality +and Christian loyalty (2 Cor. viii. 1-5). In this passage he alludes +to their poverty, and these Epistles show that they had to work for +their bread. They were exposed to bitter and continuous persecution +from Jews, who were capable of inciting the roughs of the town to set +on St. Paul (Acts xvii. 5). + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The Epistle was written from Corinth on the occasion of St. Paul's +first visit there. When St. Paul had to leave Beroea in A.D. 50, Silas +and Timothy remained (Acts xvii. 14, 15; xviii. 5). He sent for them +to meet him at Athens, and when they had come, he despatched Timothy to +Thessalonica (1 Thess. iii. 2). In October A.D. 50, St. Paul arrived +at Corinth from Athens: Timothy and Silas rejoined him at Corinth, and +the letter was written soon afterwards, probably early in A.D. 51. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The immediate cause of the Epistle was the arrival of Timothy with news +from Thessalonica. The apostle's reasons for writing were: (a) to calm +and encourage the converts whom he had so abruptly left; (b) to urge +them to perform their ordinary duties. They had fallen into a state +bordering on religious hysteria. Quite determined to be true to +Christ, they had been demoralized by the strain of facing constant +hostility. They had begun to take excessive interest in unfulfilled +prophecy and eschatological speculation. The result was that +individuals had become careless as to the performance of simple duties. + +The apostle comforts the Thessalonians by reminding them {128} of the +happiness and reality of their own spiritual experience. He wishes +them to see plainly the working of God both in his own preaching of the +gospel and their acceptance of it. On the one hand, he gladly +recognizes the _faith, charity, hope,_ and constancy under persecution: +the story of their conversion, as it had been known everywhere, has won +many friends for the Faith (i.). On the other hand, St. Paul is aware +that his own conduct has not been unworthy of an apostle. Probably to +vindicate himself against Jewish calumnies, he declares that his +ministry at Thessalonica was bold, pure, honest, and gentle. Moreover, +he did not quarter himself upon his converts; he worked with his hands, +and was just and fatherly (ii. 1-12). + +After a thanksgiving for the manner in which they received the word of +God, he speaks of his eager wish to see his friends again. He had sent +Timothy that he might comfort them, and Timothy has returned with glad +tidings. He prays for their establishment in holiness (ii. 13-iii. 13). + +He goes on to exhort them to avoid impurity and work quietly, and then +he speaks of the eschatological difficulties. The Thessalonians +wondered whether the Christians already dead would miss a share in the +joy of Christ's second coming. St. Paul replies that those who are +alive at Christ's appearing will have no advantage over the dead (iv. +15). On the contrary, the dead will rise first, and then the living +Christians will be caught up together with them to meet the Lord. The +day will come with surprise, and will terrify the unprepared (iv. 1-v. +3). + +He then calls them to watchfulness and sobriety. There follows an +exhortation to obey the clergy, and the early date of the Epistle is +again suggested by the fact that the titles which are used in his later +epistles are not given to the clergy of Thessalonica. The existence of +an order of prophets seems implied (v. 20). The Epistle has a special +blessing for these troubled Christians who look so wistfully for "the +coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." + +{129} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving, and congratulation. The good fruit borne by +Christianity at Thessalonica is known of through all Macedonia and +Achaia (i.). + +The character of the apostle's ministry there, a fresh thanksgiving, +the apostle desires to see his friends, but is hindered by Satan +working through adverse circumstances (ii.). + +Timothy's expedition, a prayer (iii.). + +Encouragement to obedience, exhortation against impurity and to work; +the blessed dead and Christ's second coming. The sudden coming of the +Lord (iv. 1-v. 3). + +Practical conclusion based on the above doctrine (v. 4-28). + + + +THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The external evidence for the genuineness of the Second Epistle is even +stronger than that of the First. It is mentioned by Polycarp,[1] and +apparently by Justin Martyr.[2] It is also supported by the same +versions of the New Testament and by the same Fathers as the First +Epistle. In modern times it has been rejected even by some who accept +1 Thessalonians. Some of the objections which have been raised are +almost too trivial to deserve attention. But the prophetic and +apocalyptic passage in ii. 1-12 has been regarded by many critics as a +serious stumbling-block. It has been urged (a) that 1 Thessalonians +implies that St. Paul believed Christ would return immediately, whereas +2 Thessalonians implies that certain important occurrences must first +intervene. But there is no real contradiction. For 1 Thessalonians +represents the return of Christ as certainly sudden {130} and _possibly +soon_; it does not represent it as certainly immediate. A thief may +come suddenly in the night, and yet the man who gives warning that the +thief will come, does not necessarily mean that the thief is coming +without delay. It has been urged (b) that the doctrine of Antichrist +in 2 Thessalonians is un-Pauline, and depends on the Book of +Revelation. But there is not the least improbability in supposing that +St. Paul was in touch with these ideas about the end of the world. We +know that such ideas were common among the Jews at this period. Nor is +there any proof that the teaching of 2 Thessalonians on this subject is +derived from the Revelation of St. John. Moreover, on the least +Christian view with regard to Christ and the Gospels, it is irrational +to deny that our Lord made various predictions about His second coming. +We find a list of such predictions in Matt. xxiv. and in the parallel +passages of the other Gospels. It is therefore natural to find St. +Paul speaking about the end of the world in language which resembles +that used by our Lord, or that found in Daniel, Ezekiel, and the later +Jewish Apocalypses. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +St. Paul sent this Epistle from Corinth, probably towards the end of +the year 51. + +Several modern writers have dated 2 Thessalonians earlier than 1 +Thessalonians. The grounds for this view are the references in this +Epistle to the teaching lately given by St. Paul while at Thessalonica. +But although these references would be natural in any Epistle written +first after his departure from that place, they do not necessarily +imply that 2 Thessalonians was the first. Moreover, ii. 2 probably +contains a reference to the First Epistle, and this letter was +apparently written to clear up a difficulty which the First Epistle did +not solve. Persecution had continued at Thessalonica, and higher +excitement and wider confusion prevailed. The Thessalonians were more +sure than ever that Christ's advent was coming immediately, on the +strength, perhaps, of some words in St. Paul's earlier letter to them, +{131} supported by a forged letter which pretended to be his and by +feigned revelations. The result was entire neglect of daily duties. +"There is no reason," men said, "why I should work for my living or try +to be provident, because the Lord is sure to come to-day or to-morrow." + +As the circumstances are so similar to those in the First Epistle, and +as Silvanus (otherwise Silas) and Timothy are still with the apostle, +we may be sure that 2 Thessalonians was written during St. Paul's first +stay at Corinth. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle consists of instruction and exhortation. The most +characteristic passage is ii. 1-12. The apostle declares that he never +taught that the day of the Lord is about to dawn immediately (ii. 2). +It must be preceded by several events. There will be an apostasy, the +revelation of "the man of sin, the son of perdition," who will assume +equality with God and sit in the temple of God. Over against this "man +of sin" we find placed "one that restraineth now." Many strange +interpretations of these two phrases have been devised, and the fancy +of commentators has ranged over various historical monsters from +Mohammed to Napoleon Bonaparte. One favourite idea is that the +description of the man of sin "setting himself forth as God" refers to +the worship offered to the Roman emperors, and to the attempt made by +Caligula in A.D. 39 to place his statue in the temple at Jerusalem. +But it seems far better to regard the man of sin as hostile Judaism, +personified in an Antichrist who pretends to be the representative of +God foretold in Mal. iii. 1. The other force which St. Paul personifies +is the curbing power of a strong government as then seen in the +administrative system of the Roman empire. The power of Rome protected +him against Jewish fanaticism at this period (Acts xix. 35-41; xxii. +22-29), but in this truly irreligious fanaticism he discerned a latent +mysterious evil (ii. 7) which would afterwards reveal itself in hideous +excesses. While "the man of sin," or {132} "wicked one," thus wreaks +his will, Christ will come and consume him with the breath of His mouth. + +St. Paul understood the real genius of the antichristian Jews. Early +in the 2nd century they began a series of rebellions against the power +of Rome, committing horrible atrocities. These rebellions culminated +between A.D. 132 and 135. The Jews then rallied round a pretended +Messiah, Simon Bar Kocheba, whom they named "Prince of Israel"; they +killed the Christians who refused to blaspheme Jesus, and they captured +Jerusalem from the Romans. After a fierce struggle the Romans took +Jerusalem again, and crowds of Jews were either massacred, or sold as +slaves by the oak of Abraham at Hebron and in the markets of Egypt. + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving for faith, charity, steadfastness, the +certainty of Christ's coming to "render vengeance" and "to be glorified +in His saints" (i.). + +Apocalyptic passage, renewed thanksgiving, exhortation to hold the +traditions already received, invocation of Christ and our Father to +comfort and stablish the converts (ii.). + +St. Paul requests their prayers for himself, anticipates their +Christian progress, excommunication of disorderly brethren commanded. +The apostle had worked for his living, they must do likewise. He +commends them to the Lord, and appends a salutation in his own hand as +a seal of authenticity (iii.). + + + +[1] _Ad Phil._ ii. + +[2] _Trypho_, 110. + + + + +{133} + +CHAPTER X + +THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans is +admitted by almost every modern critic, Christian or not Christian. It +was always acknowledged by F. C. Baur, who rejected all the Epistles +bearing the name of St. Paul except these four. This Epistle is +referred to in several writings of the 2nd century, and is unmistakably +mentioned in the letter written to the Corinthians by St. Clement of +Rome about A.D. 95. He says, "Take up the Epistle of the blessed Paul +the apostle. What did he first write to you in the beginning of the +Gospel? Of a truth he sent a letter to you by the Spirit concerning +himself, and also Cephas and Apollos, because you had even then formed +parties" (cf. 1 Cor. i. 12). The style of the Epistle is spontaneous, +vivid, and coherent. The authenticity is only disputed by a tiny group +of infidel writers who, in reaction against Baur, have endeavoured to +make good their unbelief by asserting the genuineness of the Scriptures +which Baur rejected, and rejecting what Baur defended. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth" (i. 2). In former times +Corinth had been the most important city in Greece after Athens itself. +It was one of the earliest homes of Greek art, and its position made it +so favourable for commerce that it attracted a colony of Phoenician +traders at a very remote period. When its art declined, it remained +celebrated for its wealth and its {134} extreme licentiousness. The +patron deity of the Corinthians was Aphrodite, who was no other than +the foul Phoenician Astarte. Her temple on the rock of the +Acrocorinthus dominated the city below, and from it there came a stream +of impure, influences "to turn men into swine." + +In B.C. 146 the city was captured by the Roman general Mummius. It was +left desolate until B.C. 46, when Julius Caesar refounded it as a Roman +colony. The Romans called the whole of Greece the province of Achaia, +and constituted Corinth the capital of it. While Athens was still the +seat of the greatest university in the world, where lived most +vigorously the glorious memories of bygone Greece, the government of +the province was directed from Corinth. When St. Paul visited it, it +was under a proconsul, Junius Gallio, the brother of the philosopher +Seneca. The possession of two good harbours, and its position on the +quickest route from Rome to the East, caused a rapid revival of +Corinthian wealth and Corinthian manners. There was also a good deal +of literary and philosophic culture. In the time of St. Paul the +descendants of the original Roman colonists probably formed a small +aristocracy among the mass of Greek dwellers at Corinth, and some +settlements of various nationalities, including one of Jews, were +living there. A few miles away, at the shrine of Poseidon, were held +the athletic Isthmian games, and still by the sea-shore there grow the +pine trees, such as furnished the quickly withering wreaths which were +given to the victors in the race. + +The Church of Corinth was founded by St. Paul on his second missionary +journey, during his first visit to Europe. His stay at Corinth lasted +for eighteen months. There is an account of it in Acts xviii. He +laboured at tent-making, and found a home with a devout Jewish couple, +Aquila and Priscilla. At first he preached in the synagogue, where he +converted the ruler of the synagogue, Crispus. Being rejected by the +Jews, he turned to the Gentiles, and held his meetings {135} in the +house of Justus, a converted proselyte. The Jews prosecuted St. Paul +before Gallio, who, however, dismissed the case with contemptuous +indifference. The converts to Christianity were numerous. They were +mostly Gentiles (1 Cor. xii. 2), but there were a few influential +Jewish Christians and some Gentiles who had been proselytes of Judaism. +It is clear that the Church contained a few men of good birth and +education (1 Cor. i. 26), but the majority were from the poorer +classes. The Corinthians as Christians were by no means entirely free +from the characteristics which had marked them as citizens. They were +ready to form cliques and quarrel in the name of Christ, and they still +showed the same quarrelsome mood in the time of St. Clement. They +found it hard to hate the sensuality which in their earlier days they +had regarded as divine. They were puffed up with eloquence and +philosophic speculation, and forgot that there is no "sweetness and +light" comparable to the Gospel. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +This Epistle was written from Ephesus in the spring of A.D. 55. The +note at the end of the Epistle to the effect that it was written "from +Philippi," though ancient, is incorrect, and is due to a +misunderstanding of xvi. 5. + +When St. Paul left Corinth in April, A.D. 52, to go to Jerusalem, +Apollos came to take his place, and preached with much success (Acts +xviii. 27). St. Paul returned to Ephesus at the end of the summer of +52, and Apollos left Corinth and joined St. Paul. Soon some Judaizing +teachers appeared at Corinth, and the apostle was obliged to go +thither, though "in sorrow" (2 Cor. ii. 1; cf. 2 Cor. xii. 14; xiii. +1). After this disciplinary visit he returned to Ephesus, and sent the +Corinthians a sharp letter, now lost, about the relations which they +should have with open and notorious evil-livers (1 Cor. v. 9). + +St. Paul's next news from Corinth caused him to write this letter. +Some members of Chloe's household told him of the development of +factions there; and a letter was sent, perhaps {136} by the hands of +Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (xvi. 15-18), asking for advice +about matters of grave importance, including litigation between +Christians and an unseemly freedom in public worship. Realizing the +serious state of affairs, St. Paul determined to visit Corinth a third +time, and sent Timothy as his representative to prepare for his coming +(1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 10). After Timothy's departure he wrote this +Epistle. + +The above account assumes that St. Paul's _second visit_ to Corinth was +paid before 1 Corinthians was written, but it is thought by some +writers of repute that it was paid after 1 Corinthians was written and +before 2 Corinthians. + +[Sidenote Character and Contents.] + +This Epistle, like each of the three other Epistles belonging to the +same group, has a perfectly distinct character of its own. It expounds +the doctrine of a crucified Christ as applied to social difficulties. +What Romans does as a theological treatise, and Galatians as a +controversial admonition, and 2 Corinthians as a record of personal +experience and vocation, this 1 Corinthians does as an instruction for +influencing a corrupt urban life with the leaven of the gospel. It is +very practical in tone, and the doctrine which it contains is not +stated separately, but is throughout woven into the cords of the +apostle's argument. There is nothing in the New Testament equal to +this Epistle in its power of bringing us close to the difficulties of +the Church in an ancient city. We seem to see the men and women who +composed it--their eagerness for religious novelties, their debased +surroundings, their anarchic divisions, their frail sense of moral +responsibility. And a modern reader will probably lay the letter down +with a conviction that our great modern cities have much to learn from +the words written by St. Paul to Corinth, "the light of Greece." + +The Epistle is very olderly in arrangement. It deals first with the +report which St. Paul had received about the Corinthian Church +(i.-vi.); then it answers various questions {137} which the Corinthians +had submitted to him (vii.-xi. 1). Then follow directions based on the +report and the questions. + +The letter opens with a significant salutation and thanksgiving (i. +1-9). St. Paul then proceeds to rebuke the Corinthian _tendency to +party spirit_. There were apparently four parties in the Church. The +first asserted that they were followers of _Paul_; the second preferred +the rhetorical preaching of _Apollos_ to Paul's simplicity; the +third--probably Judaizers--ranged themselves under the name of _Cephas_ +as the leader of the original apostles; the fourth repudiated human +leaders, and arrogantly named their clique that of _Christ_, thereby +insinuating that the other parties were less Christian than themselves. +It is evident that all these four names were really used as party +watchwords. St. Paul says that he has _transferred by a fiction_ (iv. +6) the action of the wranglers to himself and Apollos. He means by +this, not that the Corinthians did not employ these names in their +strife, but that he and Apollos were in no sense responsible for the +strife. Some perplexity has been caused by the name of the +Christ-party. It is thought by some that they were rigid Jewish +Christians from Jerusalem (2 Cor. iii. 1; xi. 22). But it is more +probable that they were only a body of Christians who protested against +the parties named after human leaders, and saying, "We are the people," +made a new party of their own. + +St. Paul shows that this sectarian spirit is entirely alien to the +whole principle and history of the Christian faith. That faith, though +it is a wisdom which comes from God, does not lend itself to pride of +intellect. It is deliberately content to be counted foolish by the +world; its sign is the cross, its converts are the poor and +insignificant Corinthians, its eloquence the unpolished speaking of the +apostle himself. And as to their personal preferences for receiving +spiritual benefits from one Christian teacher rather than another, this +shows a complete misconception as to the source of the benefit and the +position of the teacher. This is explained in iii. 1-iv. 5. All +spiritual {138} increase comes from God. Christ is the Foundation. +Human teachers are not figure-heads of different schools, but the +instruments and the stewards through whom God dispenses His gifts. It +is not the duty of Christian teachers to put forward original ideas on +religion. + +Then the apostle, after referring to their ostentatious +self-righteousness, pathetically shows the unfitness of pitting against +one another teachers who share in an equality of forlorn destitution +and contempt (iv. 6-13). He concludes this section with an +affectionate but authoritative speech: he says that he has sent Timothy +to Corinth, and hopes shortly to come himself (iv. 14-21). + +The apostle proceeds with sharp decision to deal with _a case of +incest_. The Corinthians had treated this gross offence almost with +levity, but St. Paul declares that the offender shall be excommunicated +and shall be punished by disease (v. 1-8). After explaining some +advice of his earlier letter (v. 9-13), he goes on to rebuke a third +abuse--_litigation_ between Christians in pagan law-courts. The love +of law-suits was mischievous in itself, as involving a breach of +Christian brotherhood. It was also scandalous in its effects, as +exposing the bickerings of the disciples of Christ to the ridicule of +unbelievers. A stern rebuke of vice follows (vi. 1-11). Then comes an +indignant and lofty argument against fornication, which is a defilement +of the temple of the Holy Ghost (vi. 12-20). + +St. Paul now turns to the various questions that the Corinthians have +asked him. He first gives some advice about _matrimony_, carefully +distinguishing between statements which he makes on his own authority, +and rules laid down by Christ, and also between counsels of perfection +and the obligations of ordinary Christians. It is excellent to lead a +single life, but in view of prevailing sensuality, he recommends +marriage as generally more prudent. He advises that when people do +marry, there should be a fulfilment of conjugal duties except for {139} +occasional devotion "unto prayer." One permanently important assertion +in the apostle's teaching is that both marriage and celibacy imply a +"gift from God." St. Paul would have had no sympathy with either any +mediaeval depreciation of married life, or the modern English notion +that a man has not "settled down" until he has married (vii. 1-40). + +The next question is whether converts may eat _meat that has been +offered to idols_. With strong common-sense, the apostle points out +that there is here no alternative between essential right and wrong. +You may eat it, because an idol is nothing, but you must take care not +to hurt the consciences of other Christians (viii.). You may eat +anything that you buy in the market-place, but you must not attend an +idolatrous feast in a temple, and if you are at a private house you +must not eat food offered to idols if your attention has been directly +called to its character (x. 23-32). St. Paul illustrates his meaning +by reference to his own self-denial--the policy he had at Corinth of +exacting no payment for his ministry, his tactful caution, his severe +self-control (ix.). The need of such self-control is proved by the +fact that the ancient Jews, in spite of their high privileges, fell +into carelessness and sin (x. 1-13). The Corinthians must not be like +the Jews. The nature of the Eucharist warns them to be scrupulously +careful about temple feasts. There cannot be a drinking of the chalice +of Christ and of the cup of devils (x. 14-22). + +Chapter xi. deals with _public worship_. St. Paul gives directions for +women to cover the head in church, and then comes a reference to the +Holy Eucharist which is of extreme interest and importance. It was the +custom for Christians to meet together before the Eucharist for a +common meal called the Agapé, which was intended to commemorate the +Lord's Last Supper. St. Paul complains that this meal has been made an +occasion of sin among the Corinthians: the richer people had overeaten +themselves, while the poor were left hungry and ashamed. The apostle +sets off the unfitness of {140} this conduct by a brief exposition of +the Eucharist; the preliminary meal, so much misused by these +ungracious and ungenerous Christians, was intended to be a preparation +for the ineffable Feast, at which the Fare was the very Body and Blood +of Jesus Christ, and at which His death was solemnly represented (xi. +2-34). + +St. Paul deals next with _spiritual gifts_, saying that they come from +God, and so give no ground for boasting, and that the exercise of them +is only pleasing to God if it be joined with charity. After a sublime +chapter on charity, he lays down some regulations for those who +possessed these abnormal gifts, which, it is evident, were already the +cause of disorders in the Church. The Corinthians, with their craving +for the miraculous, tended to set a high value on speaking with +tongues, but St. Paul upholds the superiority of the more intelligible +and useful gift of prophecy (xii.-xiv.). + +The Epistle concludes with a splendid argument for the reality of the +_Resurrection_. It is directed against some false philosophy. St. +Paul claims for the fact of the resurrection of Christ the witness of +Scripture, of many honest and intelligent Christians, and of himself. +Then he goes on to show to the Corinthian objectors what a denial of +the resurrection of the dead involves. It means that Christ did not +rise, that I am preaching deceit, that you are believing a lie, that +the dead in Christ have no existence except as memories, that we who +have foregone the pleasures of this life have done so in pursuit of a +delusive phantom. But it cannot be so. Christ is really risen. And +St. Paul passes on to demonstrate the happy consequences which follow +from this. The Resurrection is the earnest of all that Christ will do +for man; and in the light of it Christian baptism for the sake of the +dead[1] and Christian heroism have their meaning (xv. 1-34). + +{141} + +In order to remove difficulties from the mind of an objector, St. Paul +discusses the kind of body which we shall have at the Resurrection. He +shows by analogies from nature (a) that God is able to effect the +transformation of a seed-grain into a new product, and can therefore +transform us while retaining a connection between our present and +future body; (b) that God is able to create a variety of embodiments, +and can therefore give us a higher embodiment than we now possess. +There will be a spiritual body adapted to the spiritual world, as truly +as our natural body is adapted to life in this world. Thus the gospel +is truly a gospel for the body as well as for the spirit. Our whole +personality will be saved, and nothing will be discarded (xv. 35-58). + +St. Paul concludes with an order for the collection of alms on behalf +of the faithful in Jerusalem, and says that he hopes to come soon to +Corinth. After some personal matters, he characteristically appends +with his own hand a curse on those who do not love the Lord, and a +prayer and loving message for the faithful. + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving (i. 1-9). + +(1) Evils in the Church: i. 10-vi. 20.--Sectarianism. This is rebuked +on the ground that all the apostles, etc., are working for one end, and +all their power is God's. Christ is supreme over all (i. 10-iv. 21). + +Incest. The Church is to deliver the sinner to Satan (the severest +form of excommunication). St. Paul mentions a previous warning not to +associate with immoral Christians (v.). + +{142} + +Going to law with a Christian in the pagan courts is rebuked. Warning +against profligacy (vi.). + +(2) Answers to a letter from the Corinthians: vii. 1-xi. 1.--Marriage +and celibacy. It is well to avoid marriage. But the married must not +separate. Under present circumstances, the apostle would prefer others +to be unencumbered as he is (vii.). + +Food offered to idols. Christian liberty (viii.). St. Paul's example +in not claiming one's own rights (ix.). Danger of thinking that we +stand. We are "one bread," and must seek each other's good (x.-xi. 1). + +(3) Other evils in the Church: xi. 2-34.--Women to be covered. Conduct +at the Eucharist and the Agapé. An account of the institution of the +Eucharist. + +(4) Answer to a question concerning spiritual gifts: xii.-xiv.--Unity +in diversity (xii.). Charity the greatest gift (xiii.). Prophesying +and tongues compared (xiv.). + +(5) Vindication of the Resurrection: xv.--The evidence for Christ's +resurrection.[2] The nature of our resurrection. + +(6) Some directions and personal details: xvi. + + + +[1] 1 Cor. xv. 29. This verse is very obscure. It has been +interpreted as meaning that when a convert died before it was possible +for him to be baptized, it was a custom of the Corinthians to allow a +friend to undergo baptism in his stead. But perhaps it simply means +being baptized for the sake of some dear one who was a sincere +Christian, and begged that his or her surviving relatives would be +baptized and meet him or her hereafter. + +[2] It is important to notice that St. Paul, in writing of the death +and resurrection of our Lord, gives powerful evidence in support of St. +John's assertion that our Lord died on Nisan 14 (see above, p. 29). In +1 Cor. v. 7, 8 he says, "Our Passover also hath been sacrificed, even +Christ: wherefore let us keep the feast"; and in 1 Cor. xv. 20 he calls +Christ "the first-fruits of them that are asleep." Now, if Christ died +on Nisan 14, when the Passover lamb was sacrificed for a feast, and if +He rose on Nisan 16, when the Passover firstfruits were offered in the +temple, this double comparison is exquisitely appropriate. But if the +statement in John is false, St. Paul's comparison is forced and +unnatural. + + + +{143} + +CHAPTER XI + +THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of this Epistle is almost universally admitted, +although it is not quoted quite as early as the First Epistle. The two +Epistles are interwoven with each other by several threads of thought, +such as St. Paul's intention to visit Macedonia, his decision with +regard to the incestuous man, and his direction to collect alms for the +Christians of Jerusalem. Moreover, this Epistle agrees with the Book +of Acts, and at the same time is plainly independent of it. Acts does +not mention _Titus_, whose name is prominent in 2 Corinthians, and at +the same time Acts xx. 5, 6 corroborates the account of the visit to +_Troas_ in 2 Cor. ii. 12, 13. The whole style of the Epistle is so +natural and impassioned, so wonderful in its light and gloom, that +there is only one author to whom we can possibly attribute it. + +There is, however, a difficulty with regard to the last four chapters. +It is thought by some critics that they are a separate Epistle written +by St. Paul to the Corinthians, and afterwards joined to chs. i.-ix. +These writers are usually of the opinion that the last four chapters +were written before i.-ix., and that their theory will account for the +fact that they are more severe and depressed in tone. Now, it is true +that i.-ix. seem more hopeful than x.-xiii., and also that i.-ix. +contain two references to a previous letter (ii. 4; vii. 8, 9). We +find, too, in 2 {144} Cor. i. 23; ii. 1, 4, that the apostle shows a +shrinking from the thought of another visit to Corinth, while in 1 +Corinthians no such feeling is manifested. If, however, 2 Cor. +x.-xiii. had been written in the interval, the feeling is not +unreasonable. But the facts of the case seem to be most easily +explained by the belief that there was a letter written between 1 and 2 +Corinthians, but that this letter has been lost. In spite of the +difference in tone between the two parts of 2 Corinthians, there is +sufficient continuity of theme to make us hesitate to detach them. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which +are in the whole of Achaia." The latter part of the address shows us +that St. Paul felt it necessary to vindicate himself to all the +Christians in Greece (Hellas). His opponents had evidently been +extremely active. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The Epistle was written in A.D. 55, a few months after 1 Corinthians, +from some town in Macedonia, probably Philippi. It was sent by the +hands of Titus and perhaps St. Luke (2 Cor. viii. 18-23). + +The First Epistle was received submissively by the Corinthians, the +strife of parties subsided, and the case of incest was dealt with as +the apostle required. In consequence of this happy result, it seems +that St. Paul decided to visit the Corinthians on his way to Macedonia, +sailing straight to Corinth from Ephesus (2 Cor. i. 15), as well as to +pay them the visit which he had promised before (1 Cor. xvi. 5). + +Timothy, who had arrived at Corinth in accordance with St. Paul's +previous wish (1 Cor. iv. 17; xvi. 10), soon returned to Ephesus with +news of a second and more serious crisis. We do not know what caused +it, or what was precisely its character, but it is certain that St. +Paul's motives and authority were harshly and openly challenged. +Perhaps Timothy himself was insulted, and therefore, indirectly, the +apostle who gave him his commission and authority. St. Paul wrote at +once a {145} very sharp letter, which is the _second lost letter_ to +the Corinthians, and he resolved to return to his earlier plan of +visiting them only as he came south from Macedonia. He made this +resolution to spare them for the present the pain of meeting him. This +lost letter was probably sent by Titus (2 Cor. xii. 18), who also +carried instructions with regard to the collection for the poor at +Jerusalem. Apparently St. Paul thought that it would be wiser not to +entrust Timothy with the delicate task of again calming the Corinthian +wranglers. As soon as Titus left, St. Paul was full of nervous +apprehension as to the effect which this letter would produce. He set +out from Ephesus (2 Cor. i. 8-10) in great anxiety, his departure being +perhaps precipitated by the riot so graphically described in Acts. He +tells us himself that when he came to Troas he had still no relief for +his spirit--no news from Corinth. Though he found an opening for the +gospel at Troas, he hurried on into Macedonia, and at last Titus came +with joyful news of the penitence and submission of the Corinthians. +St. Paul then wrote this Epistle. Towards the end of December, A.D. +55, he reached Corinth, where he stayed for three months. + +The Book of Acts fits perfectly with the Epistles. From Acts xx. 1-3 +we see that St. Paul did visit Macedonia and Greece at the close of his +stay at Ephesus, and from Acts xix. 22 we see that he sent Timothy +before him. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle has the nature of a letter sent by a spiritual father to +his children rather than of a doctrinal treatise with an argument +carefully built up. Its value for us lies chiefly in the vivid reality +with which it reflects the personality of the writer, his love for his +converts, his intense conviction that his apostolic commission and +power are entirely genuine--a conviction which is set off by his wish +always to associate himself with the weakness and fragility of ordinary +human nature. Throughout the Epistle there are scattered allusions to +Christian doctrine which are of the very highest importance. Before +giving an outline of the {146} Epistle, we may notice one or two +doctrinal passages of special importance. + +First, with regard to the Resurrection. The teaching of 1 Corinthians +is further explained. St. Paul shows how entirely he has thrown off +the feeling of terror which environed the ordinary Jewish idea of +death. The sense of union with God by which a few Jews in some rare +flashes of inspiration knew that they would live after death, is here +triumphant. St. Paul regards death as a portal to that happy existence +which can only be described as being "at home with the Lord" (2 Cor. v. +1-8; cf. Phil. i. 23). Union with Christ _now_ absolutely guarantees +union with Him hereafter. The resurrection-body which in 1 Corinthians +he described as "a spiritual body," he poetically calls the "house from +heaven" which God will provide for the redeemed spirit. Then he thinks +of this new body as a _robe_. And as he hopes that Christ will come +again before we have put off our present body in death, he says that he +desires to be clothed with the new body over his present body, "if so +be that being clothed we shall not be found naked." The last phrase is +obscure, but it probably is a fresh rebuke of those Corinthians who +denied the resurrection of the body. If so, it means "assuming, as is +indeed the case, that we shall really be found clothed with a body at +Christ's coming, and not naked (_i.e._ bodiless spirits)." + +Secondly, with regard to the work of Christ. In 2 Cor. iv. 4 He is +called the "image of God." Now, St. Paul teaches that we men may +reflect the likeness of Christ to God: + + "The truth in God's breast + Lies trace for trace upon ours impressed: + Though He is so bright and we so dim, + We are made in His image to witness Him." + +But St. Paul also teaches that the relation between the Son and the +Father is unique. He means that Christ reveals the Father completely +in virtue of this eternal relation between them. We are made to become +like God, but the Son is not {147} made; He does not belong to the +class of created things (1 Cor. viii. 6). And St. Paul never speaks of +Christ _becoming_ the Son of God. He regards Christ as having always +been the Son, exercising divine functions, and therefore as "God +blessed for ever" (Rom. ix. 5). In 2 Cor. iii. 17, 18 he asserts that +the Lord is the divine Spirit who animates the new dispensation. The +old Jewish dispensation is described as "letter," because it was a +system of outward commandments; the Gospel dispensation is described as +"spirit," because it is a system of spiritual principles which are +summed up in Christ. We by reflecting His glory are transformed into +the same image by successive stages of glory. This glory comes from +the Lord Jesus, who is the Spirit of Christianity (2 Cor. iii. 18). It +is important to notice that St. Paul does not confuse the Second Person +of the Trinity with the Third Person, and that for many years the +Christians used occasionally to describe the divine nature of the Son +by the word "Spirit." They gradually gave up this manner of speaking, +as it was ambiguous. + +In 2 Cor. v. 18-21 there is an important statement on the Atonement. +The close connection between the Atonement and the Incarnation is shown +in the assertion that "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto +Himself," and the love of both the Father and the Son is shown in the +words that "He made Him to be sin on our behalf." The first statement +saves us from the idea that God selected a holy man to reveal His will, +and then gave up this best of men to unimaginable suffering. No! it +was God Himself who came in the Person of the Sufferer. The second +statement implies that Christ, though sinless, was treated as a sinner. +He thus by dying accomplished the end which our punishment would +accomplish, namely, the expression of God's hatred of sin and love of +righteousness. + +The Epistle opens with an introduction and thanksgiving, in which there +seems to be a note of sadness, marking the effect which the crisis in +Corinth has left on the mind of St. Paul. He proceeds to give a +personal explanation. The visit to the {148} Corinthians on the way to +Macedonia was abandoned only because of the pain which it would have +given them; the sharp letter was not written in wrath, but in sorrowful +love (i. 23-ii. 1-4). St. Paul goes on to ask pardon for the man who +caused the recent disturbance (ii. 5-11). + +Then, whilst he is describing his journey to Macedonia (ii. 12-17), he +breaks off suddenly into a digression, in which he describes the +dignity of the apostolic ministry, its superiority over the Mosaic +ministry, the nature of its commission, and the seal of it in a life +which is always martyrdom (iii. 1-vi. 13). St. Paul concludes this +section with a short appeal to the Corinthians to avoid contamination +from heathenism (vi. 14-vii. 1). + +He then returns to the situation of ii. 13. He tells us with how much +joy he received the news that Titus brought him--joy for the +Corinthians, for Titus, and for himself. The next two chapters (viii., +ix.) contain instructions and exhortations respecting the fund +mentioned in 1 Cor. xvi. 1. The last four chapters follow quite +naturally. The apostle speaks with plain severity to rebuke those who +created the recent disturbance, and to warn any there may be whose +submission perhaps has not been quite entire. The prevailing tone is +that of pathetic and sorrowful expostulation. St. Paul repeats the +unkind things that have been said of him--how unimposing his presence, +that he depends on alms, that he is only eloquent with his pen. But he +defends his apostleship with absolute though very humble confidence, +counting up the things that he can say for himself--his share in Jewish +privileges, his sufferings for Christ, the revelations that God has +sent him, the signs of his success, the continual weakness that Christ +gives and blesses. Truly, the apostle is even greater than his grief. + +The Epistle concludes with a benediction, in which St. Paul +co-ordinates the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. From primitive +times these words have been used as the introduction to the most solemn +part of the Greek liturgy, from which they were taken into the services +of the Church of England. + +{149} + +ANALYSIS + +(1) St. Paul's thankfulness and exhortation: i. 1-ii. 17.--Salutation, +thanksgiving, the promised visit postponed, the previous letter, the +penitent offender. St. Paul's journey to Macedonia, triumph in Christ. + +(2) The Apostle's ministry: iii. 1-vii. 1.--His converts are his +letters of commendation, the superiority of this ministry of the gospel +above that of the Mosaic dispensation (iii.). + +Christ the subject of his preaching, present light affliction resulting +in eternal glory (iv.). + +Inspiring hopes of the resurrection, constraining love of Christ, the +ministry of reconciliation based on the atonement (v.). + +He persuades and suffers (vi. 1-13). + +Warning against being yoked with unbelievers (vi. 14-vii. 1). + +(3) The Corinthian Church and Titus: vii. 2-ix. 15.--The visit of Titus +to Corinth, the godly sorrow that followed (vii. 2-16). + +The collection for the poor at Jerusalem, Macedonian generosity, praise +of Titus (viii.). + +Exhortation to a generosity like that of the Macedonians (ix.). + +(4) A sorrowful expostulation: x.-xiii.--A warning to those who despise +his authority (x.). + +His rights and his sufferings for Christ (xi.). + +Revelations given, but also a thorn in the flesh, the signs of an +apostle, how he and Titus had dealt with the Corinthians (xii.). + +He repeats that he will come to Corinth a third time, exhortation, +benediction (xiii.). + + + + +{150} + +CHAPTER XII + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +This Epistle, being one of the four Epistles which are almost +universally unquestioned, requires little or no defence. The Pauline +authorship "has never been called in question by a critic of first-rate +importance, and until recently has never been called in question at +all." The writings of those Fathers of the Church who lived nearest to +the apostolic age contain several possible allusions to it, and it is +expressly named by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. +The internal evidence shows that it must belong to the time of the +apostles, for the errors which are criticized in it are different from +the Ebionite ideas which existed at the beginning of the 2nd century, +and from the Gnosticism which existed even before the apostles were all +dead. They are evidently earlier than these heresies. Still more +convincing is the vehement and pathetic energy which marks this +Epistle. There is a ring of reality in its broken sentences and +earnest appeals. It displays none of the careful patchwork which we +should expect from a forger; it consists only of the quick hot words of +a man who is very deeply moved. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto the Churches of Galatia." What is the meaning of the name +"Galatia"? Students are still divided on the question. If the word +"Galatia" is used in a popular sense to describe the country inhabited +by the Galatai, then it means North Galatia, a district in {151} the +extreme north of Asia Minor. It was mainly inhabited by Celts, who +came thither from Europe in the 3rd century B.C., and spoke a Celtic +language as late as the 2nd and even 4th century after Christ. This +language is mentioned by Pausanias, and St. Jerome says that it was a +dialect only slightly varying from that used in Gaul by the Treveri. +But if the word "Galatia" is used in a political sense, signifying a +particular province of the Roman empire, then it means a large area +much further south, including Pisidia, Lycaonia, and part of Phrygia. +In this province were Pisidian Antioch, Derbe, Iconium, and Lystra, +where St. Paul founded Churches in A.D. 47, on his first missionary +journey. The latter explanation is almost certainly correct. + +No good argument can be brought forward in favour of North Galatia +which cannot be balanced by a better argument in favour of South +Galatia. For instance, though St. Luke in Acts uses the popular and +not the political names for districts, this cannot be urged in favour +of St. Paul's adopting the same usage. On the contrary, he uses Asia, +Macedonia, and Achaia in their political sense, and so we may suppose +that he would do the same in the case of Galatia. Again, though there +were in North Galatia Jews who would tempt the converts to Jewish +observances, there were Jews in plenty in South Galatia also. And +while many writers have said that the Celtic blood of these +recalcitrant Christians is proved by the enthusiasm, fickleness, +superstition, love of strife, and vanity which St. Paul rebukes, we may +reasonably urge that these defects are not confined to the Celts. The +Phrygians doted on a sombre and mysterious religion. In heathen times +they loved the worship of Cybele, with its exciting ceremonial and +cruel mutilations. And when they adopted Christianity, though their +morality was generally austere, their credulity was intense. In the +2nd century many of them embraced the new revelations of Montanus, and +in the 4th they largely affected the hard Puritanism of Novatian. In +religious matters the Celts are very little {152} inclined to +fickleness, and their superstitions are more closely connected with +dreaminess than with vehemence. + +The following facts also deserve attention; (1) It would be strange if +Acts gave us no account of Churches in which St. Paul took so much +interest. If Galatia be North Galatia, there is no such account in +Acts. If it be South Galatia there is, and the polite and natural +manner of addressing the inhabitants of the cities of Antioch, Derbe, +etc., would be "Galatians." Their bond of union was association in one +Roman province. (2) It is improbable that St. Paul would take the very +difficult journey necessary for visiting the Celtic Galatians. His +usual plan was to travel on Roman high-roads to the big centres of +population. North Galatia was both isolated and half-civilized. Also, +he says that he visited the Galatians on account of an illness (iv. +13). It is incredible that he would have chosen the long unhealthy +journey to North Galatia when he was ill. But it is extremely probable +that he left the damp lowlands of Pamphylia for the bracing air of +Pisidian Antioch. The malady was probably the malarial neuralgia and +fever which are contracted in those lowlands. (3) The Epistle contains +technical legal terms for adoption, covenant, and tutor, which seem to +be used not in the Roman but in the Greek sense.[1] They would hardly +be intelligible except in cities like those of South Galatia where the +institutions were mainly Greek. + +Assuming that the "Galatians" are those of South Galatia, we note that +in Gal. iv. 13 St. Paul speaks of preaching to them "the first time." +This first time must be the occasion mentioned in Acts xiii., xiv. The +second time is that in Acts xvi. 1-6. The Christians were mainly +converts from heathenism (iv. 8; v. 2; vi. 12), but some were no doubt +Jews or proselytes. {153} After the second visit of St. Paul, his +converts were tampered with. Some Judaizers had put a perverse +construction upon his action in promulgating the decrees of the Council +of Jerusalem of A.D. 49, and in circumcising Timothy. They urged that +St. Paul had thereby acknowledged his inferiority to the other +apostles, and practically advocated a return to Jewish ceremonial. +Instigated by other Judaizers from Jerusalem, the Galatians had changed +their Christianity into a semi-Judaism, and this all the more readily +because of their previous familiarity with the Jewish religion. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The place and date are both uncertain. The words, "I marvel that ye +are so _quickly_ removing from Him that called you" (i. 6), suggest +that it was written not long after the conversion of the Galatians. +But we cannot place it, as some writers have done, before 1 and 2 +Thessalonians. Its style is allied with that of 1 and 2 Corinthians +and Romans. It must be earlier than Romans, as it is like a rough +model of that Epistle. If written soon before Romans, it was probably +composed at Corinth early in A.D. 56. It may, however, have been +written as early as A.D. 52, before St. Paul's third missionary journey. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle is intended to recall the Galatians to St. Paul's true +gospel. In order to do this, he vindicates his own apostolic authority +to preach it, and expounds its great principle--justification by faith, +and not by observance of the Jewish law. + +After a salutation, without the congratulations which the apostle +ordinarily offers, St. Paul expresses his astonishment at their +perversion, and vehemently asserts that if any one dares to preach a +gospel other than that which the Galatians first received, let him be +anathema (i. 1-10). The history of St. Paul's reception of the gospel +is then set out. It came to him by revelation of Jesus Christ: this is +at once the demonstration of its unique authority, and the decisive +fact which settles the relation of St. Paul to the other apostles. He +did {154} not receive from them the gospel he preached, and, to +emphasize this, St. Paul counts up the various opportunities he had of +intercourse with them, and says what use he made of each (i. 11-ii. +10). The best illustration of the independence of his position is the +attitude which he adopted towards St. Peter, the prince of the +apostles, when at Antioch he deceitfully took the same sort of line +with respect to Jewish ceremonial that the Galatians are taking now +(ii. 11-13).[2] St. Paul describes the speech he made in opposition to +St. Peter, but while he is dictating it, he is carried away by an +orator's enthusiasm: he forgets that he is telling the story only of an +old debate, and at some points we cannot confidently distinguish the +rebuke to St. Peter from the exhortation to the Galatians (ii. 14-21). + +Then, still as if he were making a speech, the apostle proceeds to +argue as he does later in the Epistle to the Romans. He recalls to the +"bewitched" Galatians the happy memories of the days when they first +heard of Christ--the out-pouring of the Spirit, the first sharp +persecution endured so well. Did not all this happen when they were +under the gospel of Faith (iii. 2-5)? The true sons of Abraham are +those who accept the gospel (iii. 6-9). On the other hand, the people +who still desire to be under the Law can only avoid being under a curse +by keeping the whole Law--and this is impossible (iii. 10). God's will +is plain: He has said, "The righteous shall live by faith" (iii. 11, +12). Moreover, whatever claim the Law had on us is now discharged by +the satisfaction made by Christ (iii. 13, 14). Now St. Paul goes on to +show that the promise made by God to Abraham binds Him still. Just as +no subsequent transaction can nullify a Greek "covenant," _i.e._ will, +so the Law cannot nullify the earlier promise of God (iii. 15-18).[3] +Then he compares the promise made to {155} Abraham with the Law. The +latter was a contract, a mutual agreement between two parties involving +mutual obligations; if the Jews did not keep the Law, God was not bound +to bless them. But in the case of the promise, there is no suggestion +of contract. Then, lest his readers should suppose that there was an +inconsistency in the fact that God was the Author of both the Law and +the promise, St. Paul adds an explanation (iii. 19-22). The Law would +have been contrary to the promise if it had been intended to produce +the same result as the promise by another method. But, on the +contrary, the Law was added as a parenthesis in order to make known +transgressions, and with the result that it increased them (iii. 19). +Scripture shut up all mankind in the fold of sin, that they might look +forward to the reign of faith as the only means of escape. To +emphasize further the contrast between the Law and the promise, St. +Paul asserts that the Law did not come direct from God to man. It +came, as Jewish traditions said, from God and the angels to Moses, the +mediator, and from him to the Hebrews. The Law had a mediator, +therefore it involved two parties--God and the Hebrew people. But +there was no such mediator in the case of the promise. God spoke +directly to Abraham. And God in the Person of Christ spoke directly to +mankind. Thus the promises are greater and more gracious than the Law. +It is important to observe that the argument implies the Divinity of +Christ. + +Before Faith came, the Law played the part of a Greek "tutor," _i.e._ a +trusted servant who attended a child. He took the child to the house +where he was taught, and kept him from harm and mischief. And we, if +we wish to be still under the Law, shall be as foolish as a grown-up +son who wishes to be under a steward and a guardian. We must leave the +mere rudiments of religion now that we have reached a stage at which we +have been taught that God is indeed our Father (iii. 23-iv. 11). + +St. Paul supports this conclusion from his arguments by a {156} +touching appeal, in which he gratefully recalls the kindness he +received from the Galatians when he came to them in all the weakness +and distress of fever (iv. 12-20). Then he interprets for them the +story of Hagar, probably in answer to a reference in a letter which +they had sent him (iv. 21-v. 1). The Jew is in bondage like Hagar's +child, the Christian is free like Sarah's child. + +After this we have another appeal, a medley of exhortation, warning, +denunciation, and pathetic entreaty: the apostle, himself so +appreciative of great ideas, tries to make the unaspiring Galatians +understand that they are called to the perfect freedom which is the +service of God (v. 2-26). The Epistle closes with some plain words +which the apostle wrote with his own hand in large characters so as to +emphasize them for his readers. The motive of the Judaizers is boldly +labelled. Then, as if there had been a question of his own humility, +he associates himself with the crucified Christ, for whose sake he +bears in his flesh the eloquent marks of the Roman rods and the stones +of the Jews. It was the cruel custom in Asia Minor, a custom not yet +extinct, for masters to wound their slaves with marks which made it +impossible for them to escape recognition. And so St. Paul glories in +the pitiful scars on his body, because they prove Whose he is and Whom +he serves. + +{157} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, rebuke (i. 1-10). + +(1) St. Paul defends his apostleship: i. 11-ii. 21.--He was called by +God in spite of his fanatical Judaism, God's Son was revealed in him, +he conferred with no man, but retired to Arabia, then three years after +his conversion he stayed fifteen days with Cephas, and afterwards +preached in Syria and Cilicia (i.). + +Fourteen years after his conversion[4] he again went to Jerusalem "by +revelation." False brethren attempted to get Titus circumcised, but in +vain. James, Cephas, and John were most friendly to Paul and Barnabas, +agreeing that they should go to the Gentiles while remembering the poor +in Jerusalem. Cephas rebuked at Antioch by St. Paul (ii.). + +(2) St. Paul defends justification by faith: iii. 1-v. 1.--Galatian +fickleness, even Abraham was justified by faith, and in the Old +Testament the righteous live by faith, the Jewish Law merely a +parenthesis between God's promise and its fulfilment, the Law a tutor +to bring us to Christ (iii.). + +Judaism is the state of a son who is a minor, Christianity is the state +of a son who has attained his majority. Why return to the beggarly +rudiments of knowledge? The Jew is like the child of Hagar, the +Christian is like the child of Sarah (iv.-v. 1). + +(3) Practical exhortation: v. 2-vi. 18.--Circumcision useless, freedom +and love are the allies of the true Law, the works of the flesh and the +fruits of the Spirit (v.). Bearing one another's burdens, supporting +our teachers. A conclusion in St. Paul's handwriting (vi.). + + + +[1] The law implied in Gal. iv. 2 is in accordance with Syrian law. If +a father died, he left his son under the authority of a steward until +he was fourteen, and left his property in the hands of a guardian until +he was twenty-five. It is probable that in South Galatia as in Syria +this law was made under the reign of the Seleucids. + +[2] For the explanation of this quarrel, see p. 121. + +[3] The argument about "seeds" and "seed," in iii. 16, looks like a +mere verbal quibble in English. But it becomes quite intelligible when +we remember that in rabbinical Hebrew the word "seed_s_" was used in +the sense of descendant_s_. + +[4] See Gal. ii. 1, "at an interval of fourteen years." This third +visit to Jerusalem (the second mentioned here) was in A.D. 49. The +verse probably means fourteen years after his _conversion_, and eleven +years after his first visit. If we reckon the fourteen years from his +_first visit_ to Jerusalem, the first visit would be in A.D. 33. This +will not agree with Acts ix. 25, 26; 2 Cor. xi. 32, which show us that +the first visit was made while Aretas ruled at Damascus. Aretas became +master of Damascus in A.D. 37. + + + + +{158} + +CHAPTER XIII + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of this Epistle, like that of Galatians and 1 and 2 +Corinthians, is practically undisputed. No one ever seems to have +questioned it between the time that Marcion drew up his _Apostolicon_, +about A.D. 140, and A.D. 1792. Before the time of Marcion it is quoted +by St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius, and St. Polycarp. And there seem +to be some reminiscences of it in 1 Peter. It is first definitely +mentioned by name in the writings of St. Irenaeus, who quotes it +several times. This early and frequent use postulates for the Epistle +a very authoritative source. There is no one that we know of among the +first Christians who could have written it except St. Paul. What he +tells the Romans about his personal wishes and intentions is exactly +consonant with what he says elsewhere. The notices that he gives them +of his movements perfectly accord with the notices in Acts. The +primary conceptions of the Epistle are more or less common to all St. +Paul's works. They are concerned with the guilt and the power of sin, +the eternal purpose which God has for man, the meaning of Christ's +death and the effect of His resurrection, the nature of our acquittal +by God and our new spiritual life. + +The only serious question with regard to the criticism of the outward +letter of the Epistle, is connected with the last two chapters (xv., +xvi.). Baur rejected both as spurious compilations, {159} intended to +reconcile "Paulinism" with the more Jewish school of early Christian +thought. But Baur's habit of pronouncing spurious every book or part +of a book which did not agree with his peculiar estimate of St. Paul, +is now discredited. In spite of this, many critics think that xv. and +xvi. do not belong to this Epistle. They are generally admitted to be +by St. Paul, but it is thought that they are simply pages which have +become detached from some other writings of the apostle. Chapter xvi. +in particular is supposed to be a fragment of an Epistle to Ephesus. +It abounds in personal greetings to intimate friends; and yet it is +difficult to believe that St. Paul had many friends in Rome before he +visited it. And among these friends are Prisca and Aquila (xvi. 3), +who certainly stayed at Ephesus, where St. Paul had laboured for two +years and must have had many friends. The tone of xvi. 17-20 is +thought to imply sectarian divisions which the rest of the Epistle +ignores. And the final doxology appears in different places in +different MSS., a fact which suggests that the early Church doubted +where the Epistle ended. No real importance need be attached to +another argument used by some critics, viz. that Marcion omitted xv. +and xvi. He would have rejected them, whether genuine or not, on +account of the sanction given to the Old Testament in xv. 4. + +On the other hand, the integrity of the Epistle is maintained by some +of the best recent critics, including Sanday, Zahn, and Godet. The +best MSS. place the final doxology in its present position. The fact +that the majority of cursive MSS. and some valuable versions, such as +the later Syriac and the Armenian, place it at the end of xiv. seems to +be accounted for by the fact that the last two chapters were often +omitted in the lessons read in church, being considered unimportant for +the purposes of general edification. The fact that the Epistle seems +to come to an end at xv. 33, and also at xvi. 20, before the final +doxology in xvi. 27, suggests the best solution. It is that the +apostle, after concluding the argument of the Epistle, made various +{160} additions of a personal nature with reference to himself and his +friends as they occurred to his mind. He then summed up the whole +argument in xvi. 25-27, where the obedience of _faith_ is stated to be +the purpose of God's final revelation. The number of friends mentioned +in xvi. is not incredibly large when we remember the easy and frequent +intercourse which existed between Rome and the east. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"To all that are in Rome, beloved by God, called to be saints." It has +been well said that the universality of the gospel made St. Paul desire +to preach it in the universal city. He longed to "see Rome;" he was +conscious that Christ had called him to "bear witness at Rome." He +himself had the freedom of the city of Rome, and he was inspired with +the hope, which was fulfilled three hundred years afterwards, that the +religion of Christ would be the religion of the Roman empire. The +territory then ruled by Rome more nearly embraced the whole of the +civilized world than any empire that has since been seen. It included +London and Toledo, Constantinople and Jerusalem. Roman soldiers kept +their watch on the blue Danube, and were planting outposts on the +far-off grey Euphrates. The city of Rome itself contained about a +million and a half of inhabitants. It was well governed and +sumptuously adorned. A real belief in the homely vulgar gods of their +forefathers had declined among educated people, and the humane +principles of Stoic philosophy were instilling a new regard for the +less fortunate classes of mankind. Strange foreign devotions were +satisfying some of the yearnings which found no nourishment in the hard +old Roman paganism. Men who took no interest in Jupiter were attracted +by Mithras, the Eastern god of the light. Women who could obtain no +entrance into the exclusive sisterhood of the Vestal Virgins, could +find occupation in the worship of the Egyptian Isis. Some vague belief +in a Divine One was rising in minds who thought that Jupiter Mithras +and Isis were only symbols of a power behind the mists of human wisdom. +Jews {161} of all classes were numerous, though the majority were as +poor as those of East London. They made some converts, and Poppaea, +the mistress of Nero in A.D. 58, dallied with Judaism as with a new +sensation. Men and women of every race were included among the slaves +of Rome, and the arts and elegance of Greek and Syrian slaves often +proved a staircase by which new religions found a way into the chambers +of the great and wealthy. In spite of some signs of moral vigour, +society was cankered with pride of class and with self-indulgence. It +possessed no regenerating force capable of checking the repulsive vice +which was encouraged by the obscenity of actors and the frivolity of +sceptics. + +We are told that "sojourners from Rome," both Jews and proselytes, were +in the crowd which listened to St. Peter's address on the Day of +Pentecost (Acts ii. 10). It is possible that these men brought news of +the gospel to the large body in Rome of Jews, and of Gentiles +influenced by Jewish ideas. In any case, communication between the +chief cities of the empire was at this time so frequent that we may be +sure that the principles and attractions of Christianity were soon +heard of at Rome. Gradually a small band formed there of people who +were interested and pleased by what they had learnt of Christ; it is +probable that St. Paul sent Aquila and Prisca from Ephesus to give them +definite instruction. It does not seem that they had been visited by +an apostle (xv. 20). The Epistle is addressed to a community +consisting of Jews and Gentiles, but the Gentiles are by far the more +numerous. + +The apostle's claim in ch. i. to address this Church as within the +jurisdiction of "the apostle of the Gentiles," his direct appeal to the +Gentiles in xi. 13, and the statement of his priestly office exercised +over the Gentiles in xv. 16, show that the Church of Rome was Gentile +in character. The proper names in the Epistle afford us little +indication of the proportion of Jews and Gentiles. The majority of the +names are Greek, and four names are Latin; but the Jews of that time, +like the {162} Jews of the present day, often passed under Gentile +names. We know how the English Jews now disguise Moses as "Moss" Judah +as "Leo," and Levi as "Lewis." + +The majority of the converts were probably in a humble social position. +When St. Paul wrote to the Philippians, there were Christians in the +imperial household itself, and it is possible that the Narcissus +mentioned in Romans may be the freedman of the Emperor Claudius, put to +death in A.D. 54. Ordinary slaves and freedmen seem to have been the +principal element among those who were first "called to be saints" at +Rome, but before long there were people of good birth and cultured +intelligence who turned gladly from the lifeless old Roman religion and +the fantastic new-fashioned Eastern cults to this original faith in the +incarnate God. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +St. Paul wrote this letter towards the end of his stay at Corinth, at +the close of A.D. 55 or the beginning of A.D. 56 (see xvi. 1; xv. +23-26, and Acts xix. 21). + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +St. Paul writes as the apostle of the Gentiles to the Christians of the +greatest of all Gentile cities. He does so with a solemn sense of +special responsibility. Profoundly impressed with the grandeur of the +Roman name, the position of this promiscuous little body of converts is +to him enormously significant. They are the representatives of the +faith of Jesus in the capital of the world; they are the first members +of a Church to which God seems to give the most magnificent of all +opportunities. And the thought is scarcely absent from his mind that +this may be the last Epistle he will ever send. He is going to +Jerusalem, and has a sad foreboding of what may await him there (xv. +31). + +The manner and style which give the Epistle a unique place among the +works of St. Paul are caused by these considerations. He wishes to +tell the Roman Christians his very best ideas in the very best way: +this may be his last chance of doing so. He puts aside, then, all +clamour of personal debate, and sets {163} himself to produce an +ordered theological treatise. Never elsewhere does the apostle write +with so careful method, so powerful concentration, so effective +marshalling of arguments, so stirring yet measured eloquence. + +The Epistle opens with a brief introduction. Paul, the apostle of +Christ, wishes to preach the gospel to those in Rome whom Christ has +called. Then he begins at once to describe the set of circumstances +which the gospel is intended to meet. The Gentiles have not been true +to such knowledge as they had of God, and by an inevitable process they +have passed on to unnatural and vicious excess (i. 18-32). And when +St. Paul turns to the Jews, he finds they are in no better case. With +fuller knowledge they have sinned scarcely less. Strict justice will +be meted out by God to all, the Jew coming first and then the Gentile. +The Gentile will not escape, for the Gentiles, whom we conceive of as +having no law, have a law in that moral sense which makes them +instinctively put in practice the precepts of the Law, and their inward +thoughts accuse or defend them (ii. 1-16). The Jew may boast of his +Law and his knowledge of revelation, but he is no better in practice +than a Gentile. And as for his circumcision, it is worthless unless he +is also spiritually circumcised in the heart (ii. 17-29). + +After a parenthetical discussion of difficulties suggested by a +possible Jewish opponent (iii. 1-8), St. Paul shows that the Jews are +not in a worse case than the Gentiles. Both are under the dominion of +sin, and Scripture says so. The whole system of Law is a failure. Law +does nothing but give a clear knowledge of sin (iii. 9-20). + +St. Paul then brings forward his great remedy--the answer of God to the +need which is represented by universal human sinfulness. Man has +failed to correspond to the suggestions of conscience, he has failed to +fulfil the requirements of the written Law, but now he may come into a +right relation with God by identifying himself with Jesus Christ. He +may be justified (_i.e._ accepted as righteous) by an act of God's +grace (_i.e._ by an {164} undeserved act of God's love) on account of +the redemption wrought by Christ, whom God has set forth as a +propitiation to show His own righteousness. God could no longer allow +man to mistake His patience with our sins for slack indifference. Man +must no longer seek to be justified before God on the strength of what +he himself has done, but on the strength of his faith in Christ, _i.e._ +his devoted personal adhesion to Christ (iii. 21-26). St. Paul tells +the Romans that this justifying faith excludes glorying, can be +realized by Gentile as well as Jew; that by it we establish the Law +(iii. 27-31), as the Jewish dispensation, rightly understood, testifies +to its necessity. In fact, Abraham himself was justified by faith +(iv.) Then St. Paul sets forth in glowing and stately words what are +the consequences for us which follow from being so justified. We are +at peace with God, and share in His love, and this is the secure ground +of Christian hope for life and after death (v. 1-11). The effects of +Christ's death are computed by an _argumentum a fortiori_ from the +results of Adam's fall (v. 12-21). + +The apostle now carefully refutes the notion that the doctrine of +justification by faith encourages Antinomianism. Liberty does not mean +licence. St. Paul was quite alive to the fact that skilful opponents +and brainless admirers would misrepresent his doctrine, which was also +Christ's. He therefore takes great pains to show that the connection +between the righteousness of Christ and the righteousness of a +Christian is not arbitrary or fictitious. His argument throughout +implies that man actually receives "the righteousness of God," that is, +the righteousness which is inherent in God, and is bestowed by God upon +man when he unites himself with Christ (vi.-viii.). + +Shall I go on sinning that God's mercy may be all the greater in +forgiving me? God forbid: for when I went down into the waters of +baptism, I shared in the death of Christ; and when I rose from them, I +rose as a sharer in His risen life. Because I am united thus to the +life of Christ, sin is foreign to my nature (vi. 1-14). I am no longer +under law, but under grace: but {165} to be the slave of sin and be +occupied with uncleanness, and to gain the wages of death, is +inconsistent with being the slave of righteousness, occupied in a +course of purification and rewarded with the gift of life (vi. 15-23). + +Next, St. Paul asks why it is that we are no longer under the Law? +Because we have no connection with that state of sin to which the Law +was applicable. Our soul is like a wife whose lawful husband is dead. +Or, to put the truth into another form, our old state was killed by our +identification with Christ crucified, and we are espoused to Christ +risen (vii. 1-6). What, then, shall we think of the Law? Is it sin? +No. It reveals the sinfulness of sin, and it irritates dormant sin +into activity. A thing cannot be identical with another thing which it +exposes and irritates. But why did God permit the Law, which is holy, +to prove fatal to my soul (vii. 13)? He did not. The Law was not +fatal, though sin was all but fatal. Sin was permitted to do its worst +that its real hideousness might be apparent. This is what took place. +The Law gave me an ideal, but my better self, which corresponds to the +Law, could not keep me from ding wrong or make me do right. I became +involved in a terrible conflict. This was the opportunity of Christ. +He has delivered me from that state of the body which involved me in +sin and death. Without Him, I should still be serving the Law of God +with my conscience, and the law of sin with my body (vii. 25). + +Where the Law of Moses failed, Christ splendidly succeeds. He not only +sets before men an ideal, but also helps them to attain it, and fulfil +the righteous claims of the moral Law, by uniting Himself with them by +the Spirit (viii. 1-10). Men are now in a new relation to God: they +call Him Father, He sees in them His sons. Though with all creation we +wait still in fruitful pain for the fulness of redemption, we wait with +confident hope. The Spirit is with us to help and to pray, we remember +God's high purpose for us, we have known His love in the past, Jesus in +infinite exaltation is interceding for us; {166} who, then, shall ever +be able to separate us from the love of God (viii. 11-39)? + +St. Paul turns now to a parenthetical discussion which necessarily +suggests itself here. It has practically happened that God's own +people, the children of Abraham, in spite of their privileges, are +excluded from this new salvation which comes from acceptance of Christ. +This does not mean that God has been unfaithful. St. Paul vindicates +His action toward them, and he shows that it has been consistent with +His previous action towards the Israelites (ix. 6-13), righteous (ix. +14-21), and merciful (ix. 22-29). God has always shown that He is free +to select whom he likes to carry out His purpose in the world.[1] The +Jews are rejected because they seek to be justified, on the strength of +their own works (ix. 30-33; x. 1-3): now, the method of the Law has +been superseded by Christ's, which is an easier method (x. 4-10) and +universal (x. 11-13). And the Jews have had every opportunity for +hearing of it (x. 14-21). But God has not rejected them entirely or +finally (xi. 1-10); and if their fall has led to the preaching of the +gospel to the Gentiles, how much more happily fruitful will be their +reception into the Church (xi. 11-15)! We may hope for this ultimate +acceptance of the gospel by both Jew and Gentile because of the +original holiness of the Jewish stock. The Gentiles are grafted into +that: just as we may be cut off from it if we sin, so the Jews more +easily may be grafted in again if they will (xi. 16-24). St. Paul now +shows how the hardening of the Jews and the disobedience of the +Gentiles alike have served the purposes of God. Israel as a nation +shall be saved by the Messiah. The chapter closes {167} with words of +reverent admiration for the wonderful workings of the Divine Providence +(xi. 25-36). + +After this long doctrinal argument, St. Paul insists upon certain +practical duties (xii.-xv. 13). We may notice in xiii. 2 ff. the +emphasis which is laid upon the dignity of the civil government, a +dignity which was immeasurably degraded ten years later by the wanton +persecution of the Roman Christians. And xiii. 13 is a verse ever to +be remembered by the Church as the verse by which God brought Augustine +from free thinking and licentious living to be numbered among the +saints. In xiv. begins some considerate advice about certain +Christians "weak in faith." They seem to have formed a party, but not +a party which can be identified with any other religious clique +mentioned by the apostle. Their vegetarianism and their observance of +particular holy days have suggested the theory that they were +Christians who followed the ascetic practices of the Jewish sect of +Essenes. The theory that they were Gentiles who affected the customs +of the Pythagoreans has commended itself to other writers. On the +whole, the number of Jews in Rome supports the theory that these were +Jewish Christians. St. Paul deals very tenderly with these total +abstainers from meat and wine. He evidently does not put them on the +same level as the sectaries of Galatia or Colossae. + +The Epistle closes with various references to personal matters, +including the expression of a desire to visit Spain and Rome (xv. 34). + +{168} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation and introduction (i. 1-15). + +(1) DOCTRINAL.--The subject of the Epistle. How is righteousness to be +attained? Not by man's work, but by God's gift, through faith, _i.e._ +personal attachment to Christ (i. 16, 17). + +A. Righteousness as a state of man in the sight of God (Justification): +i. 18-v. 21. + +a. Righteousness was never attained before Christ came. The Gentiles +neglected their conscience until they sank into abominable sins; future +judgment will certainly come on all men without respect of persons; the +Jews, too, have no right to criticize the Gentiles--they had the Law of +Moses, while the Gentiles only had the unwritten law of conscience, yet +they failed. The Jewish quibble that there was no good in being a Jew +if God condemned him, is refuted. The witness of the Old Testament to +the universality of sin is quoted (i. 18-iii. 20). + +b. Exposition of the new method of attaining righteousness. It is +independent of the Law, is universal, is obtainable through Christ's +death which manifests God's righteousness. This method excludes human +boasting, and can be experienced by Jew and Gentile alike (iii. 21-31). + +c. The relation of this new method to the Old Testament. Abraham, the +typical saint of the Old Testament, was not justified because of works, +or circumcision, or law. His faith shows that the Old Testament +supports the Christian method of salvation (iv.). + +d. The blessed state of the justified Christian. He is filled with +hope, and this hope is guaranteed by the proved love of God. What a +contrast between this blessedness and the effects of Adam's fall! The +work of Christ resembles that of Adam, because it passes from one man +to all men: it differs greatly, because Adam's fall brought sin, our +condemnation, our death. Christ's gift brings grace, our acquittal, +our life. The Fall brought sin, Law increased sin; Grace is greater +than sin (v.). + +{169} + +B. Righteousness as necessarily involving moral progress +(Sanctification); vi.-viii. + +a. Refutation of the theory that we may continue to sin in order to +give God fresh opportunities of displaying His lovingkindness. Our +baptism implies union with the sinless Christ. Refutation of the +theory that we may as well sin as not sin because we are no longer +under the Law. Our marriage to Christ must be fruitful (vi. 1-vii. 6). +The Law is not to be disparaged, though it is impotent to rescue me in +the terrible moral conflict under which I should suffer, if it were not +for Christ (vii. 6-25). + +B. Where the Law of Moses failed, the incarnation of Christ succeeds. +The life of Christian righteousness is ruled by the Holy Spirit. It +implies filial confidence in God, a glorious inheritance, divine +assistance, inviolable security (viii.). + +C. The problem raised by the fate of the Jews: ix.-xi. + +a. Their rejection from their privileged position a sad contrast to +their high destiny; the entire justice of God in forming a new Israel +of Jews and Gentiles alike (ix.). + +b. The cause of their rejection was that they sought to be justified in +their own way and not in God's way, and this in spite of Christian +opportunities and prophetic warnings (x.). + +c. Consolations which qualify the severity of their fate. Their +unbelief is only partial and temporary, and God's purpose is to restore +all. Doxology (xi.). + +(2) PRACTICAL.--The Christian sacrifice, and the duties of a Christian +(xii.). Church and State, the law of love, the approaching judgment +(xiii.). + +Toleration for weak and eccentric Christians; vegetarians, observers of +private holy days and total abstainers, not to be disturbed; we must do +nothing that makes a brother stumble. Christ pleased not Himself; He +was both a minister of the circumcision and the hope of the Gentiles +(xiv. 1-xv. 13). + +Personal conclusion (xv. 14-xvi. 27). + + + +[1] The Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, as taught in the +writings of Calvin and in the Presbyterian Westminster Confession, is a +complete perversion of St. Paul's teaching. Calvin teaches a +predestination to heaven or hell; St. Paul here speaks of an +appointment to certain duties on earth. The Calvinists asserted that +some men "cannot be saved;" St. Paul teaches that God so acted "in +order that He might have mercy upon all" (xi. 32). + + + + +{170} + +CHAPTER XIV + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS--THE + EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON + + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +There is no good reason for doubting that this beautiful Epistle is the +work of St. Paul. It is full of Pauline thought, and is well attested +by external evidence. It is apparently quoted in the very ancient work +known as the Epistle of Barnabas, and Justin Martyr quotes the title of +Christ "the firstborn of all creation" (Col. i. 15). It is included in +Marcion's canon and in the _Muratorian Fragment_, as well as in the Old +Latin and Peshitta Syriac versions. The notion that it is only a weak +reflection of Ephesians seems incredible, for neither of the two +Epistles is appreciably inferior to the other, and in each one there +are several unique passages which represent as high a level of +intellectual and spiritual attainment as the passages which are in some +degree common to the two. Moreover, we cannot trace any definite +method according to which the one writing has been used for the other, +and destructive critics have only destroyed one another's arguments in +their attempts to show which of the two Epistles is genuine, or why +they both are forged. It is also important to consider the association +of this Epistle with that to Philemon: the transparent genuineness of +the latter makes it practically certain that Colossians is genuine as +well. + +Objections to the authenticity of Colossians have been {171} steadily +growing fainter. It was denied by Mayerhoff in 1838, and by the whole +Tübingen school, in spite of very strong external evidence. (1) The +heresy opposed by St. Paul was said to be a form of 2nd-century +Gnosticism; but the affinities which it shows with Judaism point rather +to the 1st century. (2) There are a large number of words which St. +Paul uses nowhere else, thirty-four being found in no other part of the +New Testament; but several of these words are called forth by the +special error which St. Paul rebukes, and the Epistle does contain +eleven Pauline words used by no other New Testament writer. (3) The +doctrine has been declared to be not Pauline, but a further development +of St. Paul's doctrine of the dignity of Christ. This objection rests +entirely on the hypothesis that Jesus Christ was not God, but was +gradually deified by successive generations of His followers. The +critics who declared that no apostle believed Christ to be more than an +ideal or half-divine man, and said that St. John's writings are +forgeries of the 2nd century, described the doctrine of Colossians as a +transition from the true Pauline doctrine to the doctrine of the Logos +contained in the fourth Gospel. But St. Paul states nothing about +Christ in this Epistle which is not implied in earlier Epistles. He +only makes fresh statements of truth in view of fresh errors. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +Colossae was the least important town to which any Epistle of St. Paul +which now remains was addressed. The place was on the river Lycus in +Phrygia, about ten miles from Laodicea and thirteen from Hierapolis, +and thus the three towns were the sphere of the missionary work of the +Colossian Epaphras (Col. iv. 12, 13). Colossae had been flourishing +enough in the time of Herodotus, but now, overshadowed by greater +neighbours--Laodicea, Hierapolis, and Chonae--and perhaps shaken by +recurring earthquakes, it was sinking fast into decay. Still it +derived importance from its situation on the great main road which +connected Rome with the eastern provinces, the road by {172} which +Xerxes had led his great armament against Greece. And as the people +had a special way of their own for producing a rich dye named +_Colossinus_, it retained a fair amount of trade. We may account for +the presence of Jews at Colossae which is suggested in the Epistle, by +remembering its convenient position and its trade speciality. The +people were mainly the descendants of Greek settlers and Phrygian +natives, and the intellectual atmosphere was the same as that of which +we have evidence in other parts of Asia Minor: every one was infected +with the Greek keenness for subtle speculation, and the usual Phrygian +tendency to superstition and fanaticism. Thirteen miles away, at +Hierapolis, was growing into manhood the slave Epictetus, who later on +will set out some of the most noble and lofty of pagan thoughts. The +persistent love of the people of this neighbourhood for the +angel-worship which St. Paul rebukes, is illustrated by the facts that +in the 4th century a Church Council at Laodicea condemned the worship +of angels, and that, in spite of this, in the 9th and 10th centuries +the district was the centre of the worship of St. Michael, who was +believed to have opened the chasm of the Lycus, and so saved the people +of Chonae from an inundation. + +Colossae, being exposed to the raids of the Moslem Saracens, +disappeared from history in the 8th century. + +The Church at Colossae was not founded by St. Paul, and he was not +personally acquainted with it (Col. ii. 1). But we can hardly go so +far as to say that he had never seen the town at all. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +St. Paul sent this letter, together with that to Philemon and the +circular which we call "Ephesians," by Tychicus from Rome, probably in +A.D. 60. He alludes to his imprisonment twice incidentally, and again +with pathetic simplicity in the postscript added by his own hand, +"Remember my bonds." + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +Some difficulties are connected with the heresy taught by the religious +agitators at Colossae. It is plain that their {173} teaching affected +both doctrine and practice. They appealed to visions and a knowledge +of the celestial world (ii. 18), and therefore set up a worship of +angels which tended to thrust Christ from His true position in the +creed of the Church. They treated the body with unsparing severity +(ii. 23), they abstained from meat and drink, and paid a punctilious +attention to festivals, new moons, and sabbaths (ii. 16). St. Paul +calls these practices "material rudiments" (ii. 8), elementary methods +now superseded by faith in Christ. Moreover, it is almost certain that +literal circumcision was practised (ii. 11). These things point to +Judaism. And yet St. Paul does not seem to be rebuking a return to the +Judaism of the Old Testament. He could hardly have described a +compliance with Old Testament injunctions as an "arbitrary religion" +and "doctrines of men" (ii. 1, 22, 23). It might be Pharisaism, but if +we look in the direction of Judaism, it is most natural that we should +think of a Judaism resembling that of the Essenes. The Essenes were +vegetarians, they avoided wine, they kept the sabbath with special +scrupulousness, and had some secret teaching about the angels. These +resemblances have tempted some commentators to identify the false +teachers with the Essenes. But there is nothing to prove that the +Essenes worshipped the angels, and St. Paul makes no mention of the +Essene veneration for the sun, or their monastic life, or their +elaborate process of initiation. Besides this, the principal community +of Essenes dwelt by the Dead Sea, and it is very doubtful if any +existed in Asia Minor. + +It is best to confess our ignorance. All that we can say is that the +scruple-mongers at Colossae taught doctrines which had points of +contact with Essenism. They employed some affected interpretation of +the Old Testament. They also were influenced by heathenism in their +conception of half-divine beings intermediate between God and the +world. How far they held any definitely dualistic view of matter we +cannot tell. {174} But their system was a mischievous theosophy, which +they endeavoured to popularize under catchwords like "wisdom" and +"philosophy." The fact that there was at this time such a widespread +tendency to adopt an exaggerated asceticism and theories about +mediatorial spirits, makes it unnecessary to suppose that the Colossian +heresy need be affiliated to any particular school of speculation. + +The Epistle consists mainly of a more or less indirect argument against +the insidious "philosophy" of the heretics, with an exhortation and +personal notes. + +Perhaps we account most naturally for the broken order and lax +coherence of this letter, by the suggestion that, as St. Paul dictated +it, there was present with him a sense of almost nervous hesitation. +He has exactly a gentleman's reluctance to do an ungracious action: +while he knows that it is his duty to warn the Colossians of a serious +danger, he knows that unless he does so with much tactful delicacy, +they will resent his interference. So he begins by saying what polite +things he can about them, and instead of going on at once to talk of +the heresy, he first says with plain significance that he perpetually +prays for their perfection in knowledge, activity, and constancy. An +incidental allusion to God's method for human salvation gives St. Paul +an opportunity for making a digression--one of the most important +statements in the New Testament--concerning the nature and work of +Christ (i. 14-20). He shows the Colossians what views they ought to +hold concerning Him. This would keep them from giving to the angels +what is due to Christ alone. Christ is the Redeemer. He was born +prior to all creation, even the angels, and all creation coheres +through union with Him (i. 15-17). He is the Head of the Church in +virtue of His resurrection, and as embodying the full number of divine +attributes (i. 18, 19). He is the Saviour of angels and men by His +death, and in this salvation the Colossians ought to share (i. 20-23). + +It seems that now he will deal with the heresy, but again he {175} +postpones it. He breaks in with a digression of a pastoral character. +He speaks of his commission to preach (i. 24-29), his anxiety even for +Churches that he has never visited (ii. 1-5), and he exhorts the +Colossians to continue in their original faith (ii. 6, 7). + +At last he enters upon the main business of the Epistle and begins +dogmatic controversy. After a warning against spurious philosophy, he +asserts that Christ is the sole incarnation of Deity, to whom all +spirits are subject (ii. 9, 10). This is the true doctrine: God has +not divided His attributes among a group of angels; all are to be found +in Christ. And the true method of salvation is simply that union with +Christ which begins with baptism, the Christian's circumcision. In it +we receive that forgiveness which was won for us when Christ died, and +both blotted out the Law and triumphed over evil angels (ii. 13-15). +The apostle then directly condemns the practices of the false +teachers--their anxious and mechanical conduct with regard to food and +seasons, their intrusion into celestial secrets and their doctrine of +angel-worship, their loose hold on Christ the Head, symptoms of an +affected humility which is no real check against the indulgence of the +flesh (ii. 16-23). + +He then turns to practical exhortation. In the bracing words made +familiar to us by the Epistle for Easter Day, St. Paul bids the +Colossians leave the gently stimulating exercise of intellectual +theorizing and listen to the stern demands made by Christ on life and +character. They have risen to a life hid with Christ in God; they must +make dead the faculties of sensual action, angry thinking, and evil +speaking: this is implied in forsaking heathenism for the universal +Christ (iii. 1-11). Live quietly in peace and love, show a gracious +life in a gracious worship, consecrate your words and deeds by doing +all in the name of the Lord Jesus (iii. 12-17). + +Then the special duties of wives and husbands, children and fathers, +slaves and masters, are dealt with. Prayer and thanksgiving are +enjoined on all alike, and the Christians are bidden {176} to "buy up +the opportunity" of furthering the cause of God in their dealings with +the outer world, having their speech seasoned with the salt of +wholesome wisdom (iii. 18-iv. 6). A few words are said about Tychicus, +Onesimus, and other friends, including "Luke, the beloved physician," +and the Epistle ends with a farewell which St. Paul wrote with his own +hand. Before writing it, the apostle directs that this letter should +be read at Laodicea, and that the Colossians should procure another +letter which had been left in that city. This was probably the +so-called Epistle to the Ephesians. + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving, the apostle's prayer for the readers (i. +1-13). + +Christ, who redeemed us, is pre-eminent in Person, being the Head of +the natural creation, and of the spiritual creation, because the sum of +divine attributes dwells in Him (i. 14-19). He is pre-eminent in work, +having reconciled us to God (i. 20-23). + +St. Paul's own commission and his anxiety (i. 24-ii. 7). Warning +against the delusion of a false philosophy. The "fulness" is in +Christ, therefore the Colossians must avoid semi-Jewish practices and +also avoid the worship of angels (ii. 8-19). The converts have died +with Christ to their old life and earthly ordinances (ii. 20-25). + +The converts have risen with Christ to a new life and heavenly +principles, vices must be made dead, virtues must be put on (iii. 1-17). + +Obligations of wives and husbands, children and parents, slaves and +masters (iii. 18-iv. 1). + +The duty of prayer and thanksgiving, and right behaviour towards the +unconverted (iv. 2-6). + +Personal conclusion, and a message relating to an Epistle from Laodicea +(iv. 7-18). + +{177} + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of this winning little letter could never be doubted +except by the most dryasdust of pedants. It is no proof of acuteness +to detect the artifice of a forger in its earnest simplicity, its +thoughtful tact, and affectionate anxiety. There is about it a +vivacity and directness which at once and decisively stamp it as +genuine. And external evidence shows that it was included in the +earliest lists of St. Paul's Epistles. It was accepted by Marcion, +included in the _Muratorian Fragment_, and expressly attributed to St. +Paul by Origen. It shows a number of coincidences with Colossians, +Ephesians, and Philippians, and it is especially connected with +Colossians by the proper names which it contains, such as Archippus, +Aristarchus, Mark, and Luke. No evidence exists to show that any early +Christians denied this Epistle to be by St. Paul. But it does appear +that some of them half disliked its inclusion in the Canon, thinking it +too trivial to be numbered with the Scriptures. To modern readers it +manifests a great treatment of little things, which is one of the +surest proofs of inspiration. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +The Epistle is addressed to Philemon, a substantial citizen of +Colossae. He has been converted by St. Paul, who writes with deep +appreciation of his faith in Christ, and of the kindness that he has +shown to the saints. He gives him the honourable title of +"fellow-worker." Religious services and the social gatherings of +Christians are held in Philemon's house. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +This Epistle was written during St. Paul's first imprisonment in Rome, +A.D. 59-61. In ver. 10 St. Paul alludes to his "bonds." + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +Philemon had a Phrygian slave named Onesimus, who first {178} robbed +him and then ran away. Onesimus was able without much difficulty to +get to Rome, and here he met the apostle, who received him into the +Church. The young convert served him with such eager willingness that +St. Paul would have been glad to keep him with him, but he decides to +send him back to Philemon with this letter to ensure his forgiveness. + +We have, therefore, in this letter a picture of St. Paul in a new +relation. There is no other letter in the New Testament of such a +private nature except 3 John. The great apostle of the Gentiles is +taking his pen to provide a dishonest runaway slave with a note that +shall shield him from the just anger of his master. He writes both +with a strong sense of justice and with his own perfect diplomatic +instinct. The letter is at once authoritative, confident, and most +gentle. He does not command or insist, yet it is quite clear that +Philemon must do just what he asks. There is no violent attack upon +slavery as an institution. Any such attack would have been both +foolish and criminal. For it would have encouraged slaves to make +Christianity a cloak for revolt, and precipitated horrors far worse +than those which it could have professed to remove. But St. Paul +asserts a principle which will eventually prove fatal to slavery. When +he tells Philemon to receive Onesimus "as a brother beloved," he is +really saying that our estimate of men must not be based on their +social class, but rather on their relation to God. + +This letter has been compared with a letter written under similar +circumstances by the younger Pliny, one of the best of the pagan +gentlemen of Rome. But while the letter of Pliny is more elegant in +language, the letter of St. Paul is a finer masterpiece of feeling. A +Roman slave was still allowed no rights and no family relationship, and +for the smallest offence he might be tortured and killed. In the next +century the Emperor Hadrian first took away from masters the power of +life and death over their slaves, and it was not until the time {179} +of the Emperor Constantine, who established Christianity, that the laws +affecting slavery pointed to the future triumph of emancipation. But +the ancient conception of slavery was doomed as soon as "slave-girls +like Blandina in Gaul, or Felicitas in Africa, having won for +themselves the crown of martyrdom, were celebrated in the festivals of +the Church with honours denied to the most powerful and noblest born of +mankind." [1] + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation from Paul and Timothy to Philemon and Apphia (? wife), to +Archippus and the Church in Philemon's house; thanksgiving for +Philemon's faith; a plea for the pardon of Onesimus, St. Paul promises +to be responsible for what was stolen; a lodging to be prepared for St. +Paul; concluding salutations, benediction. + + + +[1] Lightfoot, _Colossians and Philemon_, p. 325. + + + + +{180} + +CHAPTER XV + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The Pauline authorship of this Epistle is well attested by external +evidence. Before 150 we have proof of its wide use among both heretics +and Catholics; it is quoted probably by St. Clement and St. Polycarp, +and some of its characteristic ideas are to be found in a more +developed form in the _Shepherd_ of Hermas. There is one clear +reference to it in St. Ignatius, and two other possible references. We +trace an interesting connection between the thought of this Epistle and +that of the Revelation and the Gospel of St. John (_e.g._ ch. xvii.) +and the First Epistle of St. Peter. Perhaps we may account for it by +accepting Renan's suggestion that St. Peter, St. John, and St. Paul +were in Rome together. The strongest argument for the Pauline +authorship lies in the undesigned coincidences between Ephesians and +Romans. In both we notice the same courtesy of manner and sensitive +frankness, the same setting forth of God's method of salvation, the +same valuation of the relative position of Jews and Gentiles, and of +their union in Jesus Christ; the same thought of God's eternal and +unchanging purpose very gradually revealed, and extending in its +ultimate operation to all creation. It has been well said that the +Epistle to the Ephesians is required to give completeness to the +argument of Rom. xv. Though we do not find here the controversial +reasoning of the earlier Epistle, we have some of those characteristic +passages in which the {181} writer, carried away by emotion, leaves +statement for prayer or praise (cf. Rom. xi. 33 and Eph. iii. 20). We +have, indeed, in this Epistle evidence which points to a date later +than that of some of his Epistles. We miss the expectation of Christ's +immediate coming; the Gentiles are now quite secure in the Church; +there is proof of the growth of Christian hymns (v. 14, 19). But the +names of the ministers of the Church seem very primitive, the words +"presbyter" and _episkopos_ not being mentioned. And words such as +"worlds," "fulness," "generations," which were used in a special sense +by the Gnostics of the 2nd century, are here used in an earlier and +less technical meaning. + +It has been argued that Ephesians is a forged imitation of Colossians, +because about half of its verses have parallels in Colossians. This +argument has broken down, since it has been shown that it is equally +easy to prove that Colossians is based upon Ephesians. And there is +nothing strange in the idea that St. Paul wrote two similar letters at +the same time to Churches in similar difficulties. The two Epistles +resemble one another just as two letters written by one man to two +different friends during the same week. The phrase "holy apostles" +(iii. 5) is also said to be a formula which St. Paul would not have +employed. But the word "holy" is used in his writings almost in the +sense of "Christian;" it signifies consecration rather than personal +perfection. There would, therefore, be no vanity in the apostle +applying such a title to himself. The attempt to make the style +furnish an argument against the genuineness of the Epistle has also +failed. There are thirty-two words used only in this Epistle, but +there are also eighteen which are found in Pauline Epistles and not +elsewhere in the New Testament. The assumption of some sceptical +writers that an apostle must have been too unintelligent to enrich his +vocabulary, scarcely deserves serious examination. No one would think +of applying the same rule to a Greek classical writer, and if he +attempted to do so, he would find that Xenophon varies his language as +much as St. Paul. + +{182} + +The real reason why the authenticity of this Epistle has been attacked +is this. Ephesians teaches that the Church is a universal society, +visibly united by baptism and the ministry, embracing Jew and Gentile +on equal terms. But, according to Baur, this conception of the Church +is a product of the 2nd century. He assumed that St. Paul could not +include the twelve under the name of the "holy apostles," or teach a +Catholic doctrine of the Church.[1] The present school of rationalists +is inclining to admit that Ephesians is genuine. But it is hard to see +how they will be able to do this without also admitting that the +Epistle implies that the other "holy apostles" held, like St. Paul, +that Christ is divine. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +It is almost certainly not primarily a letter to Ephesus, but a +circular letter to several Churches in Asia Minor. + +In i. 1 we read the words "to the saints which are in Ephesus." But +the words "in Ephesus" are omitted in the two great MSS. K and B. +Origen also implies that these words were absent in some MSS., and St. +Basil definitely says so. And as the Epistle contains no salutation to +any individual, it is difficult to imagine that it was specially +addressed to Ephesus, where St. Paul's friends were numerous and dear +(see Acts xx. 17-38). In some passages St. Paul speaks as if he and +those to whom he writes knew each other only through third persons (i. +15; iii. 2). This suggests that the Epistle was written primarily to a +Church like that of Colossae which he had never visited. + +The probable solution is that it was written to the Christians of +Laodicea in the first instance. Tertullian says that Marcion had +copies with "Ad Laodicenos" as the title. Now, in this case Marcion +had nothing to gain by fraud, and we may therefore suppose that he had +honest grounds for using this title. The same title gains some support +from Col. ii. 1; iv. 13, 16. The last verse suggests that it was to be +passed on from Laodicea. Perhaps several copies of the letter were +written at {183} Laodicea, and a blank space left in them for the +insertion of the various addresses. No doubt the letter would be +forwarded to Ephesus in time. + +Laodicea, at present called Eski-Hissar (the "old fortress"), is now +utterly deserted. It was probably founded about B.C. 250 by Antiochus +II. Theos, and named after his wife Laodike. It was distant eleven +miles from Colossae. The population included some Syrians and Jews. +It rose to great wealth under the Roman power, and was so rich that +when it was destroyed by an earthquake in A.D. 60 it scorned to seek +pecuniary aid from the emperor. It was in a central position on the +great trade route from the east, and was famous for its banking +business, its manufacture of fine garments of black wool, and its +"Phrygian powder" for weak eyes. In Rev. iii. 18 there appears to be a +veiled allusion to each of these three sources of prosperity. Timothy, +Mark, and Epaphras (Col. i. 7) were instrumental in spreading +Christianity in this region. Laodicea was the leading bishopric of +Phrygia throughout the Christian period. + +Ephesus was the capital of the Roman province of Asia. With Antioch in +Syria and Alexandria in Egypt, it ranked as one of the greatest cities +of the East Mediterranean lands. Planted amid the hills near the mouth +of the river Cayster, it was excellently fitted to become a great mart, +and was the commercial centre for the whole country on the Roman side +of Mount Taurus. The substratum of the population was Asiatic, but the +progress and enterprise of the city belonged to the Greeks. There, as +in the Florence of the Medici, we find commercial astuteness joined +with intense delight in graceful culture. Some of the best work of the +greatest Greek sculptors and painters was treasured at Ephesus. A +splendid but sensuous worship centred round the gross figure of the +goddess Artemis, whose temple was one of the greatest triumphs of +ancient art. In the British Museum are preserved some fragments of the +old temple built by Croesus, King of Lydia, in B.C. 550. The vast +{184} temple which replaced this older structure was built about B.C. +350, with the help of contributions from the whole of Asia. The wealth +of the city was increased by the crowds which attended the festivals, +and many trades were mainly dependent upon the pilgrims, who required +food, victims, images, and shrines. In St. Paul's time the city +contained one temple devoted to the worship of a Roman emperor. +Ephesus was also a home of magical arts, and was famous for the +production of magical formulae known as "Ephesian letters." The actual +foundation of the Christian Church in Ephesus may be ascribed to +Priscilla and Aquila, whom St. Paul left there on his first visit (Acts +xviii. 19), On his return to Ephesus he stayed there for two years +(Acts xix. 1, 10), and the opposition of the tradesmen to a creed which +affected the vested interests of idolatry was the cause of the riot so +vigorously described by St. Luke. Even after the riot the +superstitions of the mob were a serious danger to St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. +32; xvi. 9; 2 Cor. i. 8-10). At a later period Ephesus became the +residence of St. John. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +St. Paul wrote this Epistle during his imprisonment at Rome, which +began in A.D. 59 (see iii. 1, 13; iv. 1, vi. 22). Rome is not +mentioned in the Epistle, but the connection between Ephesians, +Colossians, Philemon, and Philippians points to the high probability +that they were all written from the same place. This place is much +more likely to have been Rome than Caesarea, the only other possible +locality. Ephesians was apparently written later than Colossians, for +it shows an emphasis on new points of doctrine--the continuity of the +Church, the work of the Holy Spirit, the analogy between family life +and the Church, and the simile of the spiritual armour. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle is of the nature of a sermon, full of closely interlaced +doctrinal arguments on the greatness of that _one_ Gospel and that +_one_ Church by which all distinctions in mankind are bridged over and +salvation is made sure. The writer {185} fears that there will be some +lack of unity in the Church, and that the moral tone of his converts +will sink. He wishes for a Christianity both Catholic and deep. So he +presents his readers with the portrait of a Church predestined before +all ages, appointed to last through all ages, in which all men will be +united in holiness and love. If Galatians and Corinthians are more +vivid, Romans more rich, and Philippians more affectionate, Ephesians +gives us St. Paul's most mature and complete picture of Christianity. + +St. Paul explains how his Gentile readers came to their present +position in the Church. They are not to regard it as a matter of +chance. They were called to Christ as the result of an eternal counsel +of God. God intended from eternity to adopt them in union with His +Son. This intention was now made known, to sum up all things again in +Christ (i. 10). The apostle prays for his readers that they may +receive enlightenment, and grow in knowledge, particularly concerning +the power of God shown in the resurrection and ascension of Christ and +his consequent relation _to the Church_.[2] + +The unity of all things in the Son of God is explained in Colossians as +having been involved in His creation of them. In Ephesians St. Paul +assumes this relation, and shows that it is largely in abeyance through +_sin_. Estrangement has come between man and his God, involving man in +death and in the wrath of God (ii. 3-5). A wall of division has also +been made between Jew and Gentile (ii. 14). This division was visibly +embodied in the Jewish ordinances. But Jew and {186} Gentile alike +have now been reconciled to God, and in being reunited with God are +reunited with each other. This momentous change was effected by the +shedding of Christ's blood on the cross. The readers are to remember +that they are being built into God's own habitation, of which Christ is +the Corner-Stone (ii. 20). + +To the end that they may be filled in their degree with God's +attributes, the writer bows his knees (iii. 14) unto the Father. He +prays for their strengthening because he has a special charge over the +Gentiles. This charge involves the stewardship of a secret (iii. 3), +viz. the inclusion of the Gentiles in the promise of God. He, the +least of all saints, has been allowed to proclaim this secret, a work +which shows to the heavenly powers the wisdom of God corresponding with +His eternal purpose (iii. 10, 11). This bounty of God will ever be +praised in the Church, which is the monument of that bounty (iii. 21). + +Chapters iv.-vi. are largely practical. They set out rules of conduct. +But even here doctrine is brought in to enforce practical advice. The +readers are to "walk worthily" of their calling. To do this, they must +realize unity. The principles of unity are magnificently summed up +(iv. 4-6). Then the apostle mentions some means which God has +appointed for the maintenance of unity. Christians have various gifts +from the ascended Christ (iv. 7-8), and some are specially gifted for +ecclesiastical offices (iv. 9-13). These gifts make for the +completeness of the Church, of which Christ is the Head and the Life. +To "walk worthily" also means that everything connected with heathen +habits must be sedulously renounced. The old self must be changed for +the new. A basis for social life must be found in truthfulness, +uprightness, and kindliness (iv. 25-32). Purity must specially be +preserved, impurity being contrasted with love. Light and darkness are +then contrasted, and the sober gaiety of the Christian with heathen +folly and excess (v. 1-21). + +St. Paul passes on to speak of the Christian household--the {187} +duties of husband, wife, children, slaves. He seems to pronounce a +great benediction over family life as he compares the union of marriage +to the association of Christ with His Church. Just as in calling +Christ the Head of which the Church is the body, he suggests the entire +dependence of the Church upon Christ, so now in describing the Church +as the spouse of Christ, he suggests that this dependence must imply a +voluntary and conscious submission. The final exhortation vividly +describes the Christian's conflict with evil: to fight victoriously he +will need to be well armoured with the whole panoply of God (vi. +10-20). There is a short personal conclusion in which St. Paul +describes himself as Christ's "ambassador in chains." + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation (i. 1, 2). + +Exposition of God's purpose in adopting the Gentiles as His sons, +chosen by the Father, redeemed by the Son, sealed by the Spirit. A +prayer for the readers (i.). + +Their new state as saved by grace through faith; reconciliation of Jews +and Gentiles in Christ (ii.). Paul was made a minister to dispense the +grace of God to the Gentiles. He prays for their spiritual progress +(iii.). + +The unity of Christians in the Church combined with diversity of gifts +and offices, a warning against heathen vices, and advice as to duty +towards one's neighbour (iv.). Christian love, heathen uncleanness, +light and darkness, walking circumspectly, sobriety and song (v. 1-21). + +The union of husbands and wives like that of Christ and His Church (v. +22, 23). Duties of children and parents, servants and masters (vi. +1-9). + +Wrestling against evil powers with the whole armour of God (vi. 10-18). + +Personal conclusion and benediction (vi. 19-24). + + + +[1] See Baur's _Paul_, vol. ii. p. 177 (English translation). + +[2] Eph. i. 23. The Church is said to be "the fulness of Him that +filleth all in all." The word "fulness" is derived from philosophy, +and means that the Church is, or rather is the realization of, the sum +of the sacred attributes of Christ, who fills the whole universe with +all kinds of gifts. Some commentators translate "fulness" as if it +meant the receptacle of Christ's attributes, and others as if it meant +the completion of Christ. But the word is used in a philosophical and +not in a literal sense. See Lightfoot, _Colossians_, p. 259. + + + + +{188} + +CHAPTER XVI + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of this Epistle is now admitted by critics of very +different schools of thought, including some extreme rationalists. +About A.D. 110 St. Polycarp, in his letter to the Philippians, speaks +of the letters which they had received from "the blessed and glorious +Paul." Although he seems to refer to a number of letters, we may be +sure that this letter was among that number. Otherwise it would not +have been so universally regarded as genuine during the 2nd century. +It is in Marcion's canon, in the _Muratorian Fragment_, the Peshitta +Syriac and Old Latin versions. It is also quoted in the letter of the +Churches of Lyons and Vienne, in the Epistle of Diognetus, and by +Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria. It was rejected by Baur and others +on various grounds. It was urged (1) that the doctrine of Christ's +self-surrender or "self-emptying" in Phil. ii. 7 is derived from the +Valentinian Gnostics of the 2nd century, who taught that the Spirit +"Sophia" fell from the "fulness" of divine spirits in heaven to the +"emptiness" of the lower world. This objection is too fantastic to +deserve serious refutation. It is, in fact, little more than a play +upon words. It was urged (2) that in Phil. ii. 7 the manhood of Christ +is said to have come into existence at the incarnation, whereas in 1 +Cor. xv. 47-49 it is said to have existed in heaven before the +incarnation. This idea rests on a false interpretation; in 1 Cor. xv. +Christ is called "of heaven" {189} because His manhood became heavenly +at His ascension. It was urged (3) that in Phil. iii. 6 the writer +says that he had been, "as touching the righteousness which is in the +Law, found blameless," whereas St. Paul in Rom. vii. speaks of his +revolt against the Law. But it seems that in Phil. iii. St. Paul is +laying stress rather on his external privileges and external +conformity, while in Rom. vii. he speaks of what is inward and secret. +It was urged (4) that the mention of "bishops" (or rather _episkopoi_) +and "deacons" in Phil. i. 1 shows that the Epistle was not written in +the apostolic age. But there is nothing to make it impossible that +such offices did exist at that period, and there is much evidence in +favour of them. Christians who are attached to the historical form of +Church government will now note with interest that, since the +genuineness of this Epistle has been practically demonstrated, some +writers have suggested that these words do not refer to special +ecclesiastical offices![1] + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +Philippi was named after Philip, King of Macedon, in the 4th century +B.C. It was in Eastern Macedonia, on a steep hill at the edge of a +plain; its seaport, Neapolis, was about eight miles distant. It was on +the Egnatian road, the great high-road which connected the Aegean and +the Adriatic seas, and therefore connected Asia with Europe. It was +made into a Roman colony, with the title _Colonia Augusta Julia +Philippensium_, after the victory of Antony and Octavian over Brutus +and Cassius. Its new name was, therefore, a memorial of the murdered +but avenged Julius Caesar. St. Paul brought Christianity to Philippi +early in A.D. 50, during his second missionary journey. St. Paul's +first visit here is described in Acts xvi. 12-40, and it has a special +interest as the story of the apostle's first preaching in a European +town. The Jews had no synagogue, only a spot by the river-side in the +suburbs, where a few met together on the sabbath. His first convert +was Lydia of Thyatira, who was a seller of purple-dyed {190} goods; her +house became the centre of the Philippian Church. The imprisonment of +St. Paul and St. Silas in consequence of St. Paul's exorcising a +heathen slave-girl who professed to be inspired, is one of the most +dramatic incidents in Acts. When St. Paul was released he left the +town, but returned there, in all probability, in A.D. 55, on his third +journey while travelling to Corinth. In A.D. 56 he was there once +more, and the last Easter before his imprisonment was spent with these +beloved converts (Acts xx. 6). + +The Christians of Philippi were pre-eminent in the affections of St. +Paul. He calls them, like the Thessalonians, his "joy and crown" (iv. +1), and they alone of his children had the privilege of ministering to +his personal necessities. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +It may be regarded as almost certain that St. Paul wrote this Epistle +in Rome. He was a prisoner, as we see in Phil. i. 7, 13, 14, 17. He +sends greeting from those of Caesar's household (iv. 22). The first +and last chapters imply that he is in the midst of an active Church, +and that he is the centre to which messengers come and from which they +go. This accords with the apostle's treatment at Rome. One phrase, +however, has been thought to suggest Caesarea rather than Rome. It is +"the whole praetorium" (i. 13). This might mean the praetorium or +palace of Herod Agrippa II. at Caesarea, but it is possible that it has +quite a different meaning. It may either be the imperial guard or the +supreme imperial court before which St. Paul had to be judged. The +latter interpretation is that suggested by the great historian Mommsen, +and seems to be the most satisfactory explanation. + +The meaning of the phrase has an important bearing upon the date of the +Epistle. If it was not written at Caesarea, it must have been written +at Rome between A.D. 59 and A.D. 61. But the critics who are agreed +that it was composed at Rome, are divided as to the place which it +occupies among the Epistles which St. Paul wrote during his +imprisonment. Some {191} place it first, because the vigorous style, +and many of the phrases, suggest that it was written not very long +after Romans. Others, with greater probability, place it last among +the Epistles of the captivity. For even if it was written first among +those Epistles, it was written more than three years after Romans. And +the Epistle contains several indications of being written late in the +captivity. If "praetorium" means the imperial guard, some time would +have to elapse before such a large body of men could know much about +St. Paul; and if it means the imperial court, the verse implies that he +had already appeared before his judges. Phil. ii. 24 shows that he was +expecting a speedy decision on his case. Epaphroditus, probably not +the Colossian Epaphras who was with St. Paul at Rome (Col. iv. 12), had +come as a delegate from the Philippians, bringing their alms to the +apostle (ii. 25; iv. 18). After his arrival in Rome he was ill and +homesick, and now he is returning to Philippi bearing this letter of +thanks. This all seems to imply that Philippians was written a +considerable time after the apostle's imprisonment began, and we can +therefore reasonably place it after Colossians and Ephesians, and date +it early in A.D. 61. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +With the exception of 2 Corinthians, this is the most personal and +intimate of St. Paul's writings. In both he lays bare his heart. But +the tone of the two Epistles is absolutely different. In 2 Corinthians +he writes as a man who has been bitterly injured; he asserts his claims +to fickle believers whose ears have been charmed by his unscrupulous +opponents. In Philippians we chiefly observe a note of frank and +loving confidence; buffeted by the world, the apostle finds refreshment +in the affection of his friends at Philippi. + +After a salutation to all the "saints" at Philippi, including +especially the _episkopoi_ and deacons, the apostle speaks of the joy +which he feels in praying for them, and begs of God that their love may +abound, and that they may approve the things {192} that are excellent, +being filled with the fruits of righteousness (i. 1-11). + +Then St. Paul tells how his captivity has been a means of spreading the +gospel in the praetorium and elsewhere. Even the malicious activity of +his opponents has been a means of proclaiming Christ, and with true +grandeur of soul the apostle rejoices in the fact. So far as he is +concerned, death would be a more attractive prospect than life, for +death would mean admission into the presence of Christ, but for the +sake of the Philippians he is glad to live. With wonderful +cheerfulness he says that he is glad if his blood is to be offered like +a libation poured over the living sacrifice of the souls and bodies +which the Philippians offer to God (ii. 17). Before he speaks of this +libation of his blood he makes a tender appeal to his converts to +imitate the lowliness of Jesus Christ. He puts into the language of +theology the story of the incarnation which his friend St. Luke draws +with an artist's pen in the first two chapters of his Gospel. He +speaks to them of "the mind" of Christ Jesus, whose life on earth was +self-sacrifice in detail. Christ had before the incarnation the "form" +or essential attributes of God, but He did not set any store on His +equality with God, as though it were a prize,[2] but stripped Himself +in self-surrender, and took the "form" or nature of a bond-servant. He +looked like men as they actually are, and if men recognized His outward +"fashion," they would only have taken Him for a man. And then He made +Himself obedient to God up to His very death, and that the death of the +cross. This was followed by His exaltation, and worship is now paid to +Him in His glorified humanity (ii. 1-11). + +In ii. 19 St. Paul returns to personal matters concerning Timothy and +Epaphroditus; then he seems on the point of concluding the Epistle +(iii. 1). But he suddenly breaks into {193} an abrupt and passionate +warning against the Judaizers. The passage almost looks as if it were +a page from the Epistle to the Galatians. The Judaizers are called +"dogs," and as their circumcision was no longer the sign of a covenant +with God, the apostle calls it a mere outward mutilation of the flesh +(iii. 2). It is unlikely that Jewish influences were potent at +Philippi. The explanation of this passage appears to be that the +apostle, before completing his letter, learnt of some new and +successful plot of the Judaizers at Rome or elsewhere. Nervously +dreading lest they should invade his beloved Philippian Church, he +speaks with great severity of these conspirators. The conclusion of +the chapter is apparently directed against the licence of certain +Gentile converts. These seem to have been "enemies of the cross of +Christ" in the looseness of their lives rather than in the corruptness +of their creed. It is difficult in this case, as in that of the +Judaizers, to know whether these errors already existed at Philippi or +not. The passage concludes with an exhortation to steadfastness (iii. +2-iv. 1). + +Two women, Euodia and Syntyche, are exhorted to be "of the same mind." +A true yokefellow of the apostle, possibly Epaphroditus, and a certain +Clement, possibly the Clement who was afterwards Bishop of Rome, are +exhorted to try to bring about their reconciliation. All are exhorted +to rejoice in the Lord, and are told that the peace of God, which +passeth understanding, shall stand sentinel over their hearts and +thoughts. Before returning again to personal matters and thanking the +Philippians for their gifts, St. Paul urges them to follow whatsoever +is true and lovely. His language here seems to consecrate all that was +permanently valuable in the sayings of the Greek philosophers. It +recalls to us the words of the ancient Church historian, Socrates: "The +beautiful, wherever it may be, is the property of truth." + +{194} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving, prayer (i. 1-11). + +The position of affairs at Rome. His imprisonment has stimulated the +preaching of the gospel; his own feelings are divided between the +desire for death and a willingness to live for their sakes; an +exhortation to boldness (i. 12-30). + +An exhortation to imitate the humility of Christ, who took the form of +man and was willing to die, and was after this abasement exalted above +every created being (ii. 1-11). + +An exhortation to obedience, quietness, purity, mission and +commendation of Timothy and Epaphroditus; farewell (ii. 12-iii. 1). + +Strong warning against Judaism, enforced by his own example; against +claim to perfection, also enforced by his own example; against +Antinomian licence as unworthy of "citizens of heaven", exhortation to +steadfastness (iii. 2-iv. 1). + +Advice to Euodia, Syntyche, and others; exhortation to think of all +things true and lovely (iv. 2-9). + +The apostle expresses his joy at the spirit shown by the offerings sent +to him from Philippi. Doxology. Salutation (iv. 10-23). + + + +[1] So E. Haupt, _Die Gefangenschaftsbriefe_, p. 3. + +[2] The Greek is ordinarily translated as "a prize to be grasped," but +it seems quite possible to translate the passage, "He considered not +equality with God to involve a process of grasping." + + + + +{195} + +CHAPTER XVII + +THE PASTORAL EPISTLES + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +1 and 2 Timothy and Titus form the fourth and last group of St. Paul's +Epistles, and are known as the Pastoral Epistles,[1] because they deal +so largely with the duties and qualifications of the men entrusted with +the pastoral care of the Church. St. Paul here teaches the teachers. + +Their genuineness is more frequently denied than that of any other of +St. Paul's Epistles, and this attack upon their genuineness has been +mostly based upon the character of their teaching about the +office-bearers of the Church. Attempts have sometimes been made to +separate some fragments supposed to be genuine from the remaining +portions. All such attempts have failed. These Epistles must either +be rejected entirely or accepted entirely. Otherwise we become +involved in a hopeless tangle of conjectures. + +The _external evidence_ is excellent. They are found in the Syriac and +Old Latin versions, and in the _Muratorian Fragment_. They are all +quoted by Irenaeus, and also by Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian. +Their authenticity was therefore regarded as a certain fact in the +latter part of the 2nd century, and early in the 4th century Eusebius +was unaware that any doubts concerning them existed in the Church. +Moreover, St. Polycarp, A.D. 110, quotes both 1 and 2 Timothy. The +{196} combined evidence of these writers forms a very substantial +argument. Against it we sometimes find urged the fact that the heretic +Marcion rejected them. Such an objection borders on frivolity. +Marcion held a definite doctrinal heresy, and rejected everything which +he could not make to coincide with his own belief. The value which is +set on the Old Testament (_e.g._ 2 Tim. iii. 16), the assertion of a +real incarnation (_e.g._ 1 Tim. ii. 5), and the sustained opposition to +a false spiritualism, which these Epistles exhibit, must have been +intensely distasteful to Marcion. We have therefore no reason for +believing that he would hesitate to reject them, while knowing them to +be genuine, any more than he hesitated to reject all the Gospels except +Luke. + +The _internal evidence_ is called in question for the following reasons. + +1. _Historical difficulties._--We cannot place the journey referred to +in 1 Tim. i. 3 during the three years' stay at Ephesus mentioned in +Acts. The visit to Miletus in 2 Tim. iv. 20 cannot have taken place on +the journey to Jerusalem in Acts xx., because Trophimus was with the +apostle when he reached that city (Acts xxi. 29). Again, in 2 Tim. iv. +20 Erastus "abode at Corinth." But he had not been to Corinth for a +long time before the journey to Rome recorded in Acts. In Tit. i. 5 we +see Titus left by St. Paul at Crete; he is to join the apostle in +Nicopolis (iii. 12). But Acts allows no room for this, and the +reference to Apollos (iii. 13) implies a later period than St. Paul's +stay at Corinth (Acts xviii.). + +_Answer._--All three Epistles may quite well be later than the history +related in Acts. There is no reason for denying that St. Paul was set +free after his trial at Rome, and arrested again at a later date. +Assuming that this liberation did take place, all historical +difficulties vanish. There are several points in favour of this +liberation. First, the attitude of the Roman government towards +Christianity was fairly tolerant until Nero began his persecution in +A.D. 64, and the state of the law would {197} have allowed St. Paul's +acquittal. Secondly, it was believed in the early Church that St. Paul +was set free. The Muratorian Fragment says that he went to Spain, and +St. Clement of Rome, writing from Rome about A.D. 95, says that he went +"to the boundary of the west," which seems to point to Spain. Thirdly, +the chronology implied in the ancient list of the bishops of Rome will +not allow us to put St. Paul's martyrdom earlier than A.D. 64. +Fourthly, the apostle himself expected to be set free (Phil. ii. 24; +Philem. 22). There is therefore no historical reason for denying that +St. Paul was set free from the imprisonment in which Acts leaves him. + +2. _References to heresies._--It has been said that these Epistles +contain references to heresies later than the apostolic age, such as +the Gnosticism of the 2nd century. More especially, it is said that 1 +Tim. vi. 20, which speaks of "oppositions of gnosis falsely so called," +refers to a work by Marcion called the "Oppositions" (Antitheses), in +which he tried to demonstrate that the Old Testament was antagonistic +to the New. + +_Answer._--The heresies here rebuked are not so definitely described +that we can determine their precise character. This fact is in favour +of the idea that the heresies belong to the 1st century rather than to +the 2nd. Stress has been laid upon statements which seem to imply +Gnostic heresy, and heresy of a "Docetic" character, _i.e._ teaching a +denial of the reality of our Lord's human nature. But there is +certainly nothing which suggests that the error here rebuked was as +developed as the heresy rebuked by St. Ignatius, or even that denounced +by St. John. It is most unlikely that the word "oppositions" can refer +to a book bearing that title. The passage 1 Tim. vi. 20 does not +suggest this. And if Marcion is really quoted in 1 Tim., how could +Polycarp have quoted 1 Tim., as he does, before Marcion's book was +written? Something of a Gnostic tendency is betokened by the scorn of +material life and the human body shown in 1 Tim. iv. 3, 8 and 2 Tim. +ii. 18. But the error is mainly Jewish. The false {198} teachers +professed to be "teachers of the Law" (1 Tim. i. 7), which was exactly +the title claimed by the Jewish rabbis (see Luke v. 17). The general +character of their teaching was "vain talking" (1 Tim. i. 6; cf. Tit. +i. 10; iii. 9). It consists of "profane babblings" (1 Tim. vi. 20; 2 +Tim. ii. 16). It is further characterized as "foolish questionings, +and genealogies, and strifes, and fightings about the law . . . +unprofitable and vain" (Tit. iii. 9). It is summed up in the phrases +"old wives' fables" (1 Tim. iv. 7), "Jewish fables" (Tit. i. 14). All +this shows that the error was not a definite Gnostic heresy with a +fundamentally false view of God. It was something intrinsically +ridiculous. Therefore the "endless genealogies" (1 Tim. i. 4) can +hardly be Gnostic genealogies of the semi-divine beings who took part +in the creation. They are Jewish tales about the heroes of the Old +Testament. The error is, in fact, primitive, and does not belong to +the 2nd century. + +3. _Church organization._--It is said that these Epistles lay down the +rules for an organization of the Church which is later than the +apostolic age, and resembles the Episcopal system, such as we find it +in the 2nd century. Titus and Timothy act as delegates of the apostle, +and as the highest officials of the ministry, and they appoint +presbyters and deacons. We thus find a threefold ministry which +derives its sacred authority through the apostolate. The apostle lays +his hands upon his delegate (2 Tim. i. 6), and this delegate lays his +hands upon others (1 Tim. v. 22). + +_Answer._--It is perfectly true that there is a threefold ministry +mentioned in these Epistles. But there is no sufficient reason for +denying that such a ministry is of apostolic origin. It seems quite +certain that at Jerusalem the presbyters and deacons were under the +authority of St. James, and after his death under that of Symeon. The +same form of government can also be traced back in other places to +apostolic times. Moreover, the organization which is mentioned in Acts +is fundamentally the same as that in these Epistles. In Acts we {199} +find the apostles first appointing deacons and then presbyters. All +the additional evidence which has lately been discovered to support the +genuineness of Acts therefore favours the genuineness of these +Epistles. Finally, we must notice that the titles of the ministry in +these Epistles do not correspond with the titles used in the 2nd +century. The government is substantially "Episcopal," but the title +"episkopos" was in the 2nd century only applied to the chief dignitary +who ruled over the "presbyters." But here the title "episkopos" is +applied to the presbyters themselves as the overseers of the +congregation. We find the same thing in the letter of St. Clement, +A.D. 95. St. Clement, although Bishop of Rome, still gives the title +of "episkopos" to the presbyters. This inconvenient practice was given +up soon after that date, for we find that St. Ignatius, about A.D. 110, +applies the title "episkopos" only to the highest ministers of the +Church. We conclude, therefore, that while the organization of the +Church described in the Pastoral Epistles supports the belief that the +threefold ministry, which we now call Episcopal organization, is of +apostolic origin, it does not prove that these Epistles are forgeries. +And it is natural that St. Paul, knowing that his death must before +long come to pass, should devote a large measure of attention to +questions of Church government and discipline. The history of the +Church in the 2nd and 3rd centuries proves to us that the organization +of the Church was almost as important as the inspiration of the Church. + +4. _Language._--This is an important difficulty. There are in these +Epistles many words and phrases which do not occur in the other +Epistles of St. Paul. We find different Greek words used for "Lord" +and for the second "advent," and a fondness for the words "wholesome," +"godliness," and "faithful saying." The new element is most prominent +in 1 Tim. and Titus. + +_Answer._--Private letters to individuals and friends in reference to +one particular subject are not likely to resemble public letters which +were written in reference to other subjects. It {200} would therefore +be unreasonable to expect that the style of the Pastoral Epistles +should be cast in the same mould as that of the other Epistles of St. +Paul. Nevertheless, the objection would have considerable weight, if +St. Paul's aptitude for varying his vocabulary could not be shown. But +it can be shown; for his other Epistles are marked by an astonishing +variation in the Greek. Beneath this diversity there exists a unity. +The Pastoral Epistles have many Pauline phrases,[2] many graphic +touches, many forcible and original statements, and glow with that +personal devotion to Christ combined with a practical capacity for +guiding Christians which St. Paul possessed in so singular a degree. +If the Pastoral Epistles are spurious, or if they are composite +productions written by a forger who inserted some notes of St. Paul in +his own effusions, it becomes almost impossible to account for the fact +that 2 Tim. differs delicately both in language and subject from 1 Tim. +and Titus. In view of this fact we can admire the sagacity of a recent +opponent of their authenticity who deprecates "the possibility of +extricating the Pauline from the traditional and editorial material"! +[3] + + +THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +Reasons have already been given for rejecting the arguments which have +been alleged against the Pauline authorship of this Epistle. We may +add that it is unlikely that a forger would have inserted the word +"mercy" (i. 2) in the usual Pauline greeting "grace and peace." The +reference to Timothy's "youth" (iv. 12; cf. 2 Tim. ii. 22) has seemed +strange to many. But although {201} St. Paul had been acquainted with +Timothy for about twelve years, Timothy must have been greatly the +junior of St. Paul. Even if Timothy was as old as thirty-five, the +word "youth" would be quite natural from the pen of an old man writing +to a pupil, whom he had known as a very young man, and whom he was now +putting in authority over men old enough to be his own father. We can +attribute this Epistle to St. Paul without hesitation. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +Timothy was one of the apostle's own converts, his "child in faith." +We learn from Acts xvi. 1 that he was the son of a Greek-speaking +Gentile father and a Jewish mother. He had received a strictly +religious Jewish training from his mother Eunice and his grandmother +Lois (2 Tim. i. 1-5; iii. 14, 15). He was converted by St. Paul on his +first missionary journey, at Lystra or Derbe. On St. Paul's second +visit to that district, Timothy was so well reported of that he was +thought worthy of being associated with the apostle in his work. +Before employing him as a colleague, St. Paul had him circumcised, that +he might be able to work among Jews as well as Gentiles (Acts xvi. 3). +Some Christian prophets pointed him out as destined for his sacred +office (1 Tim. i. 18). He was ordained by the laying on of the hands +of St. Paul himself and the presbyters of the Church (1 Tim. iv. 14; 2 +Tim. i. 6). He was frequently associated with the apostle in +travelling and in the writing of Epistles. His name occurs as sending +a salutation in Rom. xvi. 21, and as the fellow-sender of six of the +apostle's letters. He was with the apostle during his first +imprisonment at Rome (see Phil., Col., and Philemon). From this +Epistle we learn that after the apostle's release he was left in charge +of the important Church at Ephesus. While he was in this position, the +two Epistles which bear his name were written to him. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +It is impossible to ascertain the precise direction of St. Paul's +journeys after his release, and it is wisest to refrain from mere +conjecture. Before writing this letter he had been recently {202} at +Ephesus and had been called away to Macedonia (i. 3). He intended to +return before long, but had been unexpectedly delayed (iii. 14, 15). +This delay rendered it necessary for him to send directions to Timothy. +The precise date cannot be exactly fixed. If St. Paul's martyrdom was +as early as A.D. 64, and his release as early as A.D. 61, we may +reasonably put this letter in A.D. 63. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The letter is personal, but it is also official. It is intended to +guide Timothy in his work of apostolic delegate. In speaking to the +presbyters of Ephesus at Miletus (Acts xx. 29, 30), St. Paul had +already expressed fears about the future of the Church, and these fears +now seem to have been partly realized. Ephesus was a meeting-place of +east and west, a place where religious speculations and religious +divisions were likely to increase, and where wise supervision of the +Christian Church was essential. The contents of the Epistle therefore +mainly consist of warnings against Judaism and false knowledge, and +directions as to the duties of various classes of Christians, and +especially the clergy. + + + +ANALYSIS + +The danger of Jewish and Gnostic heresy (i.). + +The order of common prayer (ii.). + +The qualifications of _episkopoi_ (translated "bishops" in the English +versions) and deacons (iii.). + +Condemnation of Gnostic asceticism and the duty of Timothy towards +heresy (iv.). + +Counsels as to the treatment of presbyters (translated "elders" in the +English versions) and widows (v.). + +Warnings against disobedience towards masters, vain disputations, +covetousness, and a wrong use of wealth--concluding with a direct +appeal to Timothy (vi.). + +{203} + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TITUS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +This is exactly the kind of letter which we should expect to be written +by a writer of strong individuality addressing a disciple entrusted +with the duty of ruling a Church threatened by the same troubles as the +Church which was under the supervision of Timothy. It is attributed to +St. Paul by Irenaeus, and is amply supported by other early writers. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"To Titus, my true child after a common faith" (i. 4). Titus was +converted by St. Paul (i. 4), and was an uncircumcised Gentile (Gal. +ii. 3). He must have been converted at an early period in the +apostle's career, for he was with Paul and Barnabas on their visit from +Antioch to Jerusalem in A.D. 49. He was therefore present during the +great crisis when the freedom of the Gentiles from the ceremonial part +of the Jewish law was vindicated. It is suggested by Gal. ii. that +Titus was personally known to the Galatians, and possibly he was +himself a Galatian. Titus was prominent at another important crisis. +When the Church at Corinth was involved in strife, Titus was sent +thither. His efforts were attended with success, and he was able to +report good news on returning to St. Paul in Macedonia (2 Cor. vii. 6, +7, 13-15). He carried the Second Epistle to the Corinthians to +Corinth. We hear no more of him until the period when this Epistle was +written. After St. Paul's release from his first imprisonment, Titus +was with him in Crete, and was left by the apostle to direct the +affairs of the Church in that island (Tit. i. 5). It is plain that the +tact and wisdom which he had shown at Corinth had not failed him in the +interval, and that St. Paul still regarded him as a worthy delegate and +a true evangelist of the gospel of peace. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The similarity to 1 Timothy makes it almost certain that Titus was +written about the same time, and before 2 Timothy. {204} The apostle +is expecting to winter at Nicopolis, probably the Nicopolis in Epirus. +The letter was therefore possibly written from Greece. It seems from +iii. 13 that Zenas, a former teacher of the Jewish law, and Apollos, +had occasion to travel by Crete, and St. Paul takes the opportunity to +send a letter with them to Titus. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The greeting at the beginning of the Epistle and the character of its +general contents show that this letter is official as well as private. +Possibly the gospel was first brought to Crete by those Jews or +proselytes from Crete who saw the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at +Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 11.) Fully thirty years had +passed since then, but the Church had not hitherto been sufficiently +organized to be independent of the apostle. Now, however, the +apostolic delegate will be able to ordain the presbyters required in +every city. The manner in which the "episkopoi" are mentioned +immediately afterwards (i. 5, 7) strongly favours the idea that the +name "episkopos" is here used as a title of the presbyters, as in Acts +xx. They form the order under the apostle's delegate. Useless +speculations of a Jewish character had invaded the Church (i. 10-14; +iii. 9). The teachers of these "fables" were influenced by love of +"filthy lucre." St. Paul quotes the saying that the Cretans are +"liars, evil beasts, idle gluttons," and attributes it to "one of +themselves, a prophet of their own." The saying is by the poet +Epimenides, c. B.C. 600. He was a native of Cnossus in Crete, who was +regarded as a seer, and his reputation for second-sight is testified by +Plato giving him the epithet "divine." St. Paul seems convinced that +the Cretan character was as prone to sensuality as in the days of +Epimenides, and it is immediately after alluding to their dangers that +he utters the memorable words, "unto the pure all things are pure." +The apostle's exhortation to "maintain good works" (iii. 8) is one of +the verses which have been absurdly alleged to be out of harmony with +{205} St. Paul's insistence upon the importance of justification by +faith. There is a definite allusion to baptismal regeneration in iii. +5. + + +ANALYSIS + +Titus to ordain elders; the requisite character of "episkopoi", +Judaizing talkers to be checked (i.). + +Duties of aged men and women; young women and men; servants; the grace +of God and the hope inspired by it (ii.). + +Duty towards rulers and all men; the kindness of God; foolish +discussions to be avoided; how to deal with a heretic; personal notes +(iii.). + + + +THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +It is generally considered that the authenticity of this Epistle stands +or falls with that of the First Epistle. But it bears its own peculiar +marks of genuineness. One thoroughly Pauline feature is _thanksgiving_ +at the beginning, a feature which is found in eight of his other +Epistles, but not in the two other Pastoral Epistles. A forger might +have had the critical insight which would lead him to compose this +thanksgiving. But it is highly improbable that a forger would have put +twenty-three proper names into the Epistle without tamely copying names +which occur elsewhere, or without betraying any wish to glorify some +saint who became popular after the death of the apostle. Neither of +these two suspicious tokens can be detected here. For instance, Demas, +concerning whom nothing that is discreditable is narrated elsewhere, is +here rebuked with a pathetic regret (iv. 10; cf. Col. iv. 14); while +Linus, afterwards a famous bishop and martyr of Rome, is mentioned +without any honourable distinction at all. Even if the Linus of this +Epistle is not the bishop of that name {206} the argument still holds +good. For a forger, if he inserted the name of any Linus, would have +been almost certain to mention _the_ Linus and no other. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"To Timothy, my beloved child" (i. 2). + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +It was written from Rome, where St. Paul is again a prisoner, the +reason of his imprisonment being the witness that he has borne to +Christ (i. 8, 12, 17). His imprisonment had already lasted some time, +for it was known at Ephesus. The apostle had apparently requested two +of his friends, Phygellus and Hermogenes, to come to him at Rome, but +they had declined. The Ephesian Onesiphorus had acted otherwise, and +when in Rome had sought him out. St. Paul anticipates death. His case +has already had a first hearing, when no witness appeared in his +defence (iv. 16). He is now ready to be offered up. But he does not +anticipate an immediate martyrdom, as he urges Timothy to come to Rome +before winter. The date is therefore probably some weeks or months +before St. Paul's martyrdom. The year is either A.D. 64 or very soon +afterwards. + +[Sidenote Character and Contents.] + +This Epistle is the apostle's farewell pastoral charge. He looks +forward to his fate with courage and confidence. He has fought a good +fight, and is sure of the crown of righteousness which the Lord will +give him. But he sees that a dark future is in store for the Church. +Some professing Christians have already deserted him, others have +perverted the faith. Among the latter are Hymenseus and Philetus, who +assert that the resurrection is past already. It is probable that they +were influenced by some Gnostic dislike of the human body, and taught +that the only resurrection possible for a Christian was the spiritual +resurrection of becoming acquainted with their own Gnostic doctrine. +Such a heresy is described by Irenaeus. St. Paul warns Timothy that +there are "grievous times" to come (iii. 1). Scripture will be a means +of security against the mischief-makers. {207} The various +exhortations given to Timothy are of great force and beauty; he is to +endure hardship like a good soldier, and is charged before God to +preach and rebuke with long-suffering. The solemnity of these words is +equalled by the pungent sarcasm with which the writer alludes to the +schismatics who "lead captive silly women" or will "heap to themselves +teachers, having itching ears." + +We may notice that ii. 11-13 seems to contain part of a Christian hymn, +that iii. 8 contains a reference to a Jewish story not found in the Old +Testament, and that i. 18 is perhaps a prayer for the dead. The Second +Book of Maccabees xii. 44 shows that in the century before the +Christian era the Jews were wont to pray for the departed. + + +ANALYSIS + +Exhortation to energy, the failure of friends, the fidelity of +Onesiphorus (i.). + +Exhortation to endurance as Christ's soldier, profane discussions to be +shunned; the error of Hymenseus and Philetus; varieties of character +like varieties of vessels; the way to become a vessel of honour (ii.). + +Coming corruption, the creeping mischief-makers; Timothy is reminded of +St. Paul's manner of life and of the value of Scripture (iii.). + +Exhortation to fidelity in ministerial work; the apostle's course +drawing to an end, Timothy urged to come; personal notes (iv.). + + + +[1] This title seems to have been first applied to them in 1810 by +Wegscheider. + +[2] Cf. "according to my gospel" (2 Tim. ii. 8; Rom. ii. 16); "the +gospel of the glory" (1 Tim. i. 11; 2 Cor. iv. 4). The Greek phrase +for "give occasion to" (1 Tim. v. 14) is found in 2 Cor. v. 12, and +nowhere in the New Testament except in St. Paul. + +[3] B. W. Bacon, _Introduction to the New Testament_, p. 140. + + + + +{208} + +CHAPTER XVIII + +THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The question of the authorship of this Epistle is one of the most +fascinating problems raised by the criticism of the New Testament. It +does not in the least involve any charge of forgery, such as is +involved in a consideration of St. John's Gospel or of St. Paul's +Epistle to the Ephesians. Nor does it involve the fact of an author +absorbing the work of a previous writer, such as we find in the case of +St. Luke. The work is one complete and original composition of great +finish and perfection, and yet this perfect work contains hardly a hint +as to its author. The title which is placed above it in our Bibles +deserves serious consideration, as it represents an opinion which was +held in many parts of Christendom in the 4th century, and in some parts +of Christendom even in the 2nd century. But it by no means represents +the universal judgment of the Church, and is contradicted by good +evidence, both external and internal. A remarkable divergence of +opinion on the subject existed between the Churches of the east and +those of the west. + +Alexandria appears to have been the first centre of the belief that +this Epistle was written by St. Paul. We find that about A.D. 170, +Pantaenus, the head of the catechetical school at Alexandria, +attributed it to St. Paul. His successor Clement agrees with this, but +states that it was written in Hebrew and translated by St. Luke into +Greek--a statement which implies that scholars were conscious that the +style of Hebrews is not {209} the style ordinarily used by St. Paul. +In A.D. 240, Origen, the successor of Clement, defends the Pauline +authorship--a defence which shows that the authorship was disputed. In +A.D. 245 Origen had learnt to doubt the validity of his former defence, +and states that the writer was a disciple of Paul, but "who wrote the +Epistle God only knows." In A.D. 269 the famous heretic Paul of +Samosata quoted Hebrews as the work of St. Paul in a letter read at the +Synod of Antioch which deposed him from his bishopric. Early in the +next century Eusebius quotes the Epistle as by St. Paul, but he shows +the same perplexity as Clement of Alexandria, for he thinks that it was +translated from the Hebrew, possibly by Clement of Rome. After the +time of Eusebius the Greek Fathers all ascribe it to St. Paul. We can +therefore sum up the evidence of the Greek Churches by saying that +though it mostly favours one theory, it is not so cogent as to remove +all our suspicions. + +Moreover, the complete absence of references to this Epistle in the +extant writings of Irenaeus[1] almost compels us to ask if the Greek +Churches of Southern Gaul and Asia Minor regarded this Epistle as +Pauline. Irenaeus might naturally omit to quote a short and +comparatively unimportant Epistle, but his omission of a long Epistle, +well adapted to his arguments, inclines us to place him in a rank +opposite to his contemporary, Clement of Alexandria. A Greek writer of +the 6th century actually says that Irenaeus, in a passage now lost, +denied that St. Paul wrote the Epistle.[2] + +The Latin Churches of the west seem to have been for three centuries +under the conviction that this Epistle was not by St. Paul. It is +quoted by Clement of Rome, A.D. 95, a fact which {210} alone is +sufficient to prove its early date and its sacred character. But +Clement makes no statement as to its authorship. Caius of Rome, A.D. +200, excludes it from the list of St. Paul's Epistles, and the same +hesitation with regard to it existed in the great Latin-speaking Church +of Carthage. St. Cyprian, A.D. 250, does not include Hebrews among St. +Paul's Epistles. No Latin Father attributes it to St. Paul before +Hilary of Poictiers in A.D. 368, and Hilary was in close contact with +the East. At the end of the 4th century St. Jerome shows distinct +hesitation in attributing it to St. Paul, and it was not commonly +attributed to him in the west until the time of St. Augustine, who died +in 432. + +Internal evidence agrees with the external evidence in making it very +difficult for us to believe that St. Paul wrote Hebrews. + +(1) The Greek is more elegant than that of St. Paul's Epistles. The +styles are widely different. That of St. Paul is abrupt and vehement +like a mountain-torrent, that of Hebrews is calm and smooth like a +river running through a meadow. + +(2) The quotations are very unlike St. Paul's. They are all from the +Greek version of the Old Testament, with the exception of that in x. +30, which occurs in the same form in Rom. xii. 19. It had probably +taken this shape in popular use. The quotations are introduced by +phrases such as "God saith," or "the Holy Spirit saith." But St. Paul +often shows a knowledge of the Hebrew when he makes quotations, and he +uses such phrases as "it is written," or "the Scripture saith," or +"Moses saith." + +(3) There is no salutation such as is usual in St. Paul's Epistles. + +(4) In Hebrews the incarnate Son is called "Jesus," or "Christ," or +"the Lord." In St. Paul's Epistles we find fuller titles employed, +such as "our Lord Jesus Christ." + +(5) The theological differences are important. The teaching of the +author harmonizes with that of St. Paul, but throughout the Epistle we +feel that the truths of Christianity are being expounded to us by one +whose personal history is different {211} from that of St. Paul. The +author starts from the fact of the perfection of Christ's sacrifice, +and in his doctrine about the Law he looks at it from that fact. St. +Paul, on the other hand, starts from the doctrine of justification by +faith, and looks at the Law from the point of that doctrine. Again, +the author takes a general view of faith as heroic belief in unseen +facts; while St. Paul, though he sometimes does the same, prefers to +use the word "faith" in the sense of devoted, personal, adhesion to +Christ. + +(6) In ii. 3, 4 the author seems to imply that he had not personally +seen the Lord. + +Many conjectures have been made as to the real author. Few of these +conjectures deserve serious consideration. Luther suggested Apollos, +and the suggestion has been accepted by many writers. In favour of it +are: (1) he was a friend of St. Paul; (2) he was "mighty in the +Scriptures," and Hebrews deals with the Old Testament in a masterly +way; (3) he was an Alexandrian Jew, and Hebrews was plainly written by +a Jew, and apparently by one acquainted with Philo and other +Alexandrian authors.[3] Against this theory is the complete absence of +traditional support, and the fact that Apollos was taught by Aquila and +Priscilla, whereas the author of Hebrews implies that he was taught by +a personal disciple of Christ. On the whole, _St. Barnabas_ seems to +have the best claim. Tertullian not only speaks of it as the work of +Barnabas, but also shows by his words that the Church of North Africa +regarded it as his work.[4] He is not, therefore, making a conjecture, +but assuming a tradition. His evidence is the more valuable, because +the Church of North Africa was important and was in close contact with +Rome, where the Epistle was venerated at least as early as A.D. 95. In +favour {212} of the tradition we can note: (1) St. Barnabas was an +influential companion of St. Paul; (2) he was a Levite, and would be +interested in Levitical worship; (3) he was a native of Cyprus, which +was in close communication with Alexandria; (4) he had been in the +regions to which the Epistle was probably addressed. + +Against the theory that St. Barnabas was the author, it is said that +the author makes surprising errors with regard to the Temple ritual, +which St. Barnabas was not likely to do. The so-called "errors" are: +(a) the high priest sacrificing _daily_ (vii. 27; x. 11)--but the high +priest was free to do this; (b) the pot of manna and Aaron's rod placed +_in the ark_ (ix. 4), though not so described in 1 Kings viii. 9--but +in the tabernacle they were at least close to the ark (Exod. xvi. 34; +Numb. xvii. 10); (c) the altar of incense is said to belong to the +_holiest place_ (ix. 4)--but it did belong to it in the sense of +sanctifying the approach to it, though it was placed outside it: see 1 +Kings vi. 22. No one can reasonably say that these statements are of +such a nature as to prove that the Epistle was not written by a Levite. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +The title says "To the Hebrews." The character of the Epistle suggests +this. It was plainly written for Jewish Christians, and apparently for +some particular community of them (v. 11, 12; vi. 9, 10; x. 32-34; +xiii. 1, 7, 19, 23). Which community, it is difficult to say. The +Jewish Christians of Rome have been suggested, and in support of this +the reference to Italian Christians (xiii. 24) has been quoted. It is +a strange fact that this theory about the destination of the Epistle is +favoured by some critics who assign it to a late date. For if it was +really written to Rome, the date must be early. It is almost +inconceivable that the author should have said, "Ye have not yet +resisted unto blood," to the Christians of _Rome_ after the persecution +of A.D. 64-65. Some town in Syria or Palestine is more likely than +Rome, and Antioch seems a probable destination for the Epistle. The +community must have been {213} familiar with Greek, and at the same +time must have been under strong temptations to relapse into Judaism. +They had for the sake of Christ left the warm social life of Judaism. +They felt isolated and depressed. The splendour of the temple worship +and the zeal of Jewish patriotism were luring them back to their old +religion. They felt that they had perhaps deserted a magnificent +reality for a shadowy hope. Such circumstances fit with the theory +that the community dwelt in Palestine or Syria, and the same theory is +supported by the fact that these Christians had been converted long ago +(v. 12), and had heard the apostles (ii. 3). + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +Probably from Italy, as shown by xiii. 24. The date may be put about +A.D. 66. A generation of Christians had passed away (xiii. 2). The +doom of Jerusalem was approaching (x. 25; viii. 13; xiii. 13). The +frequent reference to the Levitical worship, as exerting an attractive +force, must imply that the temple was still standing. The Epistle must +therefore be earlier than 70. + +It is true that the references to the Levitical worship are sometimes +more appropriate to the ancient tabernacle than to the temple, and this +fact is urged by those who maintain that the temple was already +destroyed when the Epistle was written. But this is no answer to the +fact that the Jewish worship is throughout assumed to be in existence. +The author is not opposing the propaganda of Jewish rabbis or the +attractions of synagogues which were connected with the temple by +tradition only. He is opposing a great living system with its +priesthood and its ritual. And in order to criticize Judaism he deals +with the _tabernacle_, concerning which the Old Testament gave definite +directions. This was a more effective method than discussing the +temple which superseded the tabernacle. + +[Sidenote: Character and contents.] + +Hebrews is marked by a complete unity of argument. Though the thread +of the argument is sometimes dropped for the sake of practical +exhortation, it is soon resumed and logically carried on. + +{214} + +Christ as the Son of God is a manifestation of God superior to all +other manifestations. He is far above the prophets, and above the +angels, who neither created the material world nor have the "world to +come" subject unto them. He towers above Moses, who was only a servant +and a stone in the house of God, for He is the Son, and built the +house. He is above Joshua; for He has won a rest for the people of +God, of which the rest of Canaan was a mere type. Neither under Joshua +nor under David did the people of God reach the ideal sabbath rest +which God has promised (i.-iv. 13). + +Christ as High Priest is above the Aaronic priesthood, for He is "after +the order of Melchizedek" (Ps. ex. 4) (iv. 14-v. 10). Then the writer, +before giving the full interpretation of Christ's high priesthood, +makes a digression to urge the need of greater spiritual insight on the +part of his readers (v. 11-vi. 12). They can be sure of God's blessing +if they have faith and patience (vi. 13-20). The unique position of +Melchizedek is then expounded. In Gen. xiv. nothing is said of +Melchizedek's descent or of his death. Thus he stands forth in +contrast to the Levitical priests whose descent is described, and who +die and are succeeded by others. He was also superior to those +priests, because Levi, in the person of his father Abraham, paid tithes +to Melchizedek. Since Melchizedek's priesthood is superior to that of +the Levitical priests, much more is that of Christ, of whom +Melchizedek, great as he was, is only a type. Then the author shows +that the rise of a new priesthood must imply the birth of a new +religious system. Christ "hath His priesthood unchangeable," but needs +not to repeat His sacrifice (vii.). + +Then the author shows that the new liturgy and the new sanctuary of the +Christian Church are superior to the liturgy and the sanctuary of +Judaism. Though Christ's blood was shed only once, He retains the +character of Priest (viii. 3); He hath "somewhat to offer," viz. +Himself in His sacred manhood in heaven. He thus acts as a Mediator of +the new covenant {215} promised in the Old Testament (viii. 6-13). The +tabernacle was only a temporary parable; Christ acts as High Priest in +the holy of holies, the actual presence of God typified by the +tabernacle; He has consecrated the new covenant between man and God by +His own blood (ix.). The repetition of the Levitical sacrifices proves +their impotence. But that of Christ is adequate. It is an offering of +inherent value, being the offering of the will of Christ, instead of +the offering of unconscious beasts. And we need no other atonement, +for His unique offering has a perpetual value (x. 1-18). + +The writer then proceeds to insist upon the appropriation and +application of the truths which he has expounded. It is our privilege +to have full confidence, and our duty to assemble for worship: apostasy +is most serious (x. 19-39). The writer next describes the nature of +faith, which is a faculty which makes the future as if it were present, +and the unseen as if it were visible. It is illustrated by a +magnificent roll-call of heroes from Abel to the Incarnation. These +heroes, who saw both worlds, and realized how petty the material world +is compared with the spiritual, had real insight (xi.). Emulate their +example, enduring persecution, knowing that our Mount Zion is superior +to Sinai, and our coming to church a reunion with angels and saints +(xii.). + +The Epistle closes with a practical exhortation concerning brotherly +love, hospitality, prisoners, marriage, and contentment. The ministers +who had formerly had rule over the readers are to be remembered. We +are not to be unsettled by strange teachings. "We have an altar" of +which the Jewish priests may not partake. Our sin offering, Jesus, is +given to us as food. We must go to Him outside the camp of Judaism. +After an injunction to obey the clergy and a request for prayers, the +Epistle concludes. Just before the end it is stated that "our brother +Timothy hath been set at liberty" (xiii.). + +The whole Epistle is peculiarly dignified, eloquent, and {216} +persuasive, and its elegant Greek and delicate Alexandrian philosophy +make it a literary treasure. + +We may conclude with some further remarks on the writer's doctrine of +Christ's Person and of the Jewish Law. + +Knowing that these Christians were in danger of drifting away from +Christ, the writer calls their special attention to His Person, in +order that they may carefully consider who He is before deciding to +part from Him. The doctrine corresponds most exactly with that which +we find in Colossians and in John. It is declared in the most positive +manner that Christ is essentially divine. He reflects His Father's +glory, is the expression of His essence, and the Sustainer of the +universe (i. 3). He is the God whose throne is eternal, and the Lord +who made the earth (i. 8, 10). Yet He became "a little lower than the +angels" (ii. 9), and, though entirely sinless, He was so truly human as +to become the pattern of obedience (x. 7), humility (v. 5), reverent +piety (v. 7), and fidelity (iii. 2). By the discipline of suffering He +was made perfect for His redeeming work (v. 8, 9). It is made evident +that this process of perfection did not consist in the diminution of +sin, but in the development of goodness. Nowhere do we find a more +profound view of suffering and virtue, or a more pathetic delineation +of the character of Jesus. + +It has already been hinted that the author regards the Jewish Law +differently from St. Paul. The latter had lived under the goad of a +Pharisaic interpretation of the Law of Moses, which laid down so many +regulations as to what ought to be done, and gave so little assistance +towards doing it, that escape from such a system was like an escape +from penal servitude. When he speaks of the Law, he regards it +primarily as a system of stern moral requirements. But the author of +Hebrews regards the Law as primarily a system of worship. He implies +that it was in some sense a "good tidings" (iv. 2). He teaches that +the Law was a "shadow" of those real "good things" which constitute the +world of truth in heaven, while the Gospel is the {217} "image" or +adequate representation of those holy realities. The Law is therefore +a rough unsubstantial outline of truth, while the Gospel is exact and +solid. Both writers regard the Law as divine in origin, and both +regard it as insufficient and rudimentary (vii. 16; cf. Gal. iv. 3, 9). +But St. Paul thinks of the Law as weak "through the flesh," _unable to +overcome_ the resistance which it encounters from man's lower +instincts, while the author of Hebrews thinks of it as _unable to +cleanse and make perfect_ the human conscience. + + +ANALYSIS + +The subject of the Epistle: CHRISTIANITY AS THE FINAL RELIGION. The +contrast of the Old Revelation and the New in method, time, and +messengers; the divine personality and incarnation of the Son (i. 1-4). + +A. The superiority of the Son, the Mediator of the New Revelation, to +the angels, and to the human founders of the Jewish polity: i. 5-iv. 13. + +a. Scripture shows the Son to be above the angels (i. 5-14). + +b. The danger of rejecting the Son's revelation (ii. 1-4). + +c. The Son of Man through suffering fulfils the high destiny of mankind +(ii. 5-18). + +d. The dignity of Jesus is far above that of Moses, He is the Maker and +Son, Moses represents the house in which he is a servant (iii. 1-6). + +e. Faith is necessary if we would enter the promised land of rest (iii. +7-19). + +f. Encouragement as well as warning can be based on the failure of the +Israelites. Under Joshua they did not reach their rest. The promise +of it remains for us (iv. 1-13). + +{218} + +B. The high-priesthood of Christ, superior to that of Aaron's line, +universal and royal: iv. 14-vii. 28. + +a. Transition to the doctrine of Christ's high priesthood (iv. 14-16). + +b. The characteristics of a high priest, human sympathy and divine +appointment, fulfilled in Christ (v. 1-10). + +c. A digression to urge the readers to advance; the writer's hope for +the Hebrews, God's blessing is assured (v. 11-vi. 20). + +d. The characteristics of Christ, as perfect and universal High Priest, +shadowed forth by Melchizedek (vii.). + +C. The liturgy and sanctuary of Christ superior to those of Judaism: +viii. i-x. 18. + +a. Christ offers sacrifice in heaven (viii. 1-6). + +b. Thus He maintains the New Covenant between God and man promised in +the Old Testament (viii. 7-13). + +c. The sanctuary and priests of the Old Covenant (ix. 1-10). + +d. Fuller explanation of the atoning work of Christ under the New +Covenant (ix. 11-28). + +e. The inadequacy of the old sacrifices, the abiding efficacy of +Christ's one sacrifice (x. 1-18). + +D. The appropriation and application of the above truths: x. 19-xiii. +25. + +a. The privilege of entering the holy place with confidence, the duty +of public worship (x. 19-39). + +b. The past triumphs of heroes of the faith (xi.). + +c. Exhortation to energy, endurance, fidelity to our Mount Zion and its +divine utterances (xii.). + +d. Detailed instructions (xiii.). + + + +[1] Eusebius, _H. E._ v. 26, says that Irenaeus "mentions the Epistle +to the Hebrews and the so-called Wisdom of Solomon, comparing certain +expressions from them." Eusebius does not say that Irenaeus attributed +it to St. Paul. We can compare words in Heb. i. 1 with Wisd. vii. 22; +Heb. i. 3 with Wisd. xvi. 21; Heb. xii. 17 with Wisd. xii. 10; Heb. +xiii. 7 with Wisd. ii. 17. + +[2] Stephen Gobar, in a passage preserved by Photius, Cod. 232. + +[3] The word "effulgence" (Heb. i. 3) is a favourite word with Philo. +The interpretation of "King of Salem" as "King of peace" (Heb. vii. 2) +occurs in Philo, and Heb. xiii. 5 has a quotation from Josh. i. 5 +exactly resembling in form a quotation in Philo, _De conf. ling._, 33. + +[4] _De Pudic_, 20. + + + + +{129} + +CHAPTER XIX + +THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES + +The New Testament contains seven letters known as "Catholic," viz. that +of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and that of Jude. These +letters were added to the Canon of the New Testament later than the +rest of its contents. In ancient manuscripts, versions, and catalogues +their position in the New Testament varies, and for a long time they +were often placed between Acts and St. Paul's Epistles. 1 Peter and 1 +John were the first to be universally received. About A.D. 300 all +seven were known and received in the Greek Churches, but nearly as late +as A.D. 350 the Syrian Church was unacquainted with any of them except +James. After this the Syrian Church adopted 1 Peter and 1 John, and +finally the whole seven. This fact with regard to the Syrian Church is +of peculiar importance. It shows us that we must take care not to +argue that an Epistle is probably a forgery because an important +Christian community was unacquainted with it at a comparatively late +date. For the evidence for the genuineness of 1 Peter and 1 John is +even stronger than the evidence for the genuineness of James. Yet at a +time when the best Greek critics were entirely satisfied as to the +genuineness of 1 Peter and 1 John, the Syrians did not recognize them. +The only reasonable explanation of this is the simplest explanation, +namely, that some Epistles were translated at a later date than others. +Among Syrian writers we find two distinct tendencies. Writers who were +entirely at home with Greek literature, and in communion with the +orthodox Greek Church, like St. Ephraim or St. John of Damascus, used +the same Catholic {220} Epistles as the Christians of Alexandria or +Jerusalem. On the other hand, Christians who were cut off by schism +from the main body of Christendom continued for centuries to use +exactly the same Canon of Scripture as that which had been employed by +their ancestors before the schism. Thus Ebed Jesu, Metropolitan of +Nisibis, and the last prelate of the Nestorian sect who wrote important +works in Syriac, died in A.D. 1318. But we find that he only uses the +three Catholic Epistles contained in the Peshitta Syriac version of the +New Testament, probably completed soon after A.D. 400. + +If we pass from the extreme east to the extreme west of ancient +Christendom, we find ourselves confronted with similar but not +identical facts. We find that a superior degree of authority was +allowed to belong to 1 Peter and 1 John. There can be no doubt that in +all the great centres of Christian life outside Syria these two +Epistles were in the Canon by the year 200. The _Muratorian Fragment_, +written in Italy about A.D. 180, mentions two Epistles of St. John and +that of St. Jude. It contains no mention of 1 Peter, but there are +grounds for believing that there was a reference to it in the lost +portion which was devoted to Mark. It contains no mention of James, +though that Epistle seems to be quoted in the _Shepherd_ of Hermas, +written at Rome about A.D. 140. It was long before James was +universally regarded as part of the Canon. It is quoted as Scripture +by Origen of Alexandria early in the 3rd century, but a hundred years +later Eusebius says that it was disputed by a minority. It is accepted +by Eusebius himself. The very private character of 2 and 3 John +accounts for the slowness with which they won acceptance as part of the +word of God, yet 2 John is backed by the high authority of Irenaeus, +and both Epistles are obviously the work of the same author. The +Second Epistle which bears the name of St. Peter is connected with +peculiar difficulties, and possesses less evidence in its favour than +any of the other Catholic Epistles. + +We cannot do better than quote the admirable words in {221} which Dr. +Sanday has sketched the adventures of such books. "An Epistle lodged +in the archives of a great and cultured Church like the Church of Rome +would be one thing, and an Epistle straying about among the smaller +communities of Bithynia or Pontus would be another; while an Epistle +written to an individual like the Gaius of 3 St. John would have worse +chances still. There were busy, careless, neglectful, and unmethodical +people in those days as well as now; and we can easily imagine one of +these precious rolls found with glad surprise, covered with dust in +some forgotten hiding-place, and brought out to the view of a +generation which had learnt to be more careful of its treasures. But +even then, once off the main roads, circulation was not rapid; an +obscure provincial Church might take some time in making its voice +heard, and the authorities at headquarters might receive the reported +discovery with suspicion. They might, or they might not, as it +happened." [1] + +But by degrees the customs of the different Churches were levelled. +Before the end of the 4th century all the Catholic Epistles were +accepted as canonical in Europe, and in a large part of the Christian +world which lay beyond Europe. This leads us to inquire why these +Epistles bear the name of Catholic. The answer seems to be that the +name Catholic or General was given to the more important of the seven, +because they were addressed to the Church Universal, or to groups of +Churches, and not to individuals or to single Churches. The words +Catholic Epistles therefore signify Circular or Encyclical Letters. +Origen gives the name of Catholic to 1 Peter, 1 John, and Jude. By the +4th century the name was applied to all the seven. There can be little +doubt that 2 and 3 John are not Catholic in the sense of being Circular +or Encyclical. But they were numbered with the others for the sake of +convenience, being naturally associated with the first and more +important letter by St. John. + +{222} + +The following table gives an idea of the gradual incorporation of the +Catholic Epistles into the Canon. An * denotes a direct quotation or +the expression of almost no doubt; a ? notes that the writer is aware +of decided doubts, a () marks an uncertain reference. + + 1 2 + J P P 1 2 3 + a e e J J J J + m t t o o o u + e e e h h h d + s r r n n n e + + I. COUNCILS-- + Laodicea, A.D. 363 . . . . . . . * * * * * * * + Rome, A.D. 382 . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * + Carthage, A.D. 397 . . . . . . . * * * * * * * + + II. EASTERN LISTS-- + (a) _Syria._ + Ephraim, A.D. 370 . . . . . * * * * * * * + Chrysostom, A.D. 400 . . . . * * * + Peshitta version, ? A.D. 410 * * * + Junilius, A.D. 550 . . . . . ? * ? * ? ? ? + John of Damascus, A.D. 750 * * * * * * * + Ebed Jesu, A.D. 1300 . . . . * * * + (b) _Palestine._ + Eusebius, A.D. 330 . . . . . ? * ? * ? ? ? + Cyril, A.D. 348 . . . . . . * * * * * * * + (c) _Alexandria._ + Clement, A.D. 190 . . . . . * * * * + Origen, A.D. 220 . . . . . . * * ? * ? ? * + Athanasius, A.D. 367 . . . . * * * * * * * + (d) _Asia Minor._ + Polycarp, A.D. 110 . . . . . * * + Amphilochius, A.D. 380 . . . * * ? * ? ? ? + Gregory Nazianzen, A.D. 380 * * * * * * * + + III. WESTERN LISTS-- + (a) _Italy._ + Muratorian, A.D. 180 . . . . * * * + Hippolytus, A.D. 220 . . . . * ( ) * + (b) _Gaul._ + Irenaeus, A.D. 180 . . . . . * * * + (c) _Roman Africa._ + Tertullian, A.D. 200 . . . . * * * + + + +[1] _Inspiration_, p. 368. + + + + +{223} + +CHAPTER XX + +THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES + +[Sidenote: The Author] + +In the 4th century this Epistle was reckoned among the authentic +documents of the apostolic period. It does not seem to have been +universally known in the Church at an earlier period. It is not in the +_Muratorian Fragment_. But it is plainly quoted by Irenaeus, though he +does not mention the author's name. The same is true with regard to +the _Shepherd_ of Hermas, which was written at Rome about A.D. 140. +Justin Martyr quotes the words "the devils shudder" (James ii. 19, +_Trypho_, 49). Polycarp seems to quote James i. 27, and 1 Peter seems +to show traces of its influence. The first writer who both quotes it +and mentions the author is Origen. + +It opens with the name of "James, a servant of God and of the Lord +Jesus Christ." There can be no reasonable doubt that this is James +"the Lord's brother." James the son of Zebedee was killed as early as +A.D. 44, before which date it is unlikely that the Epistle was written. +We have no reason to attribute the Epistle to the Apostle James "the +Little." He does not seem to have been of sufficient prominence to +write an authoritative letter "to the twelve tribes which are of the +Dispersion." But such an action would have been exceedingly natural on +the part of a saint who was bishop of "the mother of Churches," +Jerusalem itself. It will be convenient to postpone the consideration +of such evidence as we possess for the foregoing conclusion until we +have discussed the exact relation of St. James to our Lord. + +{224} + +Three important theories must be mentioned as offering a solution of +the difficult problem as to this relationship-- + +(a) That James, Joses, Simon, and Jude, mentioned in the Gospels as the +"brethren" of our Lord, were His first cousins on His mother's side. + +(b) That they were the children of Joseph and Mary. + +(c) That they were the children of Joseph by a former wife. + +The theory of St. Jerome (a) may be perhaps discarded without any +further comment than that St. Jerome apparently invented it, that he +claimed no traditional sanction for it, he did not hold it consistently +himself in his later writings, and it is very difficult to reconcile it +with Scripture. The theory of Helvidius (b), which called forth St. +Jerome's attempted refutation, answers some verbal requirements of the +Gospel narrative, and has found some skilful modern advocates. But +with the possible exception of Tertullian, no Christian seems to have +held it before Helvidius, and the theory that Mary had other children +besides Jesus gave a profound shock to Christian sentiment. No +argument can be brought against (c), the theory defended, though not +originated, by St. Epiphanius, that the brethren of our Lord were +children of St. Joseph by a former wife. It is in keeping with the +strong tradition which maintained the perpetual virginity of the +Blessed Virgin; it helps to explain the attitude of unbelief recorded +in the Gospels of Christ's brethren, and at the same time requires no +distortion of the literalness of the passages in which they are +mentioned. There is hardly sufficient evidence to show that first +cousins were ever called "brethren." But it would have been quite +natural for those who called St. Joseph "the father of Jesus" to call +St. Joseph's sons "the brothers of Jesus." And again, the supposition +that the Blessed Virgin had no other son, seems strongly supported by +the fact that at the crucifixion our Lord commended her to His beloved +disciple, and not to one of St. Joseph's family. + +{225} + +This theory of St. Epiphanius is much older than the 4th century. It +is sometimes urged against it that Origen derived it from the +Apocryphal Gospels of the 2nd century, and that its popularity in the +Church was owing to Origen's influence. But though the Apocryphal +Gospels often contained fictions, we cannot argue that everything in +them is fictitious. The tradition agrees with the words of Scripture, +and gains support from some fragments of Hegesippus, a cultured +Palestinian Christian, born about A.D. 100. He states directly that +Symeon, the second bishop of Jerusalem, was the _cousin_ of our Lord, +because son of Clopas who was the brother of Joseph. He also calls +James "the brother of the Lord," and in another passage speaks of Jude +as "called brother" of the Lord. He therefore plainly distinguishes +the cousins from the so-called "brethren." We then get the following +genealogy:-- + + Jacob + | + +--------------------+--------------------+ + | | + Joseph == Mary Clopas (or Alphaeus) + | | | + | | +------+------+ + +-- James JESUS | | | + +-- Joses James Joses Symeon + +-- Jude (the Little) + +-- Simon + +-- Sisters + + +We conclude, therefore, that St. James was the son of St. Joseph. + +The writer of the Epistle frequently colours his sentences with words +from the Old Testament, and assumes a knowledge of it among his +readers. He makes no allusion to the Gentiles. He writes in a tone of +authority and without any self-advertisement. He briefly uses for +illustration certain natural phenomena which would be familiar to the +people of Palestine, such as allusions to "the early and latter rain" +(v. 7), the effect on vegetation of the burning wind (i. 11), the +existence of salt or bitter springs (iii. 11), the cultivation {226} of +figs and olives (iii. 12), and the neighbourhood of the sea (i. 6; iii. +4). From such a cursory view of the character of this Epistle, it +would seem reasonable to admit that it was written by a Palestinian +Jewish Christian for the edification of Christians of the same race and +locality. + +We get the same impression when we study what is said by the writer +about the readers. He speaks as though they had been under a law of +bondage, but are now under a law of liberty (i. 25; ii. 12). They are +in touch with men who are unbelievers, who blaspheme Christ and +persecute Christians (ii. 6, 7). The believers are mostly poor (ii. +5); the few rich who are Christians are in danger of falling away +through covetousness and pride (iv. 3-6, 13-16). The rich appear as +oppressors, who luxuriously "nourish their hearts in a day of +slaughter," and had even "killed the righteous" (v. 5, 6). The Church +is ruled by "elders" (v. 14) like the Jewish synagogues, and the +Christian "synagogue" is occasionally frequented by rich strangers (ii. +2). All this is well suited to the conditions of Christian life in +Palestine. And it is difficult to find any locality equally +appropriate. Even as late as the first part of the 2nd century rich +Gentiles were reluctant to persecute Christians, and to describe them +as blaspheming the name of Christ at any time within or near the +apostolic age would be almost impossible. They regarded Christianity +with good-natured contempt, not with blasphemous hostility. We have +only to read Acts to see that among the Gentiles it was the poor and +ignorant rather than the rich who began the persecution of the +Christians. On the other hand, if we turn to the Jews, we find that +the rich were the leaders of persecution. It was the wealthy Sadducee +party in union with the influential Pharisees which harried the Church. +The Gospels and Acts give repeated evidence on this point, and the +evidence of the Jewish historian Josephus supplies the keystone of that +evidence. + +Against the Palestinian origin of the Epistle it is urged that {227} +the Greek is too correct and rhetorical. The style is vivacious and +forcible. It contains many rather unusual Greek words, including six +which are neither in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament nor in +the rest of the New Testament, a long list of words which are found in +the Septuagint and not in the New Testament, and seven rare classical +or late Greek words. The whole question of the style of the Epistle +requires the most delicate handling. But the style is distinctly +unfavourable to the theory that the Epistle was written at a late date +in a centre of Gentile Christianity. The Greek is neither the flowing +Greek of a Greek, nor the rough provincial Greek which St. Paul spoke +and wrote. It is slow and careful, with short sentences linked by +repetitions. One epithet is piled effectively on another (_e.g._ iii. +15, 17), and abstract statements are avoided. Galilee was studded with +Greek towns, and in Jerusalem Greek was well known. The Epistle might +well have been written by a Jew of Palestine who had made a good use of +his opportunities. And the introduction of some rare words in the +midst of a simple moral exhortation is by no means a proof of complete +mastery over Greek. It points, not to a mastery over the language, but +to a painstaking familiarity with it. + +These facts seem compatible with the few details which we know about +St. James. Their full significance can only be appreciated when we +know the difficulties which have beset the commentators who assign to +the Epistle a date outside his lifetime. + +Before considering the question of the date more minutely, we may +collect together some points of interest connected with St. James. + +St. James, like the other "brethren" of our Lord, watched the +development of our Lord's career, but was unconvinced of the truth of +His mission. After the Resurrection, our Lord, St. Paul tells us, "was +seen of James." Perhaps this was the turning-point of his life, he, +like St. Thomas, "saw and {228} believed." The Gospel according to the +Hebrews, one of the oldest of the Apocryphal Gospels, says that our +Lord, after His Resurrection, "went to James and appeared to him--for +James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour in which he +drank the cup of the Lord, until he saw Him rising from the dead;--and +again after a little while. 'Bring hither, saith the Lord, a table and +bread.'" . . . "He brought bread, and blessed and brake it, and gave it +to James the Just, and said unto him, 'My brother, eat thy bread, for +the Son of man hath risen from the dead.'" There are other versions of +the story which make the vow to be taken after the death of Christ. In +spite of some absurdities in this Apocryphal Gospel, it is possible +that the legend is true, and that the sublime death of the Redeemer +began to effect the repentance of His brother. However this may be, +before Pentecost, A.D. 29, we find him joined to the Christian +community at Jerusalem, where he afterwards attained a foremost +position. In Gal. i. we find that St. Paul visited St. James and St. +Peter at Jerusalem. In Acts xii. 17 St. Peter, on escaping from prison +in A.D. 44, desires that news of his escape should be taken to St. +James. In Gal. ii. St. Paul speaks of "James and Cephas and John" as +pillars of the Church at Jerusalem. From Acts xv. we find that at this +time, A.D. 49, St. James acted as president of the Council which +determined how far the Gentile Christians need conform to the customs +of the Jews. It is remarkable that the speech of St. James in Acts xv. +and the circular despatched from the Council show several coincidences +of style with the Epistle. If these coincidences are due to forgery, +the forger has certainly used consummate self-restraint and skill. + +Again, when St. Paul paid his last visit to Jerusalem, in A.D. 56, and +the Jews accused him of advocating the abandonment of the Law of Moses +and "the customs," it is St. James and his presbyters who advise him to +go up to the Temple and purify himself with four Nazirites, and so +reassure the "myriads" of Christian Jews who were zealous for the Law. +{229} Once more we cannot help observing how well this anxiety of St. +James agrees with the very cautious tone of the Epistle with regard to +distinctively Christian doctrine. + +The end of St. James is recorded by Hegesippus and by Josephus. +Hegesippus represents him living as a strict Nazirite, always +frequenting the Temple, with knees as hard as a camel's because of his +perpetual prayers.[1] He tells us that St. James was thrown from a +pinnacle of the Temple, stoned, and clubbed to death at the order of +the scribes and Pharisees for asserting that Jesus was on the right +hand of God. From Josephus we learn that his martyrdom took place when +a vacancy in the procuratorship caused by the death of Festus (in A.D. +62) gave the Sadducees the opportunity which they desired. He was +dragged before the Sanhedrim, condemned and stoned. Josephus also +gives us to understand that the more moderate Jews were not in sympathy +with such a thoroughly unconstitutional proceeding, and that Agrippa +deprived Ananus, the high priest, of his office for invading the rights +of the civil power. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"The twelve tribes of the Dispersion." We might suppose that the +writer had in his mind all the Jews who were dispersed throughout the +world, but came to Jerusalem to offer sacrifice when they were able, +and who were all bound by the religious obligation to pay the yearly +tribute to the temple. There had been several dispersions in the +history of the chosen people, to Assyria under Shalmaneser, to Babylon +and Egypt in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and to Rome under Pompeius. +But ch. ii. 1 shows that the Epistle was written to men who +acknowledged Jesus as Lord. It is therefore natural to think that it +was written only to men who were both Christians and of Jewish origin. +But there is another interpretation of the phrase "the twelve tribes." +Some think that it is merely a symbolical name for the Christian Church +composed both of Jews and Gentiles, and {230} forming the new and +spiritual Israel. Strong arguments have been brought forward in favour +of each of these views, but the former seems to be the sounder. The +argument that the Jews at this period could not have been called +"twelve" tribes when only two had returned from the captivity, is +disproved by the fact that the phrase is unquestionably used in this +meaning in Acts xxvi. 7. We must frankly admit that St. Paul speaks of +the Gentile Christians as forming part of the new Israel of God, but he +never alludes to them as part of twelve tribes. In Rev. vii. the +twelve tribes still mean Christian Jews in contrast with the "great +multitude" of redeemed Gentiles. Justin Martyr speaks of "your twelve +tribes" in addressing Trypho[2] the Jew, and several instances are to +be found in early Christian literature where the words are used in this +literal sense. + +We may therefore rest content with this literal meaning. But we must +maintain it with reserve in view of the fact that St. Peter applies the +word "dispersion" to the new and ideal Israel. And we must beware of +arguing that the word "synagogue" (ii. 2) proves that the readers were +necessarily Jews. The word "synagogue" was for a long time +occasionally applied to the Gentile Christian congregations, as we find +in the _Shepherd_ of Hermas[3] (A.D. 140) and Theophilus[4] (A.D. 180). + +[Sidenote: When and where written.] + +We have already seen that Palestine is the most likely place, and as +St. James lived at Jerusalem, the Epistle was probably written there. +The date has always been a hopeless problem to those who reject the +authenticity of the Epistle. That it was written by a heretic in +Palestine about A.D. 70, or by a Catholic at Rome about A.D. 90, or +that it represents a "Catholicized Paulinism" of A.D. 140, or that it +is a patchwork of homilies written soon after A.D. 120, are guesses +which have been made but not substantiated. The fact that it was +written before A.D. 62 is {231} self-evident if we admit that it was +written by St. James. But it is also corroborated by the fact that 1 +Peter, written about A.D. 64, seems to show a knowledge of this +Epistle. Far more complicated is the question as to whether St. James +shows any knowledge of St. Paul's Epistles. He insists so pointedly on +the need of being justified _by works_ that some writers have thought +that he is attacking St. Paul's doctrine of justification _by faith_. +The idea must be dismissed. Such a masterly writer would not have +attacked what an apostle did not really hold. St. James, in attacking +a theory of justification by faith, is condemning a faith which means +only orthodox intellectual assent. St. Paul, in defending his doctrine +of justification by faith, is upholding a faith which implies energetic +and loving service. The two doctrines simply supplement one another. +When Luther called the Epistle to the Galatians his "wife" and called +the Epistle of St. James an "Epistle of straw," he simply showed that +he understood neither. St. James is not only not criticizing St. Paul; +he is perhaps not even criticizing a popular perversion of St. Paul's +doctrine. The question of the justification of Abraham was a favourite +subject of discussion among the Jews, and the teaching of our Lord had +shown the superiority of a living faith over dead works. There is no +difficulty in supposing that some Jewish believers were confused with +regard to these great matters before they had read a word of St. Paul's +letters. And to such men the Epistle of St. James might be of the +highest value. + +In spite of this, there often seems to be a verbal connection between +this Epistle and those of St. Paul. The connection is admitted by +critics of the most different schools. Moreover, some are of opinion +that there is a connection between James and the Epistle to the +Hebrews, ch. xi. These connections have been exaggerated, but they are +hard to deny. Now, if St. James had borrowed from any of these +Epistles, it would be very difficult for us to account for the extreme +simplicity of his {232} doctrine. On the other hand, there is no +difficulty in the fact that they put his words in a more elaborate +setting. And as St. Paul's opponents declared that they were backed by +St. James, we may be sure that St. Paul would eagerly read anything +written by St. James. We may therefore place this Epistle earlier than +St. Paul's Epistles to Corinth and Rome, and perhaps earlier than any +of his extant Epistles. + +It is sometimes objected to this that it is "grotesque" to suppose that +St. James would have originated the practice of writing religious +Epistles. It is said that the practice must have been begun by an +apostle of supreme originality, and one who travelled widely, therefore +by St. Paul. But we have no means of deciding the question. And as +St. Paul may have written Epistles before he wrote those now extant, we +may still hold that St. Paul began the practice, and that this Epistle +is nevertheless older than the works of St. Paul which we now possess. +We can, therefore, see no good reason for denying that this Epistle is +as early as A.D. 50. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle is intensely practical, and though it is in no sense +anti-doctrinal, it does not discuss doctrine. The evils against which +it contends all concern conduct. The good which it recommends is +persistent well-doing in accordance with the new moral law of +Christianity. The sole validity of the law of love (ii. 8), the gift +of a new birth by the word of truth, making us heirs of God (i. 18; ii. +5), the mention of the author's servitude to Christ (i. 1), and the +ascription of divine power to His name (v. 14), show conclusively that +the writing is not, as some say, of Jewish origin. The tone is +austere, and the Epistle contains no word of praise for the readers. + +A strong argument in favour of the genuineness of the Epistle is +furnished by the numerous parallels which it presents to the Synoptic +Gospels. These parallels are not quotations from the Gospels, but they +show that the writer was saturated with the kind of teaching which the +Gospels record. The {233} connection with the Sermon on the Mount as +recorded by St. Matthew is particularly plain. Among the numerous +proofs of this connection we must content ourselves with noticing the +agreement as to the spiritual view of the Law (Jas. i. 25; ii. 8, 12, +13; Matt. v. 17-44), the blessings of adversity (Jas. i. 2, 13; ii. 5; +v. 7, 8; Matt. v. 3-12), the dangers of wealth (Jas. i. 10, 11; ii. 6, +7; iv. 13-16; v. 1-6; Matt. vi. 19-21, 24-34), the true nature of +prayer (Jas. i. 5-8; iv. 3; v. 13-18; Matt. vi. 6-13), the necessity of +forgiving others (Jas. ii. 13; Matt. vi. 14, 15), the tree known by its +fruits (Jas. iii. 11, 12; Matt. vii. 16-20), the prohibition of oaths +(Jas. v. 12; Matt. v. 34-37), the Judge before the door (Jas. v. 9; +Matt. xxiv. 33). Many other coincidences can be found. The "perfect +law" upheld by St. James, a law both "free" and "royal," irresistibly +reminds us of the legislation of the Messianic King in our first Gospel. + +In v. 14-16 we have a direction given with regard to the anointing of +the sick by the presbyters of the Church. This rite, perverted by the +Gnostics in the 2nd century, survived that perversion. The first full +directions for it in a Catholic document are in the prayers of Bishop +Sarapion of Thmuis in Egypt, about A.D. 350. In the Eastern Church the +oil used for this purpose may be consecrated by presbyters, contrary to +the usual practice of the West, which requires it to be consecrated by +a bishop. + +{234} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation (i. 1). + +Human trial and the wisdom which enables us to profit by it, a warning +against double-mindedness, Christianity exalts the lowly, riches are +transitory, trial brings blessing, trial due to lust is not a trial +from God but from self, God is the Source of all our good (i. 2-18). + +We must receive the divine word with humility and act upon it, kindness +and purity are the best ceremonial (i. 19-27). + +Christian behaviour towards rich and poor to be based on the royal law +of love; violation of that law is a breach of God's command, which +embraces motive as well as action (ii. 1-13). + +Intellectual faith is no substitute for godly works, Abraham and Rahab +were justified by works (ii. 13-26). + +The responsibility of teaching, the difficulty and importance of +controlling the tongue (iii. 1-12). + +Christian wisdom contrasted with the animal wisdom of faction (iii. +13-18). + +The cause of quarrelling is selfish desire, which infects even your +prayers, the adultery of a soul which indulges in worldliness and +pride, cease from finding fault, worldliness is shown in business plans +made without reference to God (iv.). + +Luxurious wealth denounced, it is the rich who have persecuted the +righteous, patience is commended (v. 1-11). + +Swear not, prayer and praise, the anointing of the sick with prayer, +mutual confession of sins and prayer, the blessing on those who convert +a sinner (v. 12-20). + + + +[1] Quoted by Eusebius, _H. E._ ii. 23. + +[2] _Trypho._ 126. + +[3] _Mand._ xi. 9. + +[4] _Ad Autol._ i. 14. + + + + +{235} + +CHAPTER XXI + +THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The author describes himself as "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (i. +1). Few books of the New Testament are so well attested as this +Epistle. + +The external evidence for its authenticity is strong, and stronger than +that for any other Catholic Epistle except 1 John. It seems to be +quoted in _Didaché_, i. 4. The letter of Polycarp written about A.D. +110 shows a complete familiarity with 1 Peter. He evidently regarded +it as a letter of the highest authority. His contemporary Papias was +acquainted with it, and so far as we can determine from Eusebius, he +referred to it directly as the work of St. Peter. The Epistle of +Barnabas, the date of which is uncertain, but which is probably as old +as A.D. 98 or even older, quotes 1 Pet. ii. 5. Again, it seems certain +that the Epistle is quoted, though not by name, in the Epistle of +Clement of Rome, A.D. 95. It is quite unnecessary for us to point to +important references in writers of the latter part of the 2nd century +and onwards. An Epistle which has the triple support of Clement, +Polycarp, and Papias is, so far as external evidence is concerned, +beyond the reach of any sober criticism. + +The apostle was first called "Simon, the son of John" (according to the +correct reading in John xxi. 15, 16, 17), and was a fisherman of +Bethsaida. He was brought to Jesus by his brother Andrew, and, like +him, had been a disciple of John the Baptist. Our Lord at once +discerned his capacity, and gave {236} him the surname of Cephas +(Aramaic) or Peter (Greek), signifying a rock or stone. Peter was the +first disciple to confess the Messiahship of our Lord, and was rewarded +by the promise of the keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. xvi. 13-19). +With John and James he was admitted to a peculiarly close relationship +with Jesus (Mark v. 37; Matt. xvii. 1; xxvi. 37; cf. Mark iii. 16, 17). +He thrice denied that he was a disciple of Jesus on the night when +Jesus was tried and condemned. He bitterly repented, and on the third +day after the Crucifixion he, again in the company of John, hastened to +the sepulchre and found it empty. He was permitted several times to +see the risen Lord, who cancelled his threefold denial by graciously +drawing from him a threefold confession of his love, and commanded him +to feed His lambs and His sheep. Our Lord also predicted his martyrdom +(John xx. and xxi.; Luke xxiv. 33, 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5). + +In Acts St. Peter appears as the leader of the Church. At the election +of Matthias in place of Judas, at the descent of the Holy Ghost at +Pentecost, at the admission of the Gentiles in the person of Cornelius +and his family to the privileges of the new covenant, at the +emancipation of the Gentile Christians from the Jewish ceremonial law +at the Council of Jerusalem, St. Peter is foremost (Acts i. 15-26; ii. +1-42; x.; xv. 6-11). Soon after the Council St. Peter was at Antioch, +and weakly "dissembled" by disguising his belief in the truth that the +Gentile Christians were on the same spiritual level as the Jewish +Christians. He was rebuked by St. Paul (Gal. ii. 11-14). + +He does not seem to have laboured in Rome until near the end of his +life. The Roman tradition that he was bishop of that city for +twenty-five years is almost certainly a legend, based on the fact that +twenty-five years elapsed between the year when the apostles were +believed to have temporarily left Jerusalem (twelve years after the +Crucifixion) and the date of his martyrdom. There is, however, no +ground for disputing the fact that {237} he died at Rome during the +Neronian persecution. There are several reasons for thinking that he +survived St. Paul for a short period, though St. Augustine asserts that +he was martyred before St. Paul. He was crucified near the middle of +the circus of Nero, on a spot afterwards marked by a "chapel of the +crucifixion." He was buried nigh at hand. His tomb, probably in the +form of a _cella_ or open apse, is mentioned by Caius of Rome about +A.D. 200. A huge basilica was built over it by the Emperor +Constantine, and remained until it was replaced in the 16th century by +the present St. Peter's. In spite of his unique position, St. Peter in +1 Pet. v. 1 speaks of himself as a "presbyter," as St. John does in 2 +John 1 and 3 John 1 (compare also 1 Tim. iv. 14, where St. Paul reckons +himself as a member of the "presbytery"). At this period, and for many +years later, the word "presbyter" was vague enough to be applied to the +highest officers of the Church. + +The internal evidence afforded by the Epistle is in harmony with St. +Peter's experience. (1) The writer claims to have been "a witness of +the sufferings of Christ" (v. 1), and contrasts himself and his readers +in saying (i. 8), "Whom not having seen ye love." (2) He lays stress +upon the pastoral aspect of our Lord's work (ii. 25; v. 2-4), as though +writing under a sense of the special pastoral charge given to him by +our Lord. (3) His injunction, "all of you gird yourselves with +humility"--literally, "put on humility like a slave's apron"--seems to +be a reminiscence of the action of our Lord that astonished St. Peter +when "He took a towel and girded Himself" at the Last Supper. (4) +There are points of resemblance between the Epistle and the speeches +delivered by St. Peter in Acts. (5) The appeal to Old Testament +predictions of Christ's sufferings (1 Pet. i. 11; Acts iii. 18), the +reference to the stone that was rejected by the builders (1 Pet. ii. 7, +8; Acts iv. 11), the description of the cross as the "tree" (1 Pet. ii. +24; Acts v. 30), are coincidences which suggest a common authorship +while they seem too small to be designed. (6) The graphic and {238} +pictorial style of the Epistle bears resemblance to the style of Mark, +which is based on St. Peter's preaching. We may mention the word "put +to silence" (ii. 15)--literally, "muzzle"--which St. Mark (i. 25; iv. +39) applies to the subduing of an unclean spirit and the stilling of a +rough sea. + +Against the authenticity of the Epistle it is sometimes said that it is +improbable that St. Peter, whose mission was to the Jews, would address +Churches in which St. Paul had laboured, and which were largely +composed of Gentiles. But in no case could such action on the part of +St. Peter be thought incredible. And if St. Peter survived St. Paul, +as he very probably did, it would be particularly fitting for him to +write to them after St. Paul's martyrdom. Many critics have been +inclined to pronounce the Epistle spurious on the ground that it seems +to be so strongly influenced by St. Paul's teaching as to represent St. +Paul's own school of thought. We find, as in St. Paul's writings, the +phrase "in Christ" (iii. 16; v. 10, 14), and the second advent of +Christ called by the name "revelation" (i. 7, 13; iv. 13). Moreover, +there are numerous verses which can be compared with verses in St. +Paul's Epistles, particularly in Romans and Ephesians.[1] We must not +fail to notice in passing, that if this Epistle, which manifestly +belongs to the 1st century, does actually quote Ephesians, as some +affirm, the authenticity of Ephesians is thereby very strongly +corroborated. But in any case the similarity between the Epistle and +St. Paul's writings cannot be reasonably urged against its genuineness. +The once popular theory that St. Paul held a fundamentally different +conception of Christianity from that held by St. Peter has completely +broken down. There is not a shred of evidence for believing that the +semi-Christian Jews who lived in Palestine in the 2nd century +represented St. Peter's {239} type of Christianity, or that the +teaching of St. Peter excluded the deep teaching of St. Paul. He was +susceptible to external influences, and he may have caught the tone of +St. Paul while living in a community which St. Paul had so profoundly +influenced. This tone seems to mark 1 Peter. + +But a further point must be mentioned in this connection. Modern +writers have too readily adopted the habit of labelling certain +expressions and doctrines as Pauline and assuming that St. Paul +_originated_ them. No doubt the apostle of the Gentiles possessed a +mind as original as it was fertile. But it is at least reasonable to +suppose that a common creed and a common training produced similar +habits of thought in many cultivated and eager minds. St. Paul himself +frequently writes as if his readers, even those who had not seen his +face, were quite familiar with a treasury of words and ideas which he +employs. We cannot legitimately argue that he was the first and only +coiner of such words and ideas. For instance, the phrase "in Christ," +which we have quoted above, is often said to have been directly +borrowed from St. Paul. But the idea of abiding in Christ is implied +in Matt. and Mark, and expounded in John. It reaches back to the Old +Testament idea of abiding "in God" (Ps. lvi. 4; lxii. 7; Isa. xlv. 25). +It would be quite natural in any Christian who had adequately realized +the truth of the Incarnation. We can therefore repudiate without +hesitation the assertion that the writer is more affected "by the +teaching of Paul than of Jesus." The imagery employed by the writer is +of a distinctive character. It is almost entirely derived from the Old +Testament, and is narrower in its range than that of St. Paul. The +figures are drawn from birth and family life (i. 3, 14, 17, 22; ii. 2), +nomadic life (i. 1, 17; ii. 11), temple and worship (ii. 3; iii. 15), +building (ii. 4), fields and pastoral life (i. 4; v. 2, 8), military +life (i. 5; ii. 11, iv. 1), painting (ii. 21), working in metals (i. 7; +iv. 12). Some of these figures suggest that the author was a Jew by +birth, and also that he was not a mere copyist of St. Paul. + +{240} + +Again, we must notice that 1 Peter shows a dependence upon James.[2] +While we therefore grant that the author of this Epistle seems to have +made use of St. Paul's writings, we must be prepared to grant that he +also made use of a document written by one who has been frequently +declared by modern critics to have been antagonistic to St. Paul. A +tradition found as early as Origen, and in itself extremely probable, +represents St. Peter as having organized the Church at Antioch, and St. +Peter probably became acquainted with the Epistle of St. James while at +Antioch and before his arrival at Rome. In any case, the author shows +himself by no means exclusively indebted to St. Paul, and the candid +student must therefore admit that it is unreasonable to discredit this +Epistle on the ground that it represents St. Peter as preaching +"Paulinism." + +It is also asserted that the Greek is too flowing to have been written +by St. Peter, especially if Papias is right in saying that St. Peter +required the services of St. Mark as "interpreter." The style of the +Greek is, indeed, good. It contains a considerable number of classical +Greek words, though it is also saturated with the language of the +Septuagint. It is simple, correct, and impressive. But the large +extent to which Greek was spoken in Palestine, and the fact that it was +the language of Antioch, make it quite possible that St. Peter obtained +a considerable mastery over Greek. We cannot attach a quite definite +meaning to the word "interpreter." It need not imply that St. Peter +always, or even at any time in his later life, required his Aramaic to +be translated into Greek. It is not unusual for a clever modern +missionary to lecture and write in correct Chinese after a very few +years of practice, and there would be nothing strange if St. Peter soon +acquired a comparatively easy language such as Hellenistic Greek. It +is therefore quite unnecessary for {241} some half-hearted apologists +to suggest that the Epistle was mainly or entirely written for St. +Peter by his secretary, Silvanus (1 Pet. v. 12). The expression and +connection of the ideas contained in it are far too natural and easy +for us to think that two hands were concerned in its composition, and +the tone of authority used in v. 1 can only be explained on the theory +that St. Peter or a forger wrote the Epistle. The language of ch. v. +is most easily explained by the theory that Silvanus, a trusted friend +and delegate of St. Peter, carried the letter. The letter was +purposely made short (v. 12) because its lessons were to be enforced by +Silvanus. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"To the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, +Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia." Considerable difficulty is attached +to this address. At first sight it seems to mean those Christians of +Asia Minor north of the Taurus mountains who had been converted from +Judaism. But there are some verses in the Epistle which seem to imply +that the readers had been pagans. These verses are i. 14; ii. 9, 10; +iii. 6; iv. 3. They suggest that the readers had led a licentious +heathen life, and had been only recently admitted to any covenant with +God. The bearing of some of them is a little uncertain. For instance, +ii. 10 says that the converts in time past "were no people, but now are +the people of God"--the same verse that St. Paul in Rom. ix. 25 applies +to the calling of the Gentiles. This verse is thought to furnish a +strong argument for those scholars who hold that the Epistle is +addressed to Gentiles, and that "sojourners of the Dispersion" must be +taken in a figurative sense, meaning Christians who are exiled from the +heavenly Canaan. But as the verse is from Hos. i. 10, and is applied +by Hosea himself to the Jews, it is certainly _possible_ to hold that +St. Peter also applies it to Jews. In this case the word "Dispersion" +would retain its literal meaning, and the Epistle would be written to +converts from Judaism. But the reference to "idolatries" in iv. 3 +cannot be applied to Jews. And it {242} would be quite unnatural for +St. Peter to speak about the heathen thinking it "strange" that +converted _Jews_ refused to join in their idolatrous excesses. The +word "you" in i. 12 suggests that the readers belonged to a different +race from the Hebrew prophets. Finally, the phrase "elect of the +Dispersion" must be compared with "in Babylon, elect" (v. 13). Like +the name "Babylon" for Rome, the word "Dispersion" is a Jewish phrase +taken over by the Christian Church. We agree, then, with St. Jerome +and St. Augustine in holding that this Epistle was written to Gentiles. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The Epistle says, "She that is in Babylon, elect together with you, +saluteth you" (v. 13). This means the Church in Rome. The name +"Babylon" is applied to Rome in the Revelation, and from an early +period the Christians would naturally be inclined to give this name to +a city which had become, like Babylon of old, the centre of worldliness +and oppression. It is practically certain that St. Peter spent his +last days in Rome. Moreover, St. Mark was with St. Peter when this +Epistle was written (v. 13), and from 2 Tim. iv. 11 we know that St. +Mark was invited to Rome about A.D. 64. It is most improbable that +"Babylon" signifies either the Babylon near Cairo, or the great city on +the Euphrates. Three facts enable us to determine the date: (1) The +presence of Mark in Rome. (2) The fact that St. Peter appears never to +have been in Rome when Colossians was written in A.D. 60--so that the +Epistle cannot be earlier than A.D. 60. (3) The allusion in iv. 13-15 +to the fact that Christians are already punished for being named +Christians. In the period described in Acts they are not yet punished +merely for being Christians, but for specific crimes alleged against +them by their opponents. It is often asserted that this Epistle must +be later than the time of Nero, on the ground that it was after Nero's +time that the name _Christian_ ensured the legal condemnation of any +one who bore it. But this assertion is not supported by the Roman +historians Tacitus and Suetonius. Their words support the contention +{243} that the kind of persecution mentioned in this Epistle began +under Nero in A.D. 64. When the Epistle was written this persecution +had probably begun, but it had not yet assumed its most savage form.[3] +(4) St. Peter himself suffered under Nero, not later than A.D. 67. We +may therefore confidently date the Epistle about A.D. 64. + +It appears from v. 12 that in writing this Epistle St. Peter was +assisted by "Silvanus, our faithful brother," as an amanuensis. He is +probably the "Silas" (another form of the same name) mentioned in Acts +xv. 22, 32, 40, and the Silvanus in 1 Thess. i. 1; 2 Thess. i. 1, 2 +Cor. i. 19. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +This Epistle is highly practical, and though it is rich in doctrinal +elements, it endeavours to instruct the readers in conduct rather than +doctrine. The two key-words of the Epistle are _suffering_ and _hope_, +and the sufferings of Christ and the glories which crowned them furnish +St. Peter with encouragement. Though he writes in plain sympathy with +the liberal Christianity of St. Paul, his language throughout bears the +impress of the Old Testament. Christ is the "lamb" (i. 19) and the +"corner-stone" (ii. 6); Christians are the "elect race" (ii. 9) and the +"royal priesthood" (ii. 9). Without discussing the problems raised by +God's predestination of the Jews, he says that they were "appointed" +unto stumbling, and their stumbling seems to be regarded as the +punishment which God attached to their disobedience. + +The fact that in i. 2 the names of the Three Persons of the Trinity are +given in an order which does not correspond with the order of their +revelation in the history of religion, indicates that they are regarded +as coequal. We may note that in iv. 19 the Father is called "faithful +Creator," a unique expression. The teaching about the work of Christ +is full. He is often {244} simply called "Christ" without the name +"Jesus." He is called "Lord," and His special divine Sonship is +implied (i. 3). The real existence of our Lord before His birth on +earth is also implied. It has been said that i. 20 signifies that He +was only known to the Father as destined to exist in the future. This +interpretation is excluded by i. 11, which shows that His Spirit +inspired the prophets before His birth. It is still more definitely +excluded by iii. 18, 19. Here it is shown that His personality resided +neither in His flesh, nor in His human spirit clothed "in which" He +preached to the dead. This spirit was therefore taken by a personality +which existed previous to the creation of the spirit. The Atonement is +prominent. Christ's death is both an example and a redemption which +procured God's grace. He died "for the unrighteous." He carried our +sins in His body to the cross (ii. 24). The Resurrection is one of the +"glories" which followed His sufferings (i. 11). It is a unique motive +to our faith (i. 21), and the cause of the efficacy of our baptism +(iii. 21). The Ascension is the fact which guarantees to us the +present rule of Christ (iii. 22). In iv. 6 we have an important +statement with regard to the dead, which must be studied in relation to +iii. 18-20. The purpose of Christ's preaching to those who died before +the gospel came was that though judged they yet might live. Blessings +which they had not known on earth were offered to them by the dead but +living Christ. + +The practical side of the Epistle is simple but solemn. It deals with +the privileges (i. 3-ii. 10), duties (ii. 11-iv. 11), and trials (iv. +12-v. 11) of the brethren. It seems to be written with the hope that +the Christians may perhaps disarm persecution if they abstain from +vainly attempting to set every one to rights and are scrupulously loyal +to the Government (ii. 14-17). + +{245} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation (i. 1, 2). + +The joy of salvation, a joy which springs from faith; this salvation +was foretold by the prophets: the fruits of salvation, seriousness, +love towards others, growth, the privilege of being built upon Christ: +Christians are the true Israel (i. 3-ii. 10). + +The Christian brotherhood and its duties, submission to civil +magistrates, slaves must obey even unreasonable masters, wives if good +and gentle may win their husbands, husbands must reverence their wives: +kindness must be the Christian's rule, there must be no return of evil +for evil; suffering, if wrongfully endured, has its reward. Christ's +sufferings issued in blessing, in His ministerial journey to Hades and +His triumphant journey into heaven: Christ our Example, our rule is the +will of God: Christian life must be guided in view of the approaching +end of all things, each of our gifts is to be used for the good of the +whole Church (ii. 11-iv. 11). + +The trials of the brethren, trust in God in the midst of suffering, +rejoice in your participation in Christ's suffering, bear the reproach +that fell on Him, to suffer as a Christian is cause for thanksgiving, +suffering to be expected, judgment is beginning: the relation of +pastors and people, the presbyters not to act as slaves, hirelings, or +tyrants: final counsels to humility and firmness (iv. 12-v. 11). + +Commendation of the bearer, and salutations (v. 12-14). + + + +[1] Compare 1 Pet. i. 14 with Rom. xii. 2; 1 Pet. i. 21 with Rom. iv. +24; 1 Pet. ii. 5 with Rom. xii. 1; 1 Pet. ii. 6, 7 with Rom. ix. 33; 1 +Pet. ii. 10 with Rom. ix. 25, 26; 1 Pet. ii. 18 with Eph. vi. 5; 1 Pet. +iii. 1 with Eph. v. 22; 1 Pet. v. 5 with Eph. v. 21. + +[2] Compare 1 Pet. i. 1 with Jas. i. 1; 1 Pet. i. 6 f. with Jas. i. 2 +f., 12; 1 Pet. i. 23 with Jas. i. 18; 1 Pet. ii. 1 with Jas. i. 21; 1 +Pet. ii. 11 with Jas. iv. 1; 1 Pet. v. 6 with Jas. iv. 7, 10; 1 Pet. v. +9 with Jas. iv. 7; and the quotation in 1 Pet. v. 5 with Jas. iv. 6. + +[3] For the persecution and its bearing on the date of this Epistle, +see Leighton Pullan, _History of Early Christianity_, p. 105 ff. +(Service and Paton, 1898). + + + + +{246} + +CHAPTER XXII + +THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The difficulties which are connected with the authorship of this +Epistle are greater than those connected with the authorship of any +other book of the New Testament. A multitude of objections have been +raised against its genuineness, and it has been pronounced spurious by +a considerable number even of Christian writers. But while fully +admitting that the problem is complicated, we can lawfully simplify it +by at once dismissing some of the weaker objections. For instance, the +statement that 2 Peter quotes from Josephus, the celebrated Jewish +historian, who died c. A.D. 103, is utterly unproved. Again, the +often-repeated statement that the doctrine of man being made a partaker +of the divine nature (2 Pet. i. 4) is a doctrine which was not taught +until after the apostolic age, is unwarrantable, unless we repudiate +wholesale many books of the New Testament which we have every reason to +regard as apostolic. For the indwelling of the Father in Christ and in +the believer through Christ is implied by St. Paul, St. John, St. +James, and St. Peter. The writer, in laying stress upon the importance +of spiritual knowledge, is once more in agreement with St. Paul and St. +John. He plainly does not mean mere intellectual _knowledge_, and the +doctrine which he teaches is of a very simple kind. The slight +reference made to the Redemption (ii. 1) and the silence manifested as +to the Resurrection cannot be considered so crucial as some scholars +believe them to be. Readers of the First Epistle could hardly fail to +have these {247} facts printed in their very souls. They would not +require to have them repeated in a second letter. + +The language of the Epistle, especially in the verses which do not +depend upon Jude, shows several small coincidences with 1 Peter and +with the speeches of St. Peter in Acts. We may compare the phrases in +2 Pet. ii. 15 with Acts i. 18, and 2 Pet. iii. 10 with Acts ii. 19, and + + Compare 2 Pet. i. 7 with 1 Pet. i. 22, iii. 8. + " " i. 19, 20 " " i. 10-12. + " " ii. 1 " " i. 18 + " " iii. 6 " " iii. 20. + " " iii. 14 " " i. 19. + + +The writer abstains from copying the designation of the apostle +contained in 1 Peter, and does not record the words spoken from heaven +at the Transfiguration exactly as they are reported in the Gospels. In +both these points a forger would very probably have acted otherwise. + +On the whole, the words employed in 2 Peter seem indecisive with regard +to the authorship. There is sufficient variation to allow us to +believe that it was written or not written by the apostle. One of the +most remarkable words in 2 Peter is that employed in i. 16 for an +"eye-witness." It is a word used in the Greek heathen mysteries, and +some critics think that such a word would not have been used by an +orthodox writer until an age when the Church had learnt to borrow Greek +religious terms from the Gnostic heretics. It is a sufficient proof of +the weakness of this argument that the Greek verb derived from this +noun is found in 1 Pet. ii. 12. It is, however, fair to say that the +style of 2 Peter is less simple and less closely connected with the Old +Testament than that of 1 Peter. + +More serious objections are (1) the lack of external evidence in the +writers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries; (2) the internal evidence that +the Epistle is based upon Jude, and perhaps on the Apocalypse of Peter. + +{248} + +Eusebius is evidently in doubt about it. He says, "We have not indeed +received it by tradition to be in the Canon, yet as it appeared useful +to many, it was studiously read with the other Scriptures." [1] It is +not mentioned by Irenaeus, nor is it in the list given in the +_Muratorian Fragment_. But it seems to have been commented on by +Clement of Alexandria, though it is not quoted in his extant works. +Origen does mention it in his original Greek works, but in a manner +which shows that it was disputed in his time. In Rufinus' Latin +translation of Origen there are several quotations from 2 Peter, but +against this fact it is sometimes urged that Rufinus emended Origen, +and that we cannot be absolutely certain that these quotations are +genuine. The Epistle seems to have been known to Origen's great +contemporary Hippolytus (_Refut._ ix. 7; x. 20 and elsewhere). There +are, moreover, passages in still earlier writers which are perhaps +based on 2 Peter. These are in Clement of Rome, A.D. 95, Justin +Martyr, A.D. 152, and the document which is wrongly called the Second +Epistle of Clement, and is really a Roman homily of about A.D. 140. +The evidence of these passages is not positive, but if even one of them +is quoted from 2 Peter, it becomes quite impossible to assign 2 Peter +to A.D. 150-170, which is the date most favoured by those who deny its +authenticity. Nor is the omission of any mention of it in Irenaeus and +the _Muratorian Fragment_ a very destructive fact. The _Muratorian +Fragment_ is only a fragment, and does not mention 1 Peter, and there +is no passage in Irenaeus quoted from James. Yet it is certain that +those two Epistles belong to the apostolic age. The fact is that such +a very large amount of the literature of the 2nd century has been +destroyed, that it is always precarious to argue from omissions in the +books which are still extant. Therefore, although the evidence of +writers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries is certainly meagre in the case of +2 Peter, we cannot argue that comparative lack of evidence means +positively hostile evidence. A {249} notable step towards the +determination of the problem will be made if scholars eventually agree +to assign a very early date to the two great Egyptian versions of the +New Testament. Both these versions contain 2 Peter. + +As to the connection between 2 Peter and Jude, it may be regarded as +certain that either they both depend on some previous document, or that +one of them depends on the other. + + Compare Jude 6 with 2 Pet. ii. 4. + " " 7 " " ii. 6. + " " 8 " " ii. 10. + " " 10 " " ii. 12. + " " 11 " " ii. 15. + " " 12, 13 " " ii. 13, 17. + " " 16 " " ii. 18. + " " 17, 18 " " iii. 1-3. + +An examination of these passages seems to prove that 1 Peter borrows +from Jude and not Jude from 2 Peter.[2] In Jude the connection of +ideas seems more simple and direct. Various verses in 2 Peter become +more intelligible in the light thrown upon them by the corresponding +verses in Jude. Thus Jude 10 alludes to the immorality which explains +why the heretics are called "animals to be destroyed" in 2 Pet. ii. 12. +Jude 13, by calling the heretics "wandering stars," explains why +"darkness" is said to be "reserved" for them in 2 Pet. ii. 17. Between +2 Pet. ii. 17 and 18 there is no direct allusion to Enoch as in Jude +14, but some of the material taken from the Book of Enoch still remains. + +It will be observed that this connection with Jude is confined to 2 +Pet. ii. 1-iii. 7. Now, this passage must have been either inserted in +some ancient manuscript of this Epistle, or it was originally part of +the Epistle. If it has been inserted, the question of the authenticity +of the rest of the Epistle obviously remains {250} untouched. But if +it originally formed part of the Epistle, as appears to be the case, +can we regard this as a conclusive proof that St. Peter did not write +it? Surely not.[3] The fact that St. Luke inserts most of the Gospel +of St. Mark is not considered to be any argument against the +authenticity of St. Luke's work. Both in the Old Testament and the New +we are occasionally confronted by the same phenomenon. Writers repeat +what has been said by other writers when their words appear to them to +be the best possible words for enforcing a particular lesson. + +The question of the authenticity of 2 Peter has lately become still +further complicated. There has recently been discovered part of the +Apocalypse of Peter mentioned in the _Muratorian Fragment_. This +Apocalypse is usually thought to have been forged in Egypt in the first +half of the 2nd century. It presents certain points of resemblance +with 2 Peter. These points of resemblance affect the first chapter of +2 Peter as well as the second chapter. They therefore furnish an +argument against the theory that ch. ii. is a late interpolation into a +genuine Epistle, and they suggest that the Epistle is either wholly +genuine or wholly forged. But the solution of the problem is not so +easy as it seems to many scholars. If we could positively say that the +Apocalypse was written in the 2nd century, and positively say that 2 +Peter borrows from it, the question would be settled once for all. But +this is the very thing which we cannot do with confidence. Some +critics of great ability hold it certain that 2 Peter was forged by +some one who borrowed from the Apocalypse. Some think that the same +writer forged them both. Others think that the Apocalypse is partly +derived from 2 Peter. They can strongly support their view by the fact +that when Christians were familiar with both writings, it was decided +to reject the Apocalypse and {251} keep the Epistle. Lastly, it might +be reasonably held that the coincidences in both writings are due to +the use of one earlier document or a common stock of ideas and phrases. +The popularity of Apocalyptic literature at the beginning of the +Christian era makes this theory credible. + +We may sum up the evidence for and against 2 Peter as follows:-- + +1. The external evidence is meagre. + +2. The internal evidence is perplexing, and may reasonably be +considered adverse. + +On the other hand:-- + +1. The external evidence is not definitely adverse. + +2. No convincing reason can be assigned for forging such an Epistle. +The critics who believe it to be forged, hold that it was written in +Egypt in order to oppose the Gnosticism of c. A.D. 150 or 160. But the +Gnosticism rebuked in 2 Peter cannot definitely be assigned to the 2nd +century. And it is very difficult to say that the heresy rebuked in 2 +Peter belongs to the 2nd century without also maintaining that the +heresy rebuked in Jude belongs to the 2nd century.[4] Yet several +facts in Jude point so decidedly to the 1st century that some of the +ablest writers who deny the authenticity of 2 Peter strongly assert the +genuineness of Jude. + +We can only conclude by doubting whether we know more about the problem +of 2 Peter than the Church of the 3rd and 4th centuries knew. Perhaps +we do not know nearly as much. And under these circumstances we cannot +effectively criticize the judgment of the Church which decided to admit +2 Peter into the Canon. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +To the same readers as the First Epistle (iii. 1). + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +It was probably written in Rome, and some of the earliest references to +it are by writers who lived in Rome. {252} Justin Martyr lived in +Rome, and if the references in Justin Martyr and other writers before +Hippolytus be considered doubtful, Hippolytus is a Roman witness of the +first importance. + +The date is perhaps between A.D. 63 and 67. If it were later than 70, +we might reasonably expect to find a reference to the destruction of +Jerusalem after the allusion to God's retribution on the people of +Sodom and other malefactors of old times. The errors which are +denounced are akin to those which are denounced in 1 and 2 Timothy. +The allusion to St. Paul's Epistles in iii. 16 suggests that some +collection of these Epistles already existed, and that St. Paul was +already dead. It has been urged against the genuineness of the Epistle +that it includes the Pauline Epistles in _Scripture_ (iii. 16), and +that this would have been impossible in the apostolic age. But the +statement need not necessarily mean more than that the Epistles were on +the margin of a Canon which was in process of formation. There is good +reason for believing that the Pauline Epistles occupied this position +at a time when men who had known some of the apostles were still +living, and perhaps earlier. The manner in which St. Peter has made +use of St. Paul's work in his First Epistle, makes it quite possible +for us to think that he believed in the peculiar inspiration of his +great comrade. And it is an interesting fact that the Syriac _Doctrine +of Addai_ in speaking of the Epistles of St. Paul, adds, "which Simon +Peter sent us from the city of Rome." + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The key-word to the Epistle is not _hope_, as in 1 Peter, but +_knowledge_ (i. 3, 8; ii. 20). We find, as in 1 Peter, a fondness or +the word "glory." But in 1 Peter glory seems to be represented as +given to Christ after His sufferings, and promised to Christians in the +future after their sufferings (1 Pet. i. 11; iv. 13; v. 1). Here glory +is rather spoken of as manifested in all the new dispensation, and +especially at the Transfiguration (i. 3, 17). The apostle {253} +appeals to the fact that he witnessed the Transfiguration as a +guarantee of his prophecy of the second "coming" of Christ. He finds +another warrant in the prophecies of the Old Testament, and asserts +that prophecy is not a matter for a man's own private unaided +interpretation, inasmuch as it was an utterance prompted by the Holy +Spirit (i. 19-21). + +This description of true religious knowledge is followed by an +arraignment of false prophets and speculative heresy. It is possible +that the teaching of definitely false doctrine was already combined +with previously existing immoral practice. The verse (ii. 1) in which +the writer speaks of false _teachers_, refers to the rise of these +heretics as future. But in other verses of the chapter the +"self-willed" teachers are spoken of as already active. We gather from +iii. 16 that the licence which is so sternly rebuked was a system in +which St. Paul's doctrine of justification by faith was represented as +a justification of vile indulgence. Although this part of the Epistle +is a paraphrase of Jude, it is not a mere reproduction. A new feature +in 2 Peter is that the heretics were sceptical concerning the second +coming of Christ (iii. 4). They argued that since the death of "the +fathers," _i.e._ the first followers of Christ, the world continued as +before. St. Peter urges that the deluge came, though its coming was +doubted, and also that it must be remembered that the Lord does not +reckon time as men do. A period which is long to us is not long to +Him. The day of the Lord will come suddenly "as a thief in the night," +and in view of judgment the readers are exhorted to holiness and +patience. + +{254} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, a list of Christian graces which are to be successively +blended with faith, a reminder of the truth of Christianity as +testified by the words of God at the Transfiguration, and by the light +of prophecy (i.). + +Denunciation of the false teachers who are guilty of gross sin and +blindly follow their lower instincts (ii.). + +Allusion to the former letter, rebuke of those who disbelieve in the +last judgment, the coming of the day of the Lord and the destruction of +the world, exhortations to holiness, diligence needed, the +long-suffering of Christ witnessed to by Paul, growth in grace (iii.). + + + +[1] _H. E._ iii. 3. + +[2] The priority of 2 Peter is strongly defended by Spitta, in his _Der +Zweite Brief d. Petrus_, 1885. + +[3] This is very clearly stated by Dr. G. B. Stevens in his valuable +_Theology of the New Testament_, although he decides against the +genuineness of 2 Peter. + +[4] This is done by Harnack, who places Jude between A.D. 100 and 130. + + + + +{255} + +CHAPTER XXIII + +THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN + + +THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF JOHN + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The authenticity of this Epistle is bound up with the authenticity of +St. John's Gospel. Like the Gospel, it does not contain any statement +as to the name of the author. Like the Gospel, it is attributed by a +very ancient tradition to the nearest friend of Jesus Christ. The +external evidence is particularly good. We learn from the +unimpeachable testimony of Eusebius[1] that it was used by Papias, who +was a disciple of St. John. Polycarp, another disciple of St. John, +directly quotes 1 John iv. 3 in his still extant letter. It is quoted +by Irenaeus, the pupil of Polycarp, and was recognized as genuine in +widely distant Churches at the close of the 2nd century. + +The internal evidence shows that the writer claims to be an eye-witness +and intimate personal friend of Jesus Christ (i. 1-3).[2] And this +eye-witness must be St. John, if the fourth Gospel was written by St. +John. The style is similar, and the ideas are the same. It is true +that Christ is not called our "propitiation" in the Gospel as in this +Epistle (ii. 2; iv. 10), that in the Gospel there is no mention of +"antichrists" (as in {256} ii. 8), and that the word "Paraclete" is in +the Gospel applied to the Holy Ghost, while it is here applied to our +Lord (ii. 1). But the idea of propitiation is expressed in the +description of our Lord as "the Lamb of God" (John i. 29), the mention +of antichrists is uncalled for in the Gospel, and by naming the Holy +Ghost "another Paraclete" our Lord gave St. John the best possible +reason for calling Christ Himself by the same title. The description +of our Lord as "the only begotten Son" (iv. 9) is an important point of +contact with John i. 14, 18. The language about "light" and +"darkness," "God" and "the world," the "new commandment," the "love" of +God, being "born of God," "eternal life," "abiding in Christ," recalls +the Gospel at every turn. + +The Epistle, however, does contain some phrases and ideas which are not +to be found in the Gospel. Such are "love perfected," "a sin unto +death," "the lust of the eyes," "to come in the flesh," "to walk in the +light," "to do lawlessness," "to be from above." Yet they fit quite +naturally with the language and theology of the Gospel. Therefore +there does not seem to be any sufficient reason for holding that it was +the work of another writer. F. C. Baur and Hilgenfeld thought it to be +the work of a second forger of that mysterious band to which they +attributed such versatility and success. And several more recent +critics who have denied the authenticity of the Gospel, have maintained +with Baur that the Epistle is the work of a second forger. But these +negations have led to no assured result. They are seen to be fruitless +as soon as we realize that these critics have been quite unable to +agree whether the Epistle was composed before the Gospel or after it. +Some consider that it was a theological balloon sent to try the +credulity of Christian readers before the Gospel was despatched. +Others consider that there are "overwhelming indications" to prove that +the Epistle is only a poor imitation of the Gospel. Renan and Davidson +favoured the former view, F. C. Baur and C. Weizsäcker the latter. At +the present time the majority {257} of critics, both Christian and +non-Christian, believe that it was written by the writer of the fourth +Gospel. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +It seems to be a pastoral letter addressed to all the members of the +apostle's flock, intended therefore for the Christians of Asia in and +around Ephesus. It is a strange fact that St. Augustine, in quoting +iii. 2, describes the passage as "said by John in his Epistle to the +_Parthians_." This statement is a riddle which no commentator has been +able to answer satisfactorily. As the Eastern Churches had little or +no knowledge of this title, we are compelled to regard it as a mistake. +It may have arisen from some scribe failing to read a partially +illegible manuscript in which St. John may have been given the title of +_parthenos_ or virgin. But it is most likely that it arose from a +confusion with the Second Epistle, which was thought in the time of +Clement of Alexandria to be addressed to _parthenoi_ or virgins. The +absence of quotations from the Old Testament, and the command "guard +yourselves from idols" (v. 21), solemnly given at the very end of the +Epistle, suggest that the recipients of the letter were converts from +heathenism. The Christians of Ephesus, the mother-city of Asiatic +idolatry, were peculiarly in need of such an exhortation. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +We can hardly doubt that it was written at Ephesus, where the apostle +spent his last years. The assertion that St. John did not live at +Ephesus is in direct contradiction with the best and earliest +traditions. But it has been repeated at intervals during the last +sixty years by several critics, who found that they would be compelled +to admit the genuineness of the Revelation if they granted that St. +John lived at Ephesus, where the Revelation was evidently published.[3] +Against such criticism we can confidently marshal the express and +independent statements of Apollonius of Ephesus (A.D. 196), Polycrates +of Ephesus (A.D. 190), {258} Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 185), Clement of +Alexandria (A.D. 190), Tertullian of Carthage (A.D. 200), not to +mention some valuable indirect evidence of earlier date. If we are to +reject such evidence as this, the science of history must be laid in +the tomb. + +The question as to the exact date is very important for those who +believe that the Epistle was not written by the author of the Gospel. +They are involved in the most intricate questions about the +reproduction of the Gospel in the Epistle or of the Epistle in the +Gospel. For those who do not believe in a diversity of authorship the +problem is far less vital. The apostle was evidently advanced in +years. He includes all his people under the affectionate name "my +little children" (ii. 1). On the whole, it seems probable that it was +written rather later than the Gospel. This is suggested by the +teaching about the second coming of Christ. Both in the Gospel and in +the Epistle we find mentioned or implied a present and a future passing +from death to life, and a spiritual presence of Christ now and another +hereafter. But in the Epistle it is the future coming of Christ which +is more prominent (ii. 28; iii. 2; iv. 17). In the Revelation, A.D. +96, it is still more prominent. The Epistle suggests that St. John's +readers were already acquainted with the discourses in his Gospel. The +heresy described, and the fact that the heretics are already _outside_ +the Church, point to a comparatively late date. We can hardly place it +before A.D. 85. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +This Epistle contains no reference to any outward dangers. Domitian's +persecution had not yet affected the Church, and the controversy with +Judaism had closed. There is no trace of any conflict between Jew and +Gentile, and St. John, in asserting the truth of the incarnation of the +Son of God, is not opposing any heresy resembling that of those +semi-Christian Jews of the 2nd century who declared Christ to be +_merely_ the best of men. He is combating a form of error taught by +Cerinthus, who said that {259} Jesus was a man born of Joseph and Mary, +and that on this man there descended a divine element named Christ, who +left him before the crucifixion. Thus _Christ_ never suffered, though +the _Jesus_ who seemed to be Christ did suffer. In face of these false +views St. John asserts the truth. He asserts that One who is both +Jesus and Christ came in the flesh (iv. 2), and that He came, that is, +was manifested as Christ, both in the water of His baptism and the +blood of His cross (v. 6). By this blood He cleanses man from sin (i. +7). We may be sure of His help, for He lives as our Advocate with the +Father. To deny that Jesus is the Christ is to deny the Father, to +deny God altogether (ii. 22; iv. 3). St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp +inveigh in similar language against the Docetists, who flourished +between A.D. 110 and 120. It is important to notice that St. John's +opponents do not appear to have been Antinomian in conduct. He says, +"Every one that doeth sin, doeth also lawlessness; and sin is +lawlessness" (iii. 4). If he had been blaming Antinomianism it would +have been more natural to say, "Every one that doeth lawlessness, doeth +also sin." + +The main theme of the Epistle is not controversial. It is to show that +in faith and love is the guarantee of our fellowship with God and of +our salvation. Since this fellowship implies that He abides in us, it +may be recognized by His Spirit being in us (iii. 24). This Spirit is +distinguished from the spirit of error by the confession of Christ; so +to hear the apostle's teaching about Christ is a sign of the presence +of God within us. The moral and the religious life are summed up in +the words "God" and "Love," and those who love one another are born of +God. Love in action corresponds with a confession of the incarnation +in the intellect (iv. 7-12). It is wholly incompatible with sin (iii. +6), and is therefore righteous towards God and man. Every one who, as +a child of God, hopes to grow like God, purifies himself as Christ is +pure. He cannot love the world, which is a system of selfishness. St. +John speaks of the possibility of committing a "sin unto death." This +{260} is an old Jewish expression for a sin deserving natural death. +But the apostle lifts the phrase to a higher level and slightly alters +it. His words literally mean "a sin tending unto death." It is any +sin which by its very nature excludes a man from fellowship with +Christians. It is a sin which requires chastisement before +forgiveness, and St. John does not enjoin, though he does not forbid, +prayer for those whose sin makes them unable to share in the privileges +of the common life of the Church. + +Behind the practical teaching of the Epistle lies that great conception +of the Father which the writer had gained from intercourse with the +only-begotten Son. God is _Love_ (iv. 8, 16), and has given us the +greatest of all gifts (iv. 9); God is _Light_ (i. 5), and dispels all +moral darkness (i. 6); God is _Life_ (v. 20), imparting His own +existence to man (iii. 9); God is _Father_ (ii. 1; iii. 1)--though our +relationship with Him is forfeited by sin, perfect and fearless +intimacy may be gained through Christ (iv. 15, 18). + + +ANALYSIS + +A promise to impart knowledge of the incarnate Word; God is Light, +fellowship with God and forgiveness of sin (i.). + +Christ our propitiation, love of our brother a necessary condition of +walking in the light, messages to children, fathers, young men, the +love of the world, Antichrist and the denial of Christ, abiding in the +Son and in the Father (ii.). + +The love of God in calling us His children, the manifestation of Christ +to take away sin, love of our brother the sign that we are spiritually +changed, to believe in Christ and love one another the commandment of +God (iii.). + +Acknowledgment of the incarnation is the test of spirits, to love one +another is to be like God, perfect love loses fear (iv.). + +Faith in the incarnation overcomes the world, the three {261} witnesses +to the incarnation, eternal life possessed if we have the Son, prayer, +freedom from sin, knowledge through Jesus, who is the true God and +eternal life (v.). + + + +THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The writer does not insert his name in the Epistle, but simply +describes himself as "the elder." Some writers have therefore supposed +that it was written by the presbyter named John, who lived at Ephesus +about the close of the apostolic age. But Irenaeus, who was not likely +to be mistaken in such a matter, certainly regarded it as the work of +the apostle, and the _Muratorian Fragment_ apparently so regards it. +Clement of Alexandria was certainly acquainted with more than one +Epistle by St. John, and a Latin translation of his _Hypotyposes_ +definitely says, "the Second Epistle of John, written to virgins, is +very simple." Moreover, the title "elder" or "presbyter" is by no +means incompatible with apostolic authorship. St. Peter in 1 Pet. v. 1 +expressly describes himself by this title, nor does the title appear to +have become confined to the presbyters or priests of the Church until +about A.D. 200. The similarity to the First Epistle is strong, seven +of the thirteen verses having parallels in the First Epistle. If the +Epistle were a forgery, it is probable that the writer would have +claimed to be an apostle in unmistakable language. And if the author +were not a forger, but the presbyter who was for some years a +contemporary of the apostle, it is hardly likely that he would have +been content to write this diminutive letter, which does little more +than sum up part of the First Epistle. The language of the Second +Epistle bears almost the same relation to that of the first as the +first bears to that of the Gospel. There is a fundamental likeness +combined with a few fresh expressions, such as "walk _according to_," +"_coming_ in the flesh" instead of "come in the flesh," "to have God." + +{262} + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto the elect lady and her children." The interpretation of these +words is a notorious difficulty. At first sight the "lady" would be +supposed to be a private individual. But if so, why is not the +individual's name mentioned, like the name of the recipient of the +Third Epistle? Perhaps it is mentioned, for the words translated "the +elect lady" may mean "the elect Kyria." The "house" of the lady (ver. +10) also suggests that the lady is an individual. On the other hand, +it has been supposed that the lady is a symbolical name for a local +_Church_. In favour of this interpretation is the fact that the writer +speaks, not only of the children of the lady who are with her, but also +of others whom he has met (ver. 4), and in a manner which suggests a +large number of persons. The same interpretation can be put upon the +"elect sister" mentioned in the last verse of the Epistle. Writers of +deserved repute accept this symbolical interpretation. But when a +literal meaning and a symbolical meaning are supported by equally good +arguments, it seems prudent to accept the simpler, _i.e._ the literal +interpretation. It is hard to believe that St. Jerome and Hilgenfeld +are right in thinking that it is addressed to the whole Catholic +Church. This is surely excluded by the mention of an "elect sister." + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +Probably from Ephesus, and the contents suggest that it was written +later than the first Epistle. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The letter contains an affectionate expression of happiness due to the +steadfast Christianity of the children of the "elect lady." But its +main object is to utter a warning against the deceivers who deny that +Christ is "come in the flesh." These deceivers were evidently +Docetists. In order to appreciate the necessity for such a warning we +must remember the extraordinary attraction which many persons who liked +a _dilettante_ Christianity found in the theory that Christ was a +divine Spirit who clothed Himself with flesh in which He did not +suffer. At the close of the apostolic age, and {263} for many +generations afterwards, orthodox Christianity was often regarded as too +materialistic for advanced thinkers. They endeavoured to make +Christianity keep pace with the times by infusing into it the decadent +Greek or Oriental mysticism which depreciated our human body. + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving for certain of the elect lady's children, +reminder of the commandments to love and obey, the deceivers who deny +the incarnation not to be welcomed; the writer, expecting to visit his +correspondents, closes his letter. + + +THE THIRD EPISTLE OF JOHN + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +It is generally admitted, both by those who deny and those who accept +the authenticity of the works of St. John, that this Epistle was +written by the author of 2 John. It presents several close parallels +both with 2 John and with the Gospel. Its obviously private character +accounts for the fact that it is seldom quoted in early literature. It +is found in the Old Latin version of the New Testament, though not in +the _Muratorian Fragment_. It was known to Origen and Dionysius of +Alexandria. Eusebius places it among the _Antilegomena_ (_H. E._ iii. +25), but it was generally accepted in the 4th century. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto Gaius the beloved." The name was a common one, being a form of +the Latin "Caius." There is no reason for identifying this Gaius with +one of the persons of the same name who are mentioned as living in +Corinth, Macedonia, and Derbe respectively, all of whom may have been +dead at the late period when this letter was written. The Gaius of +this Epistle was evidently a faithful and hospitable Christian. Baur +displayed more than even his {264} usual powers of invention by +suggesting that Gaius was a Montanist of the latter part of the 2nd +century, and "Diotrephes" a symbolical name for one of the Catholic +bishops of Rome opposed to Montanism. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +Probably at Ephesus; subsequently to the First Epistle, and probably +very soon after the Second. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +This little letter gives us a few brief glimpses of the life of the +Church near the end of the 1st century. The purpose of the letter is +to commend a Christian of good character, named Demetrius, to the +hospitable care of Gaius. It appears, therefore, to be one of those +"letters of commendation" which are mentioned by St. Paul in 2 Cor. +iii. 1, and were common in later times. By the side of this +pleasantness there is distress. Connected with the Church to which +Gaius belongs there is an ambitious schismatic named Diotrephes, who +refuses to admit the authority of the apostle. The fact that he was +guilty of casting the friends of the apostle out of the Church (ver. +10), suggests that Diotrephes was at least a presbyter, and perhaps a +bishop appointed by the apostle. We are told by Clement of Alexandria +that St. John appointed bishops in Asia, and there is no reason for +doubting that episcopacy dates back to this period. The apostle +evidently intends to punish Diotrephes for his malice when he visits +the district again. It is just possible that the letter to the Church +(ver. 9) which Diotrephes repudiated is our "Second Epistle" of St. +John. This theory will win acceptance with some of those who think +that the Second Epistle was not written to an individual, but to a +Church. + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutations to Gaius, congratulations that he is walking in the truth, +his hospitality to travelling Christians, the tyranny of Diotrephes, +recommendation of Demetrius, personal matters. + + + +[1] _H. E._ iii. 39. + +[2] It is impossible to accept the recent Rationalist hypothesis that +these words were written by a pious Christian who had not seen Jesus, +but wished to emphasize the truth that the historical Church was +intimately connected with the historical Jesus. + +[3] Among these critics must be numbered Lützelberger (1840), Keim +(1867), Bousset (1899). + + + + +{265} + +CHAPTER XXIV + +THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +"Judas, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James." We can be +sure that the James here mentioned is the James who acted as the first +bishop of the Church at Jerusalem. The author's designation of himself +would not be intelligible unless he meant that he was related to a very +prominent man of that name. The writer cannot be the Apostle Jude. He +does not claim to be an apostle, and he seems indirectly to repudiate +the authority of an apostle by describing himself only in relation to +his brother and by referring to "the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ" +in a manner which seems to distinguish them for himself. If the +Apostle Jude was the _son_ of James (as many scholars think), this Jude +was clearly another man. If the Apostle was the _brother_ of James (as +the English Authorised Version holds), then his identification with +this Jude is still doubtful. + +Jude was a son of St. Joseph. At first he did not believe in our Lord +(John vii. 5), but was convinced by the Resurrection (Acts i. 14). He +was married (1 Cor. ix. 5). Hegesippus, a writer of the 2nd century, +tells us that two of his grandsons were taken before the Emperor +Domitian as being of the royal house of David, and therefore dangerous +to the empire.[1] He found them to be poor rough-handed men, and +dismissed them with good-humoured contempt when they described the +kingdom of Christ as heavenly. Philip of Side, about 425, says {266} +that Hegesippus gave the names of these two men as Zocer and James. + +The Epistle was known to Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian, and is +in the _Muratorian Fragment_. + +The chief objections to the authenticity of this Epistle fall under +three heads. It is said that (a) a late date is indicated by the +allusion to the teaching of the apostles in ver. 17. But the allusion +seems to correspond exactly with a late date in the apostolic age, for +vers. 17 and 18 assume that the readers remember what the apostles had +said. It is said that (b) the phrase in ver. 3, "the faith which was +once for all delivered unto the saints," indicates that a definite body +of doctrine was recognized by the Christians of the period, and that +the Christians of the apostolic age did not use the word "faith" in +this sense. But it is not difficult to suppose that the word would be +soon extended from the act of believing to the facts believed. And in +such early passages as Gal. i. 23 and Rom. x. 8 we find the word +closely approximating to the latter sense. It is said that (c) the +heresy which is described is a heresy of the 2nd century, and implies a +definite Gnostic system. But the fact that the Epistle does not +describe such a definite system is convincingly shown by the inability +of certain critics to determine who the heretics are. The Balaamites +of Asia Minor, the Carpocratians of Egypt, and some obscure sects of +Syria, are all suggested. There is no evidence to show that the errors +here described could not have grown up in apostolic times, and the +Epistles of St. Paul contain several passages which point to similar +perversions of Christianity. The word "sensual" in ver. 19 was an +insulting term applied to ordinary Christians by the Gnostics of the +2nd century, but St. Jude's use of it betrays no consciousness of this +later application. + +The style of the letter makes it practically certain that it was +written by some one who had been a Jew. The Greek is forcible. It +shows a considerable knowledge of Greek words, {267} including various +poetical and archaic expressions. But the manner is stiff, and the +sentences are linked together with difficulty. Several phrases come +from the Septuagint, some of them being taken from the Book of Wisdom. +It is probable that the author was acquainted with the Hebrew Old +Testament, as ver. 12 (from Ezek. xxxiv. 2) and ver. 22 f. (from Zech. +iii. 2 f.) suggest this. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +The Epistle is simply addressed "to them that are called, beloved in +God the Father, and kept for Jesus Christ." It seems that these +Christians must have been natives of Palestine or Syria. They had been +personally instructed by the apostles (ver. 17), which makes this +region probable. No place seems more likely than Antioch and its +neighbourhood. The libertinism which was endangering the Church would +not be likely to arise except in a district where the Christians were +in close contact with heathenism. Extreme critics now usually maintain +that it was written either in Asia or in Egypt. If written in Asia, it +can hardly have been written by the Lord's brother, as we know that his +descendants lived in Palestine. If written in Egypt, it can hardly +belong to the age of the apostles. These two sceptical theories as to +the place where the Epistle was written contradict one another +effectively. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The style and contents of the letter show that it was probably written +in Palestine and at Jerusalem. The date is probably soon after the +martyrdom of St. James in A.D. 62. St. Jude was dead before his +grandsons had their interview with Domitian. The Epistle must +therefore be before A.D. 81. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle is remarkable as containing references to two Jewish books +of an apocalyptic character which are not mentioned in the Old +Testament. This caused some writers in early days to hesitate to +ascribe the Epistle to a brother of St. James, and in recent times the +same argument has been revived in a new {268} form. But these +quotations seem quite compatible with a belief in the genuineness of +the Epistle. The books quoted were in existence in the apostolic age, +and would be likely to be valued by a devout Jew. In ver. 9 there is +reference to Michael, which Origen says was derived from the +_Assumption of Moses_, a Jewish work written at the beginning of the +Christian era. In 2 Pet. ii. 11 the allusion to Michael is so +modified, that the origin of the reference is no longer obvious. In +vers. 4, 6, and 14, there are quotations from the _Book of Enoch_, a +Jewish book composed of sections written at various dates, the latest +being written in the century before Christ. + +The purpose of the Epistle is to warn the Church against certain +depravers of God's grace who denied "our only Master and Lord, Jesus +Christ" (ver. 4). The author sees fit to remind his readers of ancient +examples of unfaithfulness and impurity, and shows that they must be +compassionate towards the wavering, and try to save the worst by a +desperate effort. It is plain that the false teachers were guilty of +gross and unnatural vice, that they were greedy, and destitute of godly +fear. They also, like the evil Christians at Corinth, brought +discredit upon the Agapé (ver. 12), a social meal which the Christians +were first wont to partake of before the Eucharist, and at a later date +after the Eucharist. The licence which is rebuked by St. Jude probably +arose from a perversion of the doctrine of justification by faith which +had been taught by our Lord. Christians who had been taught that they +could be saved without observing the Jewish ceremonial law, imagined +that they could be saved without any self-discipline or self-restraint. +Many parallels to such errors have been found in modern times, the +worst example being that afforded by the Anabaptists, who arose in +Germany at the time of the Reformation. It is worth noticing that, in +spite of the untheological character of this Epistle, the writer shows +his belief in the Holy Trinity by the manner in which he refers to the +Father {269} and Jesus Christ (ver. 1) and the Holy Ghost (ver. 20). +The Epistle gives no encouragement to the theory that the first Jewish +Christians were Unitarians. + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation and charge to maintain "the faith" (1-4). Warnings from the +punishment of the Israelites, of the angels, of Sodom and Gomorrha +(5-7). + +Railing at dignities rebuked (8-10). + +Denunciation of those who imitate Cain (murder), Balaam (encouragement +of impurity), Korah (schism), and spoil the _Agapé_ (11-13). + +These sectaries foretold by Enoch (14-16). + +And by the apostles (17-19). + +Duty of edifying believers, and saving sinners (20-23). + +Doxology (24, 25). + + + +[1] Eusebius, _H. E._ iii. 20. + + + + +{270} + +CHAPTER XXV + +THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +Like the First Epistle of St. John, the Revelation has particularly +strong external evidence in its favour. About A.D. 150 Justin Martyr +speaks of it as the work of "John, one of the apostles of Christ," in +his dialogue held with Trypho, a Jew, at Ephesus, where St. John had +lived. Still earlier, Papias looked upon the book as "inspired," and +"bore testimony to its genuineness." Irenaeus, the pupil of Polycarp, +the disciple of St. John, quotes it as written by "John, the disciple +of the Lord." About A.D. 170 Melito of Sardis, one of the places to +which part of the book was specially addressed, wrote a commentary upon +it. It was accepted by the Churches of Vienne and Lyons in Gaul in +A.D. 177, for they wrote of it as "Scripture" in their letter to the +Christians of Asia Minor. Near the same date the _Muratorian Fragment_ +mentions it twice. It will be observed that this evidence is not only +good, but it is also mostly drawn from sources which were most closely +connected with St. John. The evidence of the Churches of Vienne and +Lyons would be important, even if it stood alone. For these +Greek-speaking Churches were allied with the Church of Ephesus, and +were not likely to be mistaken about this question. And the evidence +of Irenaeus and Melito is still more weighty. + +Strange to say, the belief in the authenticity of the Revelation began +to waver as time went on. We need pay little heed to the sect known as +the Alogi, who attributed both St. John's {271} Gospel and the +Revelation to Cerinthus, because they disliked the doctrine of the +Logos contained in these two books. They were too ignorant to have +been influenced by any real critical knowledge. But it is an important +fact that about A.D. 248 Dionysius of Alexandria stated that it was +probably written by John the Presbyter, and that the great Eusebius +seems at one time to have been inclined to accept the opinion of +Dionysius.[1] So far as we can discover, Dionysius founded his opinion +solely on the difference of style which can be observed as separating +the Revelation from the Gospel. He does not seem to have been in +possession of any facts which gave historical support to his theory. +Nevertheless, we can legitimately think that there was another reason +which induced orthodox Christians to regard the Revelation with less +confidence. The Montanist sect, which arose in the latter half of the +2nd century and became powerful in Asia Minor and North Africa, taught +an extravagant doctrine about the millennium when Christ would return +to reign on earth. This doctrine was partly founded on Rev. xx., and +was supported by pretended prophecies. It caused orthodox Christians +to be more suspicious about the statements of Christian prophets, and +probably made them less anxious to translate and circulate the +Revelation. This hesitation was soon overruled, and Eusebius, in spite +of his own slight doubts, reckons it as received among the undisputed +books of the Canon. This was c. A.D. 320. + +In modern times the controversy about the authorship has been revived. +About one hundred years ago a school of critics took up the argument of +Dionysius. They urged that the Gospel and the Revelation must have +been written by two different authors, the Revelation being much more +Hebrew in style than the Gospel. The argument was elaborated by F. C. +Baur and the Tübingen School. As they were determined to deny the +genuineness of the Gospel which so clearly teaches {272} that Jesus is +God, they tried to discredit the Gospel by insisting upon the +authenticity of the Revelation. The successors of these critics soon +found themselves on the horns of a dilemma. A closer examination of +the Revelation made it clearer that on many important points the +theology of the Revelation is the same as that of the Gospel. If they +admit that St. John wrote both the books or one of them, they will be +forced to admit that the apostle taught definite orthodox Christian +theology.[2] If, on the other hand, they affirm that both the books +were written by John the Presbyter, they will shatter the old argument +that diversity of style proves diversity of authorship. It will +therefore surprise no one to learn that they are now engaged in +continuous disputes with regard to the identity of the author, and the +materials, Jewish or otherwise, which he is supposed to have used in +compiling his book. At the present time the writers who hold the +Revelation to have been written by various authors, are divided into no +less than four camps, while the rationalists who hold that it was +written by one author cannot agree who that author was. It is +extremely significant that, in spite of his conviction that the book +was not all written at the same date, the critic who is now by far the +ablest opponent of orthodox Christianity, holds that the Revelation was +(i.) published in the time of Domitian, as the tradition of the Church +affirms; (ii.) published by the author of the fourth Gospel, though not +by the real St. John.[3] + +It must be admitted that the style of the book is more Hebrew and less +Greek than that of the Gospel. But some arguments may be reasonably +alleged against the theory that {273} this proves the Revelation to be +by a different author. The difference in the scope and origin of the +two books account in a large measure for the differences of vocabulary +and style. No book in the New Testament is so steeped as the +Revelation in the imagery of the Old Testament; Daniel, Isaiah, +Ezekiel, and Zechariah are constantly used. The thoroughness with +which their spirit has been assimilated, and their ideas combined by +the writer, would create a Hebrew tendency in his language. Whether +St. John made use of the material furnished by non-canonical +apocalypses is uncertain. If he did, their style would also influence +him in the same way. We must also beware of exaggerating the contrast +in style which does exist between the Gospel and the Revelation. The +Gospel is not always in correct Greek, and never shows a thorough +mastery of that language. But the Revelation is certainly in much +rougher Greek. The writer uses the nominative case for the accusative +(vii. 9; xiv. 6); similar instances are in iii. 12; xiv. 12. This +rugged usage is introduced with magnificent, and perhaps intentional, +effect in i. 4, where the author emphasizes the eternity of God by +using an entirely ungrammatical construction.[4] Apart from the +question of grammar, the language of the Apocalypse shows a remarkable +affinity with St. John's Gospel. We may observe the use of such words +as "witness," "true," "tabernacle," "have part," "keep the word," and +"overcome." + +The theology of the two books is in close agreement. This can easily +be shown in the case of the doctrine of Christ's Person. He is called +the "Lamb" [5] in the Gospel (i. 29, 36) and in the Revelation (v. 6, +8, 12, etc.). He is called the "Word" in the Gospel (i. 1, etc.) and +in the Revelation (xix. 13). He is taught to be eternal and divine. +He is "the Alpha and {274} the Omega, the first and the last" (xxii. +13; cf. Isa. xliv. 6). He shares the throne of God (xxii. 1, 3); He +determines who shall be released from the realm of death (i. 18); He +joins in the judgment (vi. 16); He is worshipped by the elders and the +angels (v. 8, 11). He is the Bridegroom of the Church (xix. 7; xxi. 2, +cf. John iii. 29). The attitude towards Judaism is the same as that in +the Gospel. The Jews who oppose Jesus are strongly denounced (iii. 9), +and though the Church is a new _Jerusalem_, it is composed of people +gathered out of every nation (vii. 9). The necessity of good works is +strenuously upheld (ii. 5, 19); but they are not works of rabbinical +righteousness, but works of Jesus (ii. 26), and the "righteous acts of +the saints" (xix. 8) are based on "the faith of Jesus" (xiv. 12). +Salvation is the free gift of Christ (xxi. 6; xxii. 17). The saints +who overcome, conquer not by relying upon their own righteousness, but +"because of the blood of the Lamb" (xii. 11). + +In the Revelation (ii. 17) Jesus promises to believers "the hidden +manna;" in the Gospel, referring also to the manna, He promises "the +true bread from heaven" (John vi. 32). In the Revelation (xxii. 17) +Jesus says, "Let him that is athirst come, and whosoever will, let him +take of the water of life freely;" in the Gospel He says, "If any man +thirst, let him come unto Me and drink" (John vii. 37). If, then, the +Revelation is full of Hebrew expressions, it is essentially and +profoundly Christian, and linked with the other Johannine books by the +closest kinship. The theology and the style of the Revelation are the +same throughout.[6] We can therefore reject without hesitation the +recent hypothesis that it is one large Jewish work with numerous +Christian interpolations. The difficulty of supposing that the book +was ever a purely Jewish Apocalypse {275} can quickly be realized by +any one who undertakes to strike out all the Christian allusions in the +book. + +The author states that he is John, in the strongest fashion both in the +beginning and end (i. 4, 9; xxii. 8), and his attitude towards the +seven Churches is inexplicable unless the writer held a position of the +highest ecclesiastical importance. + +[Sidenote: For whom written.] + +Plainly for the whole Church, as represented by "the seven Churches +which are in Asia" (i. 4). + +[Sidenote: Date.] + +From i. 9 we learn that the revelation was made to John when he "was in +the isle that is called Patmos" (in the Aegean Sea) "for the word of +God and the testimony of Jesus." Irenaeus expressly says that the date +of this banishment was at the end of the reign of Domitian (Emperor +81-96 A.D.), and therefore he says it was almost within his own +generation. On the other hand, some modern writers have assigned part +or the whole of the book to the time of Nero (54-68), or a little +later. But though some parts of it seem earlier than Domitian, the +final form of the book is unquestionably late. A late date is +indicated by the corruptions existing in some of the Churches +addressed, by the expression "the Lord's day" (i. 10) instead of the +older expression "first day of the week," by the strong opposition to +Judaism which is called the "synagogue of Satan" (ii. 9; iii. 9), and +above all by the attitude of the writer towards Rome. The imperial +rule is no longer regarded with the tolerance which we find in Acts and +in St. Paul's Epistles. It is no longer the "restraining" and +protecting power. It is denounced as cruel and aggressive, and not +only is the worship offered to the Roman emperor mentioned as +widespread, but also the worship offered to Rome. The city is called +the Great Harlot, because in prophetical language idolatry is described +as an act of fornication, being a violation of the pure love which +should be felt by man towards his Creator. The worship of Rome does +not seem to have become common in {276} Asia until late in the 1st +century, and it is not even mentioned once in Acts. + +The destruction of Jerusalem is definitely mentioned in xi. 2, where +the earthly Jerusalem is symbolized as the "court which is without the +temple," the temple which the prophet measures being the heavenly +temple only (xi. 19). This chapter seems to imply that Jerusalem is +already destroyed, and is founded on Ezek. xl., when the prophet +measures the ideal city, not the city which had been destroyed +previously. We are therefore pointed to a date later than A.D. 70. +The same seems to be suggested by xiii. 1 and xvii. 10. For the beast +in xiii. 1 is the pagan Roman State as typified by Nero, and so is the +number 666 in xiii. 18; for if the words Nero Caesar are written in +Hebrew letters, and the numerical values of the letters are added +together, the result is 666. In xvii. 8 Nero is described as dead, and +in xvii. 10 Vespasian is the sixth emperor, Titus the seventh, and the +eighth, in xvii. 11, is Domitian, who plays the Satanic part of Nero. +The sixth emperor is described as still living, and we therefore seem +compelled to assign part of this passage to Vespasian's reign. +Nevertheless, there is abundant internal evidence for thinking that the +book was not completed until the time of Domitian. It is worth noting +that Domitian exacted a more extravagant worship of his own person than +any previous emperor, and that his policy therefore made the +publication of the book doubly appropriate. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +There were a number of Jewish books called by the name of Revelation or +Apocalypse (_i.e._ revelation or unveiling). In the Old Testament an +Apocalypse is to be found in the second part of Daniel, and there is a +fine short Apocalypse in Isa. xxiv.-xxvii., where we find striking +passages relating to the resurrection and eternal life. The _Book of +Enoch_ and the _Apocalypse of Baruch_ are later examples of this class +of literature. These books were generally written with the special +purpose of giving encouragement to the {277} servants of God in times +of distress and persecution. The Revelation of St. John was written +under similar circumstances, but is by far the most sublime of these +writings. The interpretation of the Revelation appears to have always +been a standing difficulty, in spite of the fact that there has been no +age of the Christian Church which has not been able to draw consolation +and vigour from its beautiful pages, all illuminated as they are with +glowing pictures. The question as to whether different portions of the +book were written at different dates, and afterwards edited in one +volume by the writer, does not necessarily interfere with the +interpretation. For the book is one work, the materials have been +fitted into one structure. + +The connection between the different parts is organic and internal. +Not only is the doctrinal standpoint the same throughout, but the whole +book has an immense number of connecting thoughts and words. The +letters to the seven Churches contain statements which are taken up in +the visions which follow. Among such we may compare ii. 7 with xxii. +2; ii. 11 with xx. 6; ii. 26 with xii. 5, ii. 28 with xxii. 16; iii. 5 +with xix. 8; iii. 12 with xxi. 2. The description of the glorified +Redeemer in i. 10-18 is reflected in numerous passages, and the strong +assertion of the author's personality in i. 9 is again presented in +xxii. 8. And the meaning of the book rapidly becomes clearer to the +reader if he sees (a) that the notices of contemporary history in each +of the seven parts of the book are arranged chronologically in +reference to what is contained in that part; (b) that these seven parts +are not related to one another in the order of temporal succession: +each part is complete in itself, and is a full presentation of one +aspect of the whole subject. This is exactly what we find in Isaiah, +Amos, and Zechariah. + +This leads us to another fact. Some writers have held that the +Revelation is to be interpreted simply on _historical_ lines, as though +it contained a list of events occurring through the whole of history +since the time of St. John. Other writers {278} have held that little +or no historical meaning can be found in the book, and that it is to be +interpreted on _ideal_ lines, as teaching certain principles of +religion. The truth seems to be that these two methods of +interpretation are both partly true. Certain historical facts, such as +the Ascension of our Lord, the destruction of Jerusalem, the +persecution of the Church, the struggle between the Church and the +Roman empire, are taken as a basis. Certain great principles of God's +dealings with the world, and of the continued conflict between good and +evil, are then illustrated in connection with these facts, and the +whole is knit together by the fixed expectation that Christ will come +again to vanquish the wicked and rescue the good. While each division +of the book thus possesses a real meaning, it seems hardly possible to +attach a significance to each detail in the imagery which is employed. +Many items and even numbers appear to be introduced in order to make +the scenes clear to the mind's eye rather than impart a knowledge of +independent events. In after-ages Dante, like St. John, showed this +care for minute imagery in the midst of verses of mystic vision. The +book is the highest example of Christian imagination led and inspired +by the Holy Spirit, and although at is written in prose it is of the +nature of a poem. + +The book contains seven revelations, which are preceded by a prologue +concerning the divine Son of Man and the seven Churches of Asia. Of +these seven revelations, the fourth is central both in place and +meaning. It represents the kingdom of the world becoming the kingdom +of Christ as the result of the coming of the Messiah, born of that +glorious mother, the woman whose seed wars against the serpent (Gen. +iii. 15), and the maiden who bears Immanuel (Isa. vii. 14), and who +also represents the Church banished to the wilderness. + +On each side are three revelations, which correspond with one another +like the petals of a mystical rose. The _third_, which deals with the +divine judgment upon Jerusalem, corresponds with the _fifth_, which +contains God's judgment upon {279} Rome. Here we see the triumph of +God over corrupt religion and corrupt imperialism. The _second_, which +describes the powers of divine judgment kept in check, and the seal of +God imprinted on the saints of the new Israel, corresponds with the +_sixth_, which describes the war of the Word of God with the Beast, and +events which end with the universal judgment. The _first_, which +describes the Lamb that was slain and the book of destiny which He +alone could open, corresponds with the _seventh_, which describes the +Bride of the Lamb, the New Jerusalem in heaven. Thus the final glory +of the Church corresponds with the glory which the ascended Jesus +already receives in heaven. + +The whole closes with a short epilogue. + +It will be observed that the book contains seven choric songs. The +first revelation contains two such songs, one after each division. The +second, third, and fifth revelation, each close with a song. The +fourth and central revelation contains two songs; one is sung by the +bodyguard of the Lamb before they go to war, the other is sung after +the victory is gained. The seventh and last chorus celebrates the fall +of Babylon (Rome), and ushers in the marriage of the Lamb. It comes at +the end of the fifth revelation. Its form is double, and it sums up +the remaining action of the book. Two more facts must be mentioned in +this connection. The first is that the words of the song of the +bodyguard of the Lamb (xiv. 3) are not told; it can only be learned by +the redeemed. It begins with the voice of Christ, the voice "of many +waters," and it is taken up by the "thunder" of the cherubim and the +harps of the elders. The second is that there is no song between the +sixth and seventh revelation. It is simply the voice out of the throne +itself, the voice of the cherubim who uphold the throne of God (see iv. +6), which proclaims that the tabernacle of God is now with men, and +that He shall wipe away every tear (xxi. 4). The exquisite art of this +arrangement of the songs is manifest. + +{280} + +ANALYSIS + +Title and description (i. 1-3). + +Prologue (i. 4-iii. 22). + +The vision of the Son of Man (i. 4-20). + +The message to each of the seven Churches of Asia (ii., iii.). + +A general idea of conflict is present in this introduction. The +Churches of Asia have special temptations against which they must +fight, _e.g._ coldness at Ephesus, false prophecy at Thyatira, emperor +worship at Pergamum. + +I. Revelation of the Book of Destiny: iv.-v.--The throne of God is +manifested, surrounded by the elders and by the four living creatures +who represent the created universe, _chorus of creation_ (iv.). The +sealed book which none can open but the Lamb, _chorus of redemption_ +(v.). + +II. Revelation of the Seals: vi.-viii. 1.--The first four seals of the +book are opened. Christ appears riding on a white horse, and is +followed by four symbolic powers of evil: (a) Apollyon, who rides on a +red horse; (b) the Steward, who rides on a black horse, and dispenses +corn at a dear price, representing a perverted ministry of the Word, +which nevertheless cannot hurt the unction given to the Christian nor +the wine of Christ's Passion; (c) Death on a pale horse; and (d) his +companion Hell. When the fifth scene is opened, the martyrs who are +under the altar which is before the throne cry in expectancy. With the +sixth seal there is a warning of prophetic horrors. The day of God's +wrath all but comes. But judgment is restrained for a season (vi.). +Chastisement is suspended until 144,000 of Israelites are sealed, then +a multitude of all nations, _chorus of salvation_ (vii.). The seventh +seal, which discloses a war against God, can now be opened; silence +(viii. 1). + +{281} + +III. Revelation of the Trumpets: viii. 2-xi. 18.--Seven angels receive +trumpets, incense offered. With the sounding of each of the first four +trumpets a chastisement is sent from above to rouse repentance (viii.). +With the fifth, chastisement ascends from the pit; with the sixth, +angels and terrific horsemen come from the Euphrates; but men repent +not (ix.). Before the seventh trumpet sounds, an angel tells the seer +that when it has sounded the mystery of God as declared to the prophets +will be finished (x.). Two prophets resembling Elijah and Moses appear +as the symbols of Christian prophecy; they are slain in Jerusalem where +our Lord was crucified, they ascend like Christ amid the wreck of a +tenth of the city. The city confesses God. Then the seventh trumpet +proclaims the subject of the next revelation: the kingdoms of the world +becoming the kingdoms of Christ, _chorus of God reigning_ (xi. 1-18). + +IV. Revelation of the Lamb's Redemption: xi. 19-xv. 4.--The ark itself +is revealed to show that the coming revelation manifests what is most +sacred and most profound. The conflict between Christ and evil is +shown first as the conflict of the Child of the Woman against the +dragon, then as the conflict of Michael and his angels against the +dragon, then as the conflict of the dragon against the woman's seed +(xii.). Next come the allies of the dragon, the beast out of the sea, +which is imperial pagan Rome; and the beast out of the earth, which is +the priesthood of Asia appointed to promote the worship of the emperor +(xiii.). Then there is seen on Mount Zion the Lamb with His bodyguard +of 144,000, singing _the incommunicable chorus_. An angel proclaims +the eternal gospel; another tells that Babylon, _i.e._ pagan Rome, has +fallen; another proclaims the eternal punishment of those who worship +the beast. Then a voice from heaven announces the blessedness of the +dead in Christ. The Son of Man is seen with a sickle; then comes the +harvest of the good, and the vintage of those who {282} are to suffer +in the winepress of God's wrath (xiv.). Seven angels appear, and the +victors over the beast sing _the chorus Of Moses and the Lamb_ (xv. +1-4). + +V. Revelation of the Bowls: xv. 5-xix. 10.--The heavenly temple opens, +and the seven angels come to pour out the seven last punishments from +the golden bowls (xv. 6-8). There is a plague, and the turning of the +sea, and then of the rivers, into blood, then the sun's heat is +intensified, then darkness is poured over Rome. Then, in conformity +with Revelation III., we are shown the Euphrates. It is dried up that +the kings of the East, probably conceived of as Parthians, may march to +destroy Babylon. Other kings come to aid the beast. They muster at +Har-Magedon. The seventh bowl is poured on the air. Babylon breaks +into three parts. Storms (xvi.). Then an angel shows John Babylon +riding triumphantly upon a beast as the mother of harlots, drunken with +the blood of the martyrs, and he explains how she shall be destroyed by +her subject kings (xvii.). There follows a solemn dirge on Babylon +(xviii.). Then comes a _triumphant chorus_ for the judgment of the +city (xix. 1-8). John is forbidden to worship his angel-guide (xix. +10). + +VI. Revelation of the Word of God and the universal Judgment: xix. +11-xx. 15.--It is now shown that judgment is the work of the Word of +God Himself. As in Revelation II., He appears upon a white horse. +Brief sections display the complete overthrow of the great enemies of +Christ, the beast, the false prophet, and the dragon. Then comes the +millennium, when the martyrs of Jesus reign with Christ while Satan is +bound. Satan is then loosed, and with Gog and Magog, who are leaders +of nations hostile to God's people, he is finally vanquished. The +final judgment takes place, and Death and Hell are cast into fire. + +{283} + +VII. Revelation of the New Jerusalem: xxi. i-xxii. 5.--From a +mountain-top is seen the Church, the holy city, New Jerusalem, the +Bride prepared for Jesus. Its luminary and structure are described. +It rises on a vast rock of jewels. The throne of God is no longer +remote from man, but in the midst of the city. From the throne pours +the river of life through the very heart of the city. The river is +shaded on both sides by the "tree" or wood of life, with its perpetual +variety of fruit. This is in contrast with the one tree and its +forbidden fruit which was the means of the Fall. + +_Epilogue_ (xxii. 6-21). + +The attestation of the angel, the watchword of Jesus, John again +forbidden to worship the angel. The book to remain unclosed. The +watchword repeated. The attestation of Jesus to Himself and the angel, +to His Bride, to the book, to His advent. + +The response of John to the Lord Jesus. + +Salutation. + + + +[1] _H. E._ iii. 25, 39; vii. 25. + +[2] The determination to deny that St. John could have believed in the +Divinity of Christ made Zeller maintain that in the Revelation Christ +is called the _Word of God_ as a mere honorary title. Davidson +interpreted it as meaning "the highest creature." Renan tried to +extricate himself from the difficulty by saying that St. John did not +write the Revelation, but, "having approved of it, saw it circulate +under his name without displeasure" (_L'Antichrist_, p. xli.). + +[3] Harnack, _Chronologie_, vol. i. pp. 245, 246, 679. + +[4] Many of the supposed wrong constructions in the Revelation are +capable of justification (Dr. Benson, _The Apocalypse_, p. 131 ff.). + +[5] It is true that a different Greek word for Lamb is used in the +Revelation from that in the Gospel, but the variation can be accounted +for by the author's desire to use a word similar in form to the word +used for the Beast, who is contrasted with the Lamb. + +[6] The attempt to divide a supposed Judaizing element in the book from +a more Catholic element has led to the assertion that vii. 1-8 is +inconsistent with vii. 9-17. There is no more incongruity between +these two passages than in the statement of St. Paul in Rom. i. 16, +that the gospel is a power unto salvation "to the Jew _first_, and also +to the Greek." + + + + +{284} + +APPENDIX A + +RATIONALIST CRITICISM ON ST. JOHN'S WRITINGS + +The following table will illustrate the points of agreement arrived at +by the more prominent Rationalist critics of the last sixty years:-- + + THE GOSPEL. 1 JOHN. 2 AND 3 JOHN. REVELATION. + + F. C. Baur, By a forger, By a By a By St. + 1847. 170 A.D. second third John. + forger. forger. + + Th. Keim, By the same forger, ---- Not by + 1867. 100-117 A.D. St. John. + + A. Hilgen- By a forger, All by a second forger, By St. John. + feld, 1875. 120-140 A.D. 130 A.D. + + E. Renan, By the Presbyter John and others, who Not by St. + 1879. pretended that they were by St. John, John, but + 120 A.D. circulated + by him. + + C. Weizsäc- By a disciple Not by St. John nor by the Not by + ker, 1886. of St. John. author of the Gospel. St. John. + + A. Harnack, The Gospel and Epistles all probably by By the + 1897. the Presbyter John, who did not pretend Presbyter + that they were by St. John, John, + 80-110 A.D. 96 A.D. + + A. C. Uncertain. By the Uncertain. Possibly + McGiffert, author by the + 1897. of the Presbyter + Gospel. John. + + + B. W. By an All by another unknown By St. + Bacon, unknown writer, A.D. 95-100 A.D. John. + 1900. writer, + 100-110 A.D. + + P. W. Not by St. By a By a third Possibly + Schmiedel, John, nor second forger. by the + 1901. by the forger. Presbyter + Presbyter. John. + + + + +{285} + +APPENDIX B + +PAPIAS AND JOHN THE PRESBYTER + +Papias, a Phrygian by birth, and Bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, wrote +in the first half of the 2nd century a book called _Expositions of +Oracles of the Lord_. Among the "Elders" whom Irenaeus quotes, Papias +and Polycarp alone are called "ancient" (_archaios_--_Adv. Haer._ v. +33). This helps us to fix the date of Papias. For Polycarp died +either in A.D. 155 or 156. He had been a Christian for eighty-six +years, and was therefore born in A.D. 70 at the very latest. Papias +was therefore probably born about A.D. 70. We know from Irenaeus that +Polycarp was a disciple of St. John, and several ancient writers, +including Irenaeus, expressly assert that Papias also was a hearer of +St. John. Eusebius (_H. E._ iii. 39) says that "in his preface" Papias +does not declare that he was an "eye-witness of the holy _apostles_." +But Eusebius in his Chronicle (_Syncell._ 655, 14) plainly says that +Papias, like Polycarp, was a "hearer" of John the Divine and Apostle. +The preface of Papias, which Eusebius transcribes, mentions John the +Presbyter. The following is a literal translation of it:-- + +"But for your advantage I will not hesitate to put side by side with my +interpretations everything that in time past I learnt well from the +Elders, and remembered well, guaranteeing its truth. For, unlike the +many, I did not take pleasure in those who say much, but in those who +teach the truth; nor in those who relate alien commandments, but in +those who relate such as were given from the Lord to the Faith, and are +derived from 'the Truth' itself. And again, on any occasion when a +person came who had been a follower of the Elders, I would inquire +about the discourses of the Elders--what Andrew or what Peter said, or +what Philip or what Thomas or James, or what John or Matthew or any +other of the disciples of the Lord, and the things which Aristion and +John the Presbyter (Elder), the disciples of the Lord, say. For I did +{286} not suppose that the contents of books would profit me so much as +the utterances of a living and abiding voice." + +The exact meaning of this passage is disputed, but much of it is +perfectly clear. It is plain that Papias is referring to his action at +a time long past (_pote_), probably about A.D. 100. It is also plain +that he had no direct access at that date to the apostles about whose +sayings he inquired. They were already dead, their speech was a thing +of the past (_eipen_). On the other hand, Aristion and John the +Presbyter were then living, their speech was a thing of the present +(_legousin_). They survived at the time of his inquiries, and we +cannot accept the hypothesis that Papias only meant that he inquired +what Aristion and John the Presbyter said in their books. He recorded +what they said to his friends, and he quoted them both so freely that +Eusebius believed that Papias also wrote down words which Aristion and +John the Presbyter said in his own hearing. But whether he heard them +or only heard about them, it is evident that he had reached manhood +before they were dead. It is also certain that he calls them +"disciples of the Lord." He must mean by this that they had been +personally in contact with Christ, like the apostles whom he has just +mentioned. We therefore can only draw the conclusion that Papias +believed that these two men had known the Lord in their boyhood, and +the fact that he mentions only two such men favours this interpretation. + +With regard to the other Elders, the question at once arises, Did +Papias include among those Elders the apostles whom he mentions? If he +did _not_ include them, he means that he inquired of travellers what +they had heard from Elders who had known the apostles. This seems +incredible; the information gained would be far inferior to that +contained in books, whereas Papias speaks of it as superior. Moreover, +it would imply that the knowledge possessed by Papias about those who +had known the Lord was less direct than that possessed by Irenaeus! +For Irenaeus (1) knew Polycarp (2) and others, who knew St. John and +others who had seen the Lord. Whereas, according to this theory, +Papias (1) was instructed by travellers (2), who had heard the Elders +(3) speak about the apostles. If Papias had no better knowledge than +this, Irenaeus would not have referred to Papias with such marked +deference. We conclude, therefore, that Papias used the word "Elders" +to denote Christians who had actually seen the Lord, including the +apostles whom he mentions. This interpretation is {287} supported by +the fact that in the New Testament both St. Peter and St. John give +themselves this very title. + +If the above views are correct, they have an important bearing on the +authenticity of St. John's Gospel. The lifetime of Papias, like that +of Polycarp, covers the whole period of dates to which modern +Rationalists now assign that Gospel. If it was not written by the +apostle, it is hard indeed to suppose that Papias did not know the +truth, and record it. And it is equally hard to believe that his +statements about it would not have been copied by such men as Irenaeus, +Dionysius of Alexandria, and Eusebius. + + + + +{288} + +APPENDIX C + +THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT + +The _Muratorian Fragment_ is part of a Latin list of the books of the +New Testament, named after Muratori, the librarian at Milan, who +published it in A.D. 1740. The Canon of which the Fragment is a part +was probably written about A.D. 180. It begins in the midst of a +sentence relating to St. Mark-- + +[Sidenote: The Gospels.] + +". . . at some things, however, he was present, and has thus recorded +them." + +"The third book of the Gospel according to Luke, Luke compiled in his +own name from report, the physician whom Paul took with him after the +ascension of Christ, for a companion as devoted to the law: however he +did not himself see the Lord in the flesh, and hence begins his account +with the birth of John as he was able to trace (matters) up." + +[Sidenote: The Epistles of St. John.] + +"Of the fourth of the Gospels (the author is) John, one of the +disciples. At the instance of his fellow-disciples and bishops he +said, 'Fast with me to-day for three days, and whatever shall be +revealed to each, let us relate it to one another.' The same night it +was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should write all +in his own name, the rest revising. . . . And therefore, although +varying ideas may be taught in the several books of the Evangelists, +there is no difference in that which pertains to the faith of +believers, since by one Sovereign Spirit in all are declared all things +that relate to the nativity (of the Lord), His passion, resurrection, +intercourse with His disciples, and concerning His double advent, the +first in humble guise, which has taken place, the second splendid with +royal power, which is yet to be. . . . What wonder, then, if John in +his Epistles also, speaking of his own authorship, so boldly advances +each {289} detail, saying, 'What we have seen with our eyes, and have +heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, these things we have +written unto you.' For thus he professes himself not only an +eye-witness, but a hearer, yea, and a writer as well, of all the +wonders done by the Lord in their order." + +[Sidenote: Acts.] + +"But the Acts of all the Apostles are written in a single book, Luke +relates them excellently to Theophilus, confining himself to such as +fell under his own notice, as he plainly shows by the omission of all +reference either to the martyrdom of Peter or the journey of Paul from +Rome to Spain. . . ." + +[Sidenote: The Epistles of St. Paul.] + +"But the letters of Paul themselves make known to those who would know +both what they are, and from what place, or what occasion they were +sent. At considerable length he wrote to the Corinthians first, +forbidding schismatic divisions, then to the Galatians (forbidding) +circumcision, and to the Romans (expounding) the general tenor of the +Scriptures, showing, however, that Christ is the essence of their +teaching; to these (Epistles) we must devote separate discussion; for +the blessed Apostle Paul himself, following the example of his +predecessor John, wrote by name to seven Churches only in this order: +First to the Corinthians, second to the Ephesians, third to the +Philippians, fourth to the Colossians, fifth to the Galatians, sixth to +the Thessalonians, seventh to the Romans. True, he wrote twice to the +Corinthians and Thessalonians for their correction, but he shows +thereby[1] the unity of the universal Church; for John also in the +Apocalypse, though he writes to seven Churches only, yet speaks to all. +He also writes one to Philemon, one to Titus, and two to Timothy, out +of personal regard and affection, but these too are hallowed in the +respect of the Catholic Church for the arrangement of ecclesiastical +discipline. Moreover, there is in circulation an Epistle to the +Laodiceans, another to the Alexandrians forged under the name of Paul, +looking towards the heresy of Marcion, and several others which cannot +be received into the Catholic Church; for gall should not be mixed with +honey. However, the Epistle of Jude, and two of John the above named, +are received among Catholics. Also the Book of Wisdom written by the +friends of Solomon in his honour." + +{290} + +[Sidenote: Apocalypses.] + +"We receive, moreover, the Apocalypse of John and Peter only, though +some of our body will not have the latter read in the Church. The +_Shepherd_ indeed was written quite recently in our own times in the +city of Rome by Hermas, while his brother Pius occupied the seat of +Bishop of the Church of Rome; wherefore the private reading of it is +indeed commendable, but it can never be publicly read to the people in +the Church whether among the Prophets . . . or among the Apostles." + +"We receive nothing whatever of the Arsinoite, or Valentinus, or of +Mitias (?) . . . who also were the compilers of the new Book of Psalms +(?) for Marcion, together with Basilides. . . ." + + + +[1] As symbolized by the number seven. + + + + +{291} + +APPENDIX D + +SOME EARLY WITNESSES TO NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS[1] + + +CLEMENT OF ROME. Bishop of Rome. + _Epistle to Corinthians_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 95 + +BARNABAS. _Epistle of_, not by the Barnabas who + was St. Paul's companion . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 98 + +DIDACHÉ. "The Teaching of the Twelve + Apostles," a manual of Church regulations . . . . c. A.D. 100 + +IGNATIUS. Bishop of Antioch and Martyr. + 7 _Epistles_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 110 + +POLYCARP. Bishop of Smyrna and Martyr. + _Epistle to Philippians_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 110 + +PAPIAS. Bishop of Hierapolis. _Expositions of + the Oracles of the Lord_ (fragments are + preserved by Eusebius) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 130 + +HERMAS. _The Shepherd_, an allegory . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 140 + +MARCION. Heretic from Pontus at Rome . . . . . . . c. A.D. 144 + +JUSTIN MARTYR. Apologist. _1 and 2 Apologies_ + and _Dialogue with Trypho_ . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 152-157 + +EPISTLE TO DIOGNETUS. Anonymous defence + of Christianity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 160 + +TATIAN. Syrian Apologist, disciple of Justin + Martyr. _Diatessaron_, a harmony of the Gospels A.D. 160-170 + +THEOPHILUS. Apologist of Antioch. _Ad Autolycum_ c. A.D. 180 + +IRENAEUS. Bishop of Lyons. _Against Heresies_ c. A.D. 185 + + + + +[1] In the case of most of these witnesses the date here given is that +of their chief literary activity. + + + +{292} + +CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. Head of the Catechetical + School. _Paedagogus, Hypotyposes_, etc. . . . . c. A.D. 190 + +TERTULLIAN. Of Carthage. Apologist . . . . . . . . A.D. 200 + +HIPPOLYTUS. Presbyter at Rome. _Refutation of + All Heresies_ and numerous commentaries . . . . . c. A.D. 220 + +ORIGEN. Of Alexandria. Successor of Clement, + great philosopher and writer . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 230 + +DIONYSIUS. Bishop of Alexandria . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 248 + +EUSEBIUS. Bishop of Caesarea. _Ecclesiastical + History_, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 320 + +APHRAATES. Syrian writer . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 338 + +ATHANASIUS. Bishop of Alexandria . . . . . . . . . A.D. 328-373 + +EPIPHANIUS. Bishop of Salamis . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 380 + +JEROME. Author of the revised or "Vulgate" + Latin version of the Bible . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 390 + + + + +{293} + +APPENDIX E + +BOOKS RECOMMENDED + +In this list are included the most useful books written in English or +translated into English. An * is placed before those commentaries +which contain the whole Greek text of the books indicated, or which +comment much on the Greek text. + +1. CANON-- + Charteris (Prof. A. H.), Canonicity, 18s. + Sanday (Dr. W.), Inspiration, 6s. 6d. (Longmans.) + Westcott (Bishop), History of the Canon, 10s. 6d. (Macmillan.) + +2. TEXT-- + The Greek Text of the Revised Version, various prices. + (Oxford University Press.) + Concordance to the Greek Testament, by Moulton (W. F.) + and Geden (A. S.), 26s. (T. and T. Clark.) + +3. TEXTUAL CRITICISM-- + Lake (Prof. K.), The Text of the New Testament, 1s. net. + Oxford Church Text Books. (Rivingtons.) + Nestle (E.), Textual Criticism of the Greek New Testament, + 10s. 6d. (Williams and Norgate.) + +4. INTRODUCTION-- + Zahn (Prof. Th.), Introduction to the New Testament, 3 vols., + English Translation, 36s. (T. and T. Clark.) + Salmon (Prof. G.), Historical Introduction to the Books of + the New Testament, 9s. (Murray.) + Godet (F.), Introduction to the New Testament. Part I. + The Epistles of St. Paul, 12s. 6d. (T. and T. Clark.) + +5. THE GOSPELS AND THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM-- + Burkitt (Prof. F. C.), The Earliest Sources for the Life of + Jesus, 1s. net. (Constable.) + Sanday (Dr. W.), Studies in the Synoptic Problem, 12s. 6d. + (Oxford Clarendon Press.) + Wright (Dr. A.), *A Synopsis of the Gospels in Greek, 10s. + (Macmillan.) + Campbell (Dr. Colin), *The First Three Gospels in Greek, + 5s. (Williams and Norgate.) + +{294} + + Hawkins (Sir J. C.), *Horae Synopticae, 7s. 6d. + (Oxford Clarendon Press.) + Rushbrooke (W. G.), *Synopticon, 35s. (Macmillan.) + Westcott (Bishop), Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, + 10s. 6d. (Macmillan.) + Stanton (Dr. V. H.), The Gospels as Historical Documents, + Part I. 7s. 6d., Part II. 10s. (Cambridge University Press.) + +6. COMMENTARIES-- + _St. Matthew._--Godet (F.), The Collection of the Four + Gospels and the Gospel of St. Matthew, 6s. (T. and T. Clark.) + Allen (Ven. W. C.), *Commentary, 12s. (T. and T. Clark.) + Plummer (Dr. A.), *Exegetical Commentary on the + Gospel according to St. Matthew, 12s. (Elliot Stock.) + Carr (A.), "The Gospel according to St. Matthew, 4s. 6d. + (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges.) + + _St. Mark._--Swete (Prof. H. B.), *Greek Text with Notes, + 15s. (Macmillan.) + Maclear (G. F.), *The Gospel according to St. Mark, + 4s. 6d. (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and + Colleges.) + + _St. Luke._--Plummer (Dr. A.), *Commentary, 12s. + (T. and T. Clark.) + + _St. John._--Godet (F.), Commentary, 3 vols., 31s. 6d. + (T. and T. Clark.) + Westcott (Bishop), Commentary, 10s. 6d. (Murray.) + Lightfoot (Bishop), Biblical Essays, 12s. (Macmillan. + Sanday (Dr. W.), The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, + 7s. 6d. (Longmans.) + + _Acts._--Knowling (Dr. R. J.), in *Expositor's Greek Testament, + vol. ii., 28s. (Hodder and Stoughton.) + Rackham (R. B.), 12s. 6d. (Methuen.) + Ramsay (Prof. W. M.), The Church in the Roman + Empire, 12s. (Hodder and Stoughton.) + Ramsay (Prof. W. M.), St. Paul the Traveller and the + Roman Citizen, 10s. 6d. (Hodder and Stoughton.) + + _Romans._--Sanday (Dr. W.) and Headlam (A. C.), + *Commentary, 12s. (T. and T. Clark.) + Liddon (Dr. H. P.), *Analysis, 14s. (Longmans.) + Gore (Bishop), Exposition, 2 vols., 3s. 6d. each. (Murray.) + +{295} + + _1 Corinthians._--Goudge (H. L.), in Westminster + Commentaries, 6s. (Methuen.) + Findlay (G. G.), in *Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. ii. + + _2 Corinthians._--Meyer's *Critical Commentary on the New + Testament, 1 and 2 Cor., in 2 vols., 10s. 6d. each. + (T. and T. Clark.) + + _Galatians._--Lightfoot (Bishop), *Text with Introduction, + 12s. (Macmillan.) + Ramsay (Prof. W. M.), Historical Commentary, 12s. + (Hodder and Stoughton.) + + _Ephesians._--Abbott (T. K.), *Commentary on Ephesians + and Colossians, 10s. 6d. (T. and T. Clark.) + Robinson (Dr. J. Armitage), *St. Paul's Epistle to the + Ephesians, 12s. (Macmillan.) + Westcott (Bishop), *St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, + 10s. 6d. (Macmillan.) + Gore (Bishop), Exposition, 3s. 6d. (Murray.) + + _Philippians._--Lightfoot (Bishop), Text with Introduction, + 12s. (Macmillan.) + + _Colossians and Philemon._--Lightfoot (Bishop), *Text with + Introduction, 12s. (Macmillan.) + + _1 and 2 Thessalonians._--Milligan (Dr. G.), *Commentary, 12s. + (Macmillan.) + Ellicott (Bishop), *Commentary, 7s. 6d. (Longmans.) + + _1 and 2 Timothy, Titus._--Bernard (Dr. J. H.), *Cambridge + Greek Testament, 3s. 6d. (Cambridge University Press.) + + _Hebrews._--Westcott (Bishop), *Greek Text with Notes. + 14s. (Macmillan.) + Davidson (Prof. A. B.), Handbook, 2s. 6d. + (T. and T. Clark.) + + _St. James._--Mayor (Dr. J. B.), *Greek Text with Notes., 12s. + (Macmillan.) + Carr (A.), *The General Epistle of St. James, 2s. 6d. + (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges.) + + _1 and 2 St. Peter, St. Jude._--Bigg (Dr. C.), *Commentary, + 10s. 6d. (T. and T. Clark.) + Mayor (Dr. J. B.), *The Epistle of St. Jude and the + Second Epistle of St. Peter, 14s. (Macmillan.) + + _1, 2, 3 St. John._--Westcott (Bishop), *Greek Text with + Notes, 12s. 6d. (Macmillan.) + +{296} + + _Revelation._--Ramsay (Prof. W. M.), Letters to the Seven + Churches, 12s. (Hodder and Stoughton.) + Simcox (W. H.), *The Revelation of St. John the + Divine, 5s. (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools + and Colleges.) + Milligan (Prof. W.), Lectures on the Apocalypse, 5s. + (Macmillan.) + Swete (Prof. H. B.), *The Apocalypse of St. John, 15s. + (Macmillan.) + + + + +{297} + +INDEX + + Acts, Book of, 102 + Agapé, or Love-feast, 139, 269 + Alexandria, St. Mark at, 50; philosophy of, 95 + Alogi, rejected St. John's writings, 82 + Antichrist, in 2 Thess., 131; in 1 John, 255 + Antilegomena, or disputed books, 222, 271 + Antioch, in Syria, collision between SS. Peter and Paul at, 121, 157 + Antioch, Pisidian, 152 + Apocalypse. _See_ Revelation + Apocalyptic teaching, in St. Matt., 38; in 2 Thess., 131; + general nature of, 276 + Apollos, his partisans at Corinth, 135, 137; supposed author of + Hebrews, 211 + Aramaic language, 1; original of St. Matt., 34 + Aristion (author of St. Mark xvi. 9-20), 63, 285 + + "Babylon" in N. T., 242, 279 + Balaamites, 266 + Baptism, St. Paul's doctrine of, 164, 175, 205; for the dead, 140 + Barnabas, St., author (?) of Hebrews, 211 + Barnabas, so-called Epistle of, 14 + Baur, F. C., his misrepresentation of the apostles, 111, 121; + what Epistles accepted by, 133; repudiation of Rom. xv., xvi., + 158; of Colossians, 171; of Ephesians, 182; of Philippians, 188 + Beast in Revelation, 276, 281 + Bousset, W., denies St. John's residence at Ephesus, 257 + Brethren of our Lord, 224 + + Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, not Pauline, 166 + Canon, formation of, 2, 220 + Catholic Epp., 219; gradual insertion in Canon, 3, 221 + Census in St. Luke, 79 + Christology, or doctrine about Christ's Person, in St. Matt., 40; + in St. Mark, 54, 56; in St. Luke, 71; in St. John, human side of, + 31, divine side of, 82, 95; in Acts, 109; of St. Paul, 123, 146, + 174, 185, 192 + Church, doctrine of, in St. Matt., 44; in St. Paul, 185 + Clement, St., of Rome, quotes Synoptic narrative, 14; quotes + the Epistles, 133, 235 + Clement of Alexandria, on date of St. Mark, 52; on 2 Peter, 248 + Colossians, Ep. to, 170; heresy of, 173 + Corinthians, Epp. to, 133, 143; first lost Ep. to, 135; second + lost Ep. to, 145; factions among, 137; doctrine of resurrection + in Epp., 140, 146 + + Date of N. T. books, p. x.; of Christ's nativity, 78 + Date of Christ's death, 28; St. John supported by St. Luke as to, + 30; and by St. Paul, 142 + Davidson, S., on I John, 256; on Christology of Revelation, 272 + "Diaspora," or Dispersion, 229, 241 + Diatessaron of Tatian, 11 + Dionysius of Alexandria on Revelation, 271 + Diotrephes, 264 + Disputed books, 222, 271 + Docetic heresy, 197, 259, 262 + Domitian, his treatment of Christians, 265, 276 + + Ebionites, their Gospel, 34; St. Luke not influenced by, 72 + Enoch, Book of, 249, 268, 276 + Epaphroditus or Epaphras, 171, 191 + Ephesians, Ep. to, 180 + Ephesus, St. John at, 81, 257 + Epiphanius on Gospel of the Hebrews, 34 + Eschatology, in St. Matt., 38; in St. Mark, 58; in St. Luke, 67; + in St. John, 97; in St. Paul, 121, 131, 146 + Essenes, sect of, possible influence at Rome, 167; at Colossae, 173 + Eucharist, in St. Luke, 70; in 1 Cor., 139 + Eusebius, on Hebrews, 209; on Catholic Epp., 222; on 2 Peter, 248; + on Revelation, 271 + + Faith, St. Paul's doctrine of, 154, 164; in Hebrews, 211; in + St. James, 231; in St. Jude, 266 + Feasts, Jewish, in St. John, 98 + Felix, Antonius, procurator of Judaea, 115 + Festus, Porcius, procurator of Judaea, 115 + Florinus, letter of Irenaeus to, 87 + + Galatia, North or South (?), 151 + Galatians, Ep. to, 150 + Gallic, 134 + Gieseler, J. K. L., on the Synoptic problem, 21 + Gnosticism, supposed influence on Ep. to Philippians, 188; rebuked + in Pastoral Epp., 197; in 2 Peter and Jude, 251, 266 + Godet, F., writings of, 293, 294 + Gospels, the four, 9, St. Matt., 33; St. Mark, 49; St. Luke, 64; + St. John, 80 + + Harnack, A., on St. John, 93, Appendix A; on the apostles' + doctrine, 111; on Revelation, 272 + Hebrews, Apocryphal Gospel of, 35 + Hebrews, Ep. to, 208; its connection with Philo, 211 + Hegesippus, on St. James, 225, 229; on St. Jude's grandsons, 265 + Heresies in N. T. times, 120, 137, 153, 172, 197, 251, 258, 266 + Herod the Great, 79 + Herod Agrippa I., 114 + Herod Agrippa II., 115, 190 + Hilgenfeld, A., on St. John's writings, Appendix A + + Idols, eating meat offered to, 139 + Ignatius, St., relation to St. Matt., 14; to St. John, 14, 85; + heresy rebuked by, 197, 259 + Irenaeus, St., on Canon of the Gospels, 11; on St. Luke, 64; + on St. John, 84, 87; on Catholic Epp., 222 + + James, St., Ep. of, 223 + Jerome, St., author of the Vulgate, 5; on the Hebrew of St. Matt., + 34; on 2 John, 262 + Jewish Christianity, 34, 120, 137, 153, 172 + John the Presbyter, not the author of the fourth Gospel, 83; + Papias on, Appendix B + John, St., Gospel of, 15, 27, 80; relation to Synoptists, 27; does + not quote them, 32; Epistles of, 255; Revelation of, 270; + rationalist criticism of his writings, 83, Appendix A + John, St., the Baptist, his infancy and ministry, 76; interest + shown in, 115 + Josephus, on St. James, 229; not quoted in 2 Peter, 246 + Jude, St., Ep. of, 249, 265 + Judgment, the, in St. Matt., 38; in St. John, 97, 258, 282 + Jülicher, A., on St. John, 83 + Justification, in St. Luke, 71; in St. Paul, 157, 163; + in St. James, 231 + Justin Martyr, used our four Gospels, 12; ascribes Revelation + to St. John, 270 + + Keim, Th., on St. John's writings, Appendix A + Kingdom of God in St. Matt., 44 + + Laodiceans, Ep. to, identical with "Ephesians," 176, 182 + Latinisms in St. Mark, 54 + Law, teaching of Christ on, 44, of St. Paul on, 154, 163, of + Hebrews on, 216 + Linus, ? Bishop of Rome, 205 + _Logia_, meaning of the word, 13; early books of, 24, 34 + Logos, doctrine of, in St. John, 95 + Luke, St., Gospel of, 64; its dependence on St. Mark, 16; + Acts written by, 65, 102 + Lycus valley, Churches of, 123, 171, 182 + + Magi and the star, 78 + Marcion, Canon of, 13; Gospel of, 66; why he repudiated 1 and 2 + Tim. and Titus, 196 + Mark, St., Gospel of, 49; its dependence on St. Peter, 51, 54 + Marriage and celibacy, St. Paul's teaching on, 138, 187 + Matthew, St., Gospel of, 33; its dependence on St. Mark, 16, + 36; some primitive features in, 22; numerical arrangement in, 25 + Ministers of the Church, in Acts, 111; in Ephesians, 186; in + Pastoral Epistles, 198; in 3 John, 264 + _Muratorian Fragment_, Appendix C + + Nazarenes, Gospel of, 34 + Nero, persecution by, 108, 124, in Revelation, 276 + Nicopolis, 204 + + Onesimus of Colossae, 177 + Onesiphorus of Ephesus, 206 + Oral teaching, influence on St. Matt., 26; on St. John, 101 + Oral tradition theory of Gospels, 21, 22 + Origen, on Hebrews, 209; on Catholic Epp., 222; on 2 Peter, 248 + + Papias, on the "Oracles," 13; on the Logia of St. Matt., 24, 34; + on St. Mark, 51; on John the Presbyter, Appendix B + Parables, the different classes of, 74 + Pastoral Epp., 195 + Paul, St., Epp. and life of, 116; Epp. questioned, 117, 125, 133, + 171, 181, 188, 195 + Peter, St., source of St. Mark's Gospel, 51, 57; "Memoirs" + of, 50; Epistles of, 235, 246; "Apocalypse" of, 250, 290 + Philemon, Ep. to, 177 + Philippians, Ep. to, 188 + Philo, his difference from St. John, 96; his similarity to + Hebrews, 211 + Polycarp, St., connection with St. John, 11, 86, 87, 222 + Polycrates on St. John, 81 + Prayer in St. Luke, 74 + + Quirinius, P. Sulpicius, governor of Syria, 79 + + Ramsay, W. M., on authenticity of Acts, 105 + Renan, E., on St. John's writings, 272, Appendix A + Revelation, Book of the, 270 + Romans, Ep. to, 158 + Rome, attitude of, towards the Church, 108, 131, 275; religion + at, 160; worship of, 275 + + Sabatier, A., on ministry in Acts, 111 + Sanday, W., on Catholic Epp., 221; writings of, 293, 294 + Schmiedel, P. W., on Acts, 111; on St. John's writings, Appendix A + Silvanus or Silas, not the author of Acts, 107; bearer of + 1 Peter, 243 + Sinaitic Syriac version of Gospels, 43 + Slavery, St. Paul on, 175, 178, 187 + Spirit, the Holy, doctrine of, in St. John, 97; in St. Paul, 147 + Synoptic problem, 16 + Synoptists, relation of, to St. John, 15, 27, 95 + + Tatian, Diatessaron of, 11 + Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, or Didaché, 14; Johannine + language in, 85 + Tertullian ascribes Hebrews to St. Barnabas, 211 + Theophilus of Antioch, 291 + Thessalonians, Epp. to, 125 + Timothy, Epp. to, 195 + Titus, Ep. to, 203 + Titus, Roman emperor, 276 + Tübingen School, on St. Paul's Epistles, 117; on relation of + St. Peter to St. Paul, 121 + Tychicus of Asia, 172, 176 + + Versions of the Bible, 5 + Vespasian in Revelation, 276 + Virgin birth of our Lord, 43 + + "We sections" in Acts, 65, 102 + Weizsäcker, C., on St. John's writings, 83, Appendix A + Westcott (Bishop), writings of, 294, 295 + Works, doctrine of, in St. Paul, 155, 204; in St. James, 231; + in Revelation, 274 + + Zechariah, quoted by St. Matt., 41; by St. John, 88 + Zeller, E., on Revelation, 272 + Zenas, 204 + + + +***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT*** + + +******* This file should be named 22459-8.txt or 22459-8.zip ******* + + +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: +http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/2/4/5/22459 + + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://www.gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: +http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + diff --git a/22459-8.zip b/22459-8.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..68c8989 --- /dev/null +++ b/22459-8.zip diff --git a/22459.txt b/22459.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..300b2ac --- /dev/null +++ b/22459.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11088 @@ +The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Books of the New Testament, by Leighton +Pullan + + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + + + + +Title: The Books of the New Testament + + +Author: Leighton Pullan + + + +Release Date: August 30, 2007 [eBook #22459] +Last updated: January 19, 2009 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-646-US (US-ASCII) + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT*** + + +E-text prepared by Al Haines + + + +Transcriber's note: + + Page numbers in this book are indicated by numbers enclosed + in curly braces, e.g. {99}. They have been located where page + breaks occurred in the original book. For its Index, a page + number has been placed only at the start of that section. + + + + + +THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT + +by the + +REV. LEIGHTON PULLAN + +Fellow and Tutor of St. John Baptist's College, Oxford. + + + + + + + + "If you choose to obey your Bibles, you will + never care who attacks them."--RUSKIN. + + + +Fourth Edition Revised + +Rivingtons +34 King Street, Covent Garden +London +1912 + + + +{v} + +PREFACE + +This book is intended to meet the widely prevalent need of an +introduction to the New Testament which is neither a mere hand-book nor +an elaborate treatise for specialists. It is written in a conservative +spirit, and at the same time an ample use has been made of recent +critical investigation. + +It has been impossible to give an exhaustive proof of the position +maintained, but no matter of great importance has been overlooked. The +arguments will be intelligible to educated persons who are unacquainted +with the Greek language. + +The author has sometimes derived much help from the articles in Dr. +Hastings' _Dictionary of the Bible_. The dates which have been adopted +are in most cases those adopted in {vi} that Dictionary by Dr. Sanday +and Mr. C. H. Turner. + +His best thanks are due to the Rev. E. W. Pullan, Mr. J. F. Briscoe, +and Mr. E. W. Corbett, for the kind help which they have given him in +the preparation of the book. + + + + +{vii} + +CONTENTS + +CHAPTER PAGE + + TABLE OF APPROXIMATE DATES . . . . . . . . . . . . . x + I. THE NEW TESTAMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 + II. THE GOSPELS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + III. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW . . . . . . . . 33 + IV. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK . . . . . . . . . . 49 + V. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE . . . . . . . . . . 64 + VI. THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN . . . . . . . . . . 80 + VII. THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 + VIII. THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116 + IX. 1 AND 2 THESSALONIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 + X. THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE + CORINTHIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 + XI. THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE + CORINTHIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 + XII. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS . . 150 + XIII. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS . . . 158 + XIV. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE + COLOSSIANS--THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON . . . 170 + XV. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS . . 180 + XVI. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS 188 + XVII. THE PASTORAL EPISTLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 + XVIII. THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 + XIX. THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 + XX. THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 + XXI. THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER . . . . . . . . . 235 + XXII. THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER . . . . . . . . 246 + XXIII. THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 + XXIV. THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 + XXV. THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE . . . . . . . 270 + + APPENDIX A.--RATIONALIST CRITICISM ON ST. JOHN'S WRITINGS 284 + APPENDIX B.--PAPIAS AND JOHN THE PRESBYTER . . . . . . . . 285 + APPENDIX C.--THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT . . . . . . . . . . . 288 + APPENDIX D.--SOME EARLY WITNESSES TO NEW TESTAMENT + WRITINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 + APPENDIX E.--BOOKS RECOMMENDED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293 + + INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 + + + + +{x} + +TABLE OF APPROXIMATE DATES + + THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW . . . . . A.D. 69 + " " ST. MARK . . . . . . . A.D. 62 + " " ST. LUKE . . . . . . . A.D. 70-75 + " " ST. JOHN . . . . . . . A.D. 80-90 + ACTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 75-80 + ROMANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 56 + 1 CORINTHIANS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 55 + 2 CORINTHIANS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 55 + GALATIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 56 + EPHESIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 60 + PHILIPPIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 61 + COLOSSIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 60 + 1 THESSALONIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 51 + 2 THESSALONIANS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 51 + 1 TIMOTHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 63 + 2 TIMOTHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 64 + TITUS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 63 + PHILEMON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 60 + HEBREWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 66 + JAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 50 + 1 PETER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 64 + 2 PETER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 65 + 1, 2, 3 JOHN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 80-90 + JUDE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 63 + REVELATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 96 + + + + +{1} + +CHAPTER I + +THE NEW TESTAMENT + +[Sidenote: Its Name.] + +After the gift of the Holy Spirit Himself, we may justly reckon the New +Testament as the most precious gift which our Lord Jesus Christ has +given since His Ascension to those who believe on His Name. The word +"testament," which is in Latin _testamentum_, corresponds with our word +"covenant," and the phrase "New Testament" signifies the record of that +new covenant in which God bound man to Himself by the death of His Son. +The truth that this was a new covenant, distinct from the covenant +which God made with Abraham, was taught by our Lord when He instituted +the memorial of His death and said, "This cup is the new covenant in My +Blood." We do not know precisely at what date the Christians began to +call this record "the New Testament," but we do know that they used +this name before A.D. 200. + +[Sidenote: Its Language.] + +In the time of our Lord the popular language of Palestine was Aramaic, +a language which was akin to Hebrew and borrowed some words from +Hebrew. Hebrew was known by learned people, but the language which the +Son of God learned from His blessed mother and His foster father was +Aramaic, and He spoke the Galilean dialect of that language. From a +few words preserved in the Gospels, it is plain that the gospel was +first preached in that tongue. In the 7th century after Christ, the +Mohammedan conquerors, who spoke Arabic, began to supplant {2} Aramaic +by Arabic, and this is now the ordinary language of Palestine. As many +people who spoke Aramaic were at one time heathen, both the Jews and +the Christians adopted the habit of calling their language _Syriac_ +rather than Aramaic. The great centre of Christian Syriac literature +was Edessa, and in the eastern part of the Roman Empire Syriac was the +most important and most elegant language next to Greek. It is still +used in the Church services of many Oriental Christians, and it is +spoken in ordinary conversation in parts of North Mesopotamia and +Kurdistan. Further west it is only spoken in a few villages of +Anti-Libanus. In the course of this book it will be necessary to refer +occasionally to the Aramaic language. + +It is highly probable that some of the earliest Christian writings were +in Aramaic, but all the books of the New Testament which we now possess +are in Greek. The Greek language was known by many people in +Palestine, and it was splendidly fitted to be the medium of God's +revelation. It was widely known among the civilized nations of the +time, and it is so rich and expressive that religious ideas are better +conveyed in Greek than in almost any other tongue. Whereas it was +essential that the gospel should be preached first in Aramaic, it was +equally essential that it should be written in Greek, for the benefit +of people who did not live in Palestine or who lived there as strangers. + +[Sidenote: The Canon.] + +The New Testament Scriptures consist of twenty-seven different books, +written by nine different authors. Each book has some special +characteristics corresponding with the mind of the writer and the +circumstances under which it was written. Yet these books exhibit a +manifest unity of purpose and doctrine. Under many differences of +dialect and expression there is an internal unity such as we do not +find in any secular literature, and this unity is due to inspiration. +The whole collection of books is called the CANON of the New Testament. +This Greek word "canon" originally meant a straight rod, such as could +be used for {3} ruling or measuring, then it was employed to signify a +rule or law, and finally it meant a list or catalogue. As applied to +the New Testament, the word "canon" means the books which fit the +Church's rule of faith, and which themselves become a rule that +measures forgeries and finds them wanting. The Church set these +genuine books apart as having their origin in inspiration which came +from God. They were all either written by the apostles or by men who +were trained by the apostles, and thus they contain a unique account of +the sayings of the Lord Jesus and the teaching of those who received +their commission from Him. They are therefore documents to which the +Church can refer, as a final court of appeal, in all questions of faith +and conduct. + +It was only by degrees that the Church realized the importance of +placing all these twenty-seven books in the canon. This was finally +done in the western Churches of Christendom in A.D. 382, by a Council +held at Rome.[1] + +The disciples first endeavoured to collect the sayings of our Lord and +the record of His life. Thus the four Gospels constitute the first +layer of the New Testament canon. The canon of our four Gospels +existed by A.D. 150, as is shown by Hermas and Justin Martyr. + +The next layer of the canon consists of the thirteen Epistles of St. +Paul and the Acts. To these the Epistle to the Hebrews was generally +attached in the east, though not in the west. This layer of the canon +was universally recognized towards the close of the 2nd century, and +perhaps some years earlier, for the books composing it were used and +quoted throughout the 2nd century. + +The third layer of the canon gained its place more slowly. It consists +of what are called the "Catholic Epistles," viz. those of St. James, +St. Peter, St. John, and St. Jude, together with the Revelation or +Apocalypse of St. John. + +A crowd of works circulated among the Christians of the {4} and +century, including some forged Gospels and Apocalypses, the Epistle of +St. Clement, Bishop of Rome, written about A.D. 95, and the allegory +known as the _Shepherd_ of Hermas, written about A.D. 140. Several of +these works appear to have enjoyed a popularity in excess of that which +attached to some of the books now included in the canon. Nevertheless +they were rejected when they were examined. It was not merely a +wonderful intellectual feat on the part of the Church to have sifted +out this mass of literature; it was an action in which the Christian +cannot fail to see the hand of God. + +One question remains to be asked after drawing this small sketch of the +history of the canon. Why is it that for several generations the canon +of the New Testament varied in different countries, containing fewer +books in one place than in another? Two reasons may be given: (i.) +Certain books at first enjoyed only a local popularity; thus "Hebrews +was saved by the value set upon it by the scholars of Alexandria, and +the Epistle of St. James by the attachment of certain Churches in the +East." (ii.) The books of the New Testament, when translated into +other languages, were not all translated together. The Gospels were +naturally translated first, as containing the words of our Lord. The +other books followed gradually. Interesting information is given us +with regard to the latter fact by the _Doctrine of Addai_, a Syriac +book of which the present form dates from about A.D. 400, but which +appears to describe the condition of the Syrian Church in the 3rd +century. The writings of _Aphraates_, a Syrian writer, A.D. 338, +supplement this information. We find from these books that about A.D. +160 the Syrian Christians possessed a translation of the Gospels. +Early in the 3rd century they used a harmony of the Gospels with Acts +and the Epistles of St. Paul. In the 4th century they used also the +Epistle to the Hebrews. It is fairly evident, from the _Doctrine of +Addai_, that only the Old Testament and the Gospels were at first used +by the Syrian Christians, and that St. Paul's Epistles and Acts arrived +later. And as late as {5} A.D. 338 they knew nothing of the Catholic +Epistles and Revelation, though these books were well known by the +Christians who spoke Greek and Latin. + +[Sidenote: Ancient Versions.] + +The most ancient versions or translations of the New Testament were in +those three great languages spoken by people who touched the borders of +the districts where Greek was spoken. These were Latin, Syriac, and +the Coptic language spoken by the Egyptians. It seems probable that a +large part of the New Testament was translated into these languages +within about a hundred years after the time of the apostles. The +oldest version in any language closely akin to English was that made by +Ulphilas, the celebrated bishop of the Goths, who translated the Bible +from Greek into Gothic about A.D. 350. There is a most beautiful +manuscript of this version preserved at Upsala, in Sweden. The Goths +were then settled in the country between the Danube and the Dnieper. +As late as the 17th century their language was still spoken in part of +the south of Russia. A carefully revised translation of the Latin +Bible was made by St. Jerome between A.D. 382 and 404, and this version +came to be used by the Church throughout the west of Europe. + +[Sidenote: English Versions.] + +The Gospel of St. John and perhaps the other Gospels were translated by +the patient historian and monk, the Venerable Bede, who was buried at +Durham in A.D. 731. Parts of the Bible, especially the Psalms, were +soon fairly well known through translations. King Alfred was +translating the Psalms when he died, in A.D. 901; and soon after A.D. +1000, Archbishop Aelfric translated large portions of the Bible. As +the language of England gradually changed, new versions of the Psalms +were made, and most of the Bible was known in a version made before +1360. But perhaps there was no complete version of the Bible in +English until the time of John Wyclif (1380). Wyclif translated most +of the New Testament of this version, and a priest named Hereford +translated the Old Testament. Wyclif held various {6} opinions which +the Church of England at that time condemned, and some of which she +still rightly condemns. The result was that in 1412 Archbishop Arundel +denounced Wyclif's version, but it seems to have been revised and to +have come into common use. All these versions or partial versions in +the English language were made from the Latin. But after the Turks +captured Constantinople from the Greeks in 1453, a number of learned +Greeks fled for refuge to the west of Europe. The result was that +Greek books began to be studied again, and the New Testament began to +be read once more in the original language. Three important editions +were printed in 1514, 1516, and 1550 respectively. The first was +printed under the direction of the Spanish Cardinal Ximenes, but owing +to various causes was not published until 1522. The edition of 1516 +was printed under the direction of the great Dutch scholar Erasmus. +That of 1550 is important as being substantially the "received text" +which has appeared in the ordinary Greek Testaments printed in England +until the present day, and as being the foundation of our English +Authorised Version. This "received text" was printed by Robert +Estienne (or Stephanus), a great printer of Paris. About the same time +a desire for a reformation of abuses in the Church caused a deeper +interest to be taken in the Word of God. The first English translation +of the New Testament shows a desire for a reformation of a somewhat +extreme kind. It was the version of _William Tyndale_, which was +printed at Worms in Germany, in 1525. In 1534 the Convocation or +Church Parliament of England made a petition to King Henry VIII. to +allow a better version to be made. The work of translation was +interrupted by an order to have an English Bible in every church. As +the Church version was not completed, a version made in 1535 by _Miles +Coverdale_ had to be used instead. Two other versions, also somewhat +inferior, appeared in 1537 and 1539, and then a slightly improved +version called the _Great Bible_ appeared in April, 1539. It is {7} +also called Cranmer's Bible, because Archbishop Cranmer wrote a preface +to the second edition. Three other important versions were published +before the end of the 16th century. The Calvinists, who were the +predecessors of the modern Presbyterians, published a New Testament at +Geneva in 1557, followed by the whole Bible in 1560. The English +bishops published what is called the _Bishops' Bible_ in 1568, and the +Roman Catholics published an English New Testament at Rheims in France, +in 1582. We cannot fail to be impressed by the eager desire felt at +that time by the people of Great Britain, of all religious parties, to +study the Holy Scriptures, a desire to which these various translations +bear witness. + +All previous English versions were thrown into the shade by the +brilliant _Authorised Version_, which was commenced in 1604 and +published in 1611. Its beauty and accuracy are so great that even the +Presbyterians, both in England and Scotland, gradually gave up the use +of their Genevan Bible in favour of this translation. But since 1611 +hundreds of manuscripts have been discovered and examined. "Textual +criticism," by which an endeavour is made to discover the precise words +written by the writers of the New Testament, where discrepancies exist +in the manuscripts, has become a science. Many results of this +criticism have been embodied in the _Revised Version_, published in +1881. The English of the _Revised Version_ is not so musical as that +of the _Authorised Version_, and it seems probable that a deeper +knowledge of the ancient versions will before long enable us to advance +even beyond the verbal accuracy attained in 1881. But at the same time +we know that both our modern English versions give us a noble and +trustworthy interpretation of the Greek. And criticism has made it +certain that the earliest Greek manuscripts are essentially the same as +the original books written by the apostles and their companions. The +manuscripts are almost utterly free from wilful corruptions. And +concerning the small variations which they contain, we {8} can fitly +quote the words of a fine old English scholar, Bentley: "Even put them +into the hands of a knave or a fool, and yet with the most sinistrous +and absurd choice, he shall not extinguish the light of any one +chapter, nor so disguise Christianity but that every feature of it will +still be the same." + +For the sake of space the works of the evangelists are often referred +to in an abbreviated form; _e.g._ "Matt." has been written for "the +Gospel according to St. Matthew," and "Mark" for "the Gospel according +to St. Mark." But when the writers themselves are mentioned, their +names are usually given in full, with the title which Christian +reverence has bestowed upon these "holy men of old." + + + +[1] See Mr. C. H. Turner, _Journal of Theological Studies_, July, 1900. + + + + +{9} + +CHAPTER II + +THE GOSPELS + +[Sidenote: Their Name.] + +The modern English word "Gospel" is derived from the Anglo-Saxon word +_Godspell_, which means "God story," the story about the life of God in +human flesh. It does not, therefore, exactly correspond with the Greek +name _euaggelion_, which means "good tidings." In the earliest times +the Greek name meant the good tidings proclaimed by our Lord about the +Kingdom of God which He had come to establish. And, as our Lord +Himself rules over this kingdom, the tidings about the kingdom included +tidings about Himself. So Christ Himself says, "for My sake and the +gospel's" (Mark viii. 35). After the Ascension of our Lord and the +disappearance of His visible presence, the _euaggelion_ came to mean +the good tidings about Christ, rather than the good tidings brought by +Christ (see 1 Cor. ix. 14 and 2 Cor. iv. 4). So St. Paul generally +means by _euaggelion_ the good news, coming from God, of salvation +freely given to man through Christ. When he speaks of "My gospel" +(Rom. ii. 16), he means "my explanation of the gospel;" and when he +says, "I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision" +(Gal. ii. 7), he means that he had been appointed by God to preach the +good tidings to the Gentiles, with special emphasis on the points most +necessary for their instruction. + +The word _euaggellon_, in the sense of a written gospel, is first found +in the ancient Christian manual called the _Didache_, or _Teaching of +the Twelve Apostles_, in ch. xv.: "Reprove one {10} another, not in +anger but in peace, as ye have it in the gospel." This book was +probably composed about A.D. 100. The word seems to have been still +more definitely applied to a written account of the life of Christ in +the time of the great heretic Marcion, A.D. 140. The plural word +_euaggelia_, signifying the Four Gospels, is first found in a writing +of Justin Martyr,[1] about A.D. 152. It is important to notice that he +also calls them "Memoirs of the Apostles," and that he refers to them +collectively as "the Gospel," inasmuch as they were, in reference to +their distinctive value as records of Christ, one book. + +[Sidenote: Their Genuineness.] + +The first three Gospels do not contain the name of the writers in any +connection which can be used to prove conclusively that they were +written by the men whose names they bear. On the other hand, the +fourth Gospel in a concluding passage (John xxi. 24) contains an +obvious claim to have been written by that intimate friend of Jesus to +whom the Church has always attributed it. But the titles, "according +to Matthew," "according to Mark," "according to Luke," rest on +excellent authority. And they imply that each book contains the good +news brought by Christ and recorded in the teaching of the evangelist +specified. These titles must, _at the very least_, signify that the +Christians who first gave these titles to these books, meant that each +Gospel was connected with one particular person who lived in the +apostolic age, and that it contained nothing contrary to what that +person taught. The titles, taken by themselves, are therefore +compatible with the theory that the first three Gospels were perhaps +written by friends or disciples of the men whose names they bear. But +we shall afterwards see that there is overwhelming evidence to show +that the connection between each book and the specified person is much +closer than that theory would suggest. + +Speaking of the four Gospels generally, we may first observe that it is +impossible to place any one of them as late as A.D. 100, {11} and that +the first three Gospels must have been written long before that date. +This is shown by the internal evidence, of which proof will be given in +detail in the chapters dealing with the separate Gospels. The external +evidence of the use of all the four Gospels by Christians, and to some +extent by non-Christians, supports the internal evidence. Let us begin +by noting facts which are part of undoubted history, and then work back +to facts of earlier date. It is now undisputed that between the years +170 and 200 after Christ our four Gospels were known and regarded as +genuine products of the apostolic age. St. Irenaeus, who became Bishop +of Lyons in France in A.D. 177, and was the pupil of Polycarp, who had +actually been a disciple of St. John, uses and quotes the four Gospels. +He shows that various semi-Christian sects appeal severally to one of +the four Gospels as supporting their peculiar views, but that the +Christian Church accepts all four. He lays great stress on the fact +that the teaching of the Church has always been the same, and he was +personally acquainted with the state of Christianity in Asia Minor, +Rome, and France. His evidence must therefore be considered as +carrying great weight. Equally important is the evidence of Tatian. +This remarkable Syrian wrote a harmony of the Gospels near A.D. 160. +Allusions to this harmony, called the _Diatessaron_, were known to +exist in several ancient writers, but until recently it was strenuously +maintained by sceptical writers that there was not sufficient evidence +to prove that the Diatessaron was composed of our present Gospels. It +was suggested that it might have been drawn from other Gospels more or +less resembling those which we now possess. This idea has now been +dispelled. A great Syrian father, Ephraim, who died in 373, wrote a +commentary on the Diatessaron. This was preserved in an Armenian +translation which was made known to the world in 1876. The discovery +proved that the Diatessaron had been drawn from our four Gospels. In +1886 an Arabic version of the Diatessaron itself was found, and it {12} +proved conclusively that Tatian's Diatessaron was simply a combination +of our four canonical Gospels. About the same date as Tatian, a famous +Gnostic writer named Heracleon wrote commentaries on Luke and John, and +it can also be shown that he was acquainted with Matt. There can +therefore be no doubt that all our four Gospels were well known by A.D. +170. + +Between A.D. 130 and 170 our Gospels were also in use. The most +important evidence is furnished by Justin Martyr, who was born near +Samaria, and lectured in Rome about A.D. 152. He says "the apostles +handed down in the Memoirs made by them, which are called Gospels;" he +shows that these Memoirs were used in Christian worship, and he says +that "they were compiled by Christ's apostles and those who companied +with them." This exactly agrees with the fact that the first and the +fourth of our Gospels are attributed by the tradition of the Church to +apostles, while the second and the third are attributed to companions +of the apostles. The quotations which Justin makes show that these +Memoirs were our four Gospels. It has been thought that Justin perhaps +used some apocryphal Gospel in addition to our Gospels, but there is no +sufficient proof of this. We may explain that he uses the term +"Memoirs" in order to make himself intelligible to non-Christian +readers who would not understand the word "Gospel." + +The _Shepherd_ of Hermas, which was written at Rome, probably about +A.D. 140, but perhaps earlier, uses expressions which imply an +acquaintance with all our Gospels, though none of them are directly +quoted. Moreover, the _Shepherd_, in depicting the Christian Church as +seated on a bench with four feet, probably refers to the four Gospels. +This would be in agreement with the allegorical style of the book, and +it gains support from the language of Origen and Irenaeus. + +The testimony rendered to the authenticity of the Gospels by the +heretics who flourished between A.D. 130 and 170 is of importance. At +the beginning of this period, Basilides, the {13} great Gnostic of +Alexandria, who tried to replace Christianity by a semi-Christian +Pantheism, appears to have used Matt., Luke, and John. The fact that +they contain nothing which really supports his peculiar tenets, forms +an argument which shows that the genuineness of these documents was +then too well established for it to be worth his while to dispute it. +Marcion, whose teaching was half Gnostic and half Catholic, endeavoured +to revive what he imagined to be the Christianity of St. Paul, whom he +regarded as the only true apostle. He believed that Judaism was the +work of an inferior god, and he therefore rejected the whole of the Old +Testament, and retained only the Gospel written by St. Luke, the friend +of St. Paul, and ten of St. Paul's Epistles. Modern writers have +sometimes urged that Marcion's list of New Testament books proves that +all other parts of the New Testament were regarded as doubtful about +A.D. 140. But it is quite evident that Marcion, unlike those Gnostics +who adapted uncongenial books to their own systems by means of +allegorical explanations, cut out the books and verses which would not +correspond with his own dogma. In spite of his pretended fidelity to +St. Paul, he mutilated not only St. Luke's Gospel, but even the Epistle +to the Galatians. So whereas it is certain that he used our Luke, +there is no indication to show that he did not admit that the other +Gospels were really the work of the writers whose names they bear. + +In the period between A.D. 98, when the death of St. John probably took +place, and A.D. 130, we find several signs of acquaintance with the +Gospels. About A.D. 130, Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, wrote a book +called _Expositions of the Oracles of the Lord_. It may be regarded as +almost certain that the word "Oracles" signifies written Gospels, just +as in the New Testament the word signifies the written documents of the +Old Testament. He mentions Gospels written by St. Matthew and St. +Mark, and we know from Eusebius that he made use of 1 John. It is +deeply to be regretted that we only have {14} a few remaining fragments +of the writings of this early bishop, who was acquainted with men who +knew our Lord's disciples. In the letters of St. Ignatius, the +martyred Bishop of Antioch, A.D. 110, we find signs of acquaintance +with Matt. and John. The Epistle written by St. Polycarp to the +Philippians soon after the death of St. Ignatius contains quotations +from Matt. and Luke, and the quotations in it from 1 John almost +certainly imply the authenticity of St. John's Gospel, as it is +impossible to attribute the Epistles to any writer except the writer of +the Gospel. The _Didache_, about A.D. 100, shows acquaintance with +Matt. and Luke, and contains early Eucharistic prayers of which the +language closely resembles the language of St. John. The Epistle of +Barnabas, probably about A.D. 98, contains what is probably the oldest +remaining quotation from a book of the New Testament. It says, "It is +written, Many called, but few chosen," which appears to be a quotation +from Matt. xxii. 14. The Epistle of St. Clement of Rome, written to +the Christians of Corinth about A.D. 95, is full of the phraseology of +St. Paul's Epistles, but contains nothing that can be called a direct +quotation from our Gospels. But it does contain what are possibly +traces of the first three Gospels, though these passages are perhaps +quoted from an oral Gospel employed in the instruction of catechumens. + +We must conclude that, considering what a large amount of early +Christian literature has perished, the external evidence for the +authenticity of our Gospels is remarkably strong. They are genuine +writings of the apostolic age, and were received by men whose lifetime +overlapped the lifetime of some of the apostles. In the early +Christian literature which remains, there is much which lends support +to the authenticity of the Gospels, and nothing which injures a belief +in that authenticity. And there are strong reasons for thinking that +in the early Christian literature which has perished, there was much +which would have made a belief in their authenticity quite inevitable. + +It would be an aid to modern study if we could be certain {15} when and +where the four Gospels were put together in one canon. In the 4th and +5th centuries it was believed by some Christians that the collection +had been made at Ephesus by St. John himself, and that he had prefixed +the names of the writers to the Gospels when he published his own +Gospel. It is at present impossible to discover how far this supposed +fact is legendary or not, but modern criticism has done something to +corroborate the idea that the Gospels were really collected first in +Asia Minor, and if St. John did not make the collection himself, it was +probably made by his disciples soon after his death. + +[Sidenote: Their Diversity.] + +If we compare the four Gospels together, it is as plain as daylight +that there is a marked difference between the first three Gospels on +the one hand and the fourth Gospel on the other hand. The first three +Gospels are usually called the _Synoptic Gospels_, because they give us +one _synopsis_ or common view of our Lord's work. To a great extent +they record the same events and the same discourses, and in many +passages they express themselves in almost identical words. The +account which they give of our Lord's work is mostly confined to His +ministry in Galilee, the birthplace of our religion, and it includes +only one visit to Jerusalem. But St. John's Gospel differs widely in +language from the other Gospels, and also gives an account of no less +than five visits to Jerusalem, and chiefly describes the scenes +connected with our Lord's ministry in Judaea. Whereas our first three +Gospels can be appropriately printed in three parallel columns, the +greater part of St. John's Gospel cannot be appropriately placed by the +side of the other three. Another most important difference is that St. +John's Gospel is marked by a tone and teaching which are seldom to be +found in the Synoptic Gospels. The difference was well expressed by +Clement of Alexandria, who calls the Synoptic Gospels _bodily_ and St. +John's Gospel _spiritual_; and by Theodore of Mopsuestia, who says that +St. John declared that "doubtless it was not right to omit {16} the +facts told with regard to the sojourn of Christ in the flesh, but +neither was it right to omit the words relating to His Divinity." For +the Synoptic Gospels relate the outward events connected with our +Lord's ministry, while St. John records the discourses and works which +reveal our Lord's heavenly origin and divine authority. Again, the +Synoptic Gospels report Christ's addresses to simple Galilean people, +addresses consisting largely of _parables_; while St. John reports +discourses, frequently expressed in the language of _allegory_, and +uttered to the Jews of Jerusalem or to His own intimate disciples. + +[Sidenote: The Synoptic problem.] + +The Synoptic problem consists in the difficulties raised by the fact +that the Synoptic Gospels show both a remarkable similarity and a +remarkable dissimilarity. It is just because the similarity is often +so astonishing that we find it all the more difficult to explain the +dissimilarity when it exists. A study of the Synoptic problem is +valuable for the Christian student, inasmuch as it directs our +attention to the sources employed by the evangelists, and thus leads us +nearer to the actual events connected with the rise of Christianity. + +The RESEMBLANCES between the Synoptic Gospels may be observed in the +following points:-- + +(a) _A common plan._--The general view of the course of events is +almost identical. St. Matthew and St. Luke give separate accounts of +the infancy of our Lord, but they then join with St. Mark in their +account of St. John the Baptist, the baptism and temptation of Christ, +and the beginning of His ministry. Later all three direct their +attention mainly to Christ's work in Galilee, while St. John describes +much that took place in Judaea and Samaria. They pass rapidly over +some considerable space of time until they come to the last week of His +life, where all three give a detailed account. + +(b) _A common selection of facts._--By far the larger number of both +events and discourses are found in all three Gospels. If anything is +recorded in Mark it is generally to be found in {17} Matt. and Luke, +and almost always in either Matt. or Luke. If the whole number of +incidents in the Synoptic Gospels be reckoned as eighty-eight, the +distribution of the incidents shared by at least two Gospels is as +follows:-- + + In all three Gospels . . . . . . . 42 + In Mark and Matt. . . . . . . . . 12 + In Mark and Luke . . . . . . . . . 5 + In Matt. and Luke . . . . . . . . 12 + +If we add the above together, we realize that seventy-one incidents out +of a total of eighty-eight are to be found in more than one Gospel. Of +the remaining seventeen incidents, three are peculiar to Mark, five to +Matt., and nine to Luke. + +(c) _Similar groups of incidents._--Not only is there a common +selection of facts, but detached events which happened at different +times are sometimes grouped together in the same way in all of the +Synoptic Gospels or in two of the three. Thus in all three we find +together the cure of the paralytic, the call of Levi, and the question +of fasting (Matt. ix. 1-17; Mark ii. 1-22; Luke v. 17-39); so also the +plucking of the ears of corn and the cure of the withered hand--events +separated by at least a week (Matt. xii. 1-21; Mark ii. 23-iii. 6; Luke +vi. 1-11). Thus also the death of John the Baptist is introduced both +in Matt. xiv. 3 and in Mark vi. 17 to explain the fear felt by Herod +Antipas that he had risen from the dead. In fact, when a parallel +passage is found in all three Synoptic Gospels, it is never immediately +followed in _both_ Matt. and Luke by a whole separate incident which is +not in Mark.[2] There is a general tendency in Matt. and Luke to +narrate the same facts as Mark in the order of Mark. And therefore it +is difficult to think that the original basis of the Synoptic Gospels, +whether written or unwritten, did not coincide closely with Mark in the +order of events. + +{18} + +(d) _Similarity of language._--The Synoptic Gospels often agree +verbally. And this agreement is not merely found in the reports of the +sayings of our Lord, but even in the narrative of events. It extends +even to rare Greek words and phrases. The clauses are often remarkably +similar. Sometimes quotations from the Old Testament are found in two +or three Gospels with the same variations from the original. Matt. +iii. 3, Mark i. 3, and Luke iii. 4 have the same quotation from Isa. +xl. 3, in which they agree in every word, although at the end they +depart in the same way from both the Hebrew and the Greek version of +the Old Testament, for they put "His paths" instead of "the paths of +our God." Another interesting instance is to be found in Matt. xxvi. +47, Mark xiv. 43, and Luke xxii. 47, where all three evangelists, +apparently without any necessity, explain that Judas was one of the +twelve. Again in Matt. xxiv. 15, 16, and Mark xiii. 14, we have the +note or parenthesis "let him that readeth understand," which one +evangelist seems to have copied from the other. + +The DIFFERENCES between the Synoptic Gospels may be observed in the +following facts:-- + +(a) _Facts peculiar to one or two Gospels._--There is a wide difference +between the account of the birth and infancy of our Lord given in Matt. +and that given in Luke. In Matt. we have recorded an angelic +communication to St. Joseph concerning the future birth of Jesus. In +Luke, an earlier and fuller annunciation to St. Mary is recorded. In +Matt. the story of the infancy is centred at Bethlehem, in Luke at +Nazareth. The accounts given of the appearances of our Lord after the +Resurrection record different events. In Matt. and Mark Galilee is the +scene of His appearances, in Luke the scene is laid in Jerusalem and +its neighbourhood. There is not the least reason for regarding these +accounts as contradictory, but there is reason for inquiring why the +different writers selected different appearances. + +{19} + +(b) _Different accounts of the same facts._--The three distinct +incidents of the temptation of our Lord are recorded in a different +order in Matt. and Luke, and the temptation is recorded without these +incidents in Mark. St. Luke's version of the Beatitudes is reduced in +number, and is followed by corresponding denunciations. In Mark x. 46 +and Matt. x. 29 we have the cure of Bartimaeus on the departure from +Jericho, in Luke xviii. 35, xix. 1 at the entrance of the city. In +Matt. viii. 28 there are two demoniacs, while in Mark v. 2 and Luke +viii. 27, which seem to narrate the same event, only one demoniac is +mentioned. All the Synoptic Gospels give slightly different accounts +of the inscription on the cross, and the words spoken by the centurion +at the death of Jesus vary in Luke from the words in Matt. and Mark. + +(c) Differences in the order of words and sentences.--Although Matt. +and Luke do not combine against Mark in narrating a whole incident in +an order different from Mark, it is important to notice that there are +some cases in which Matt. and Mark agree against Luke, or Mark and Luke +agree against Matt. And we must not omit a significant instance where +Matt. and Luke agree against Mark in the order of _part_ of an +incident. In Matt. iii. 11, 12 and Luke iii. 16, "I indeed baptize you +with water," etc., comes _before_, in Mark i. 7, 8 it comes _after_, +the description of Jesus as "He that is mightier than I." No doubt one +author who copies another may often omit something stated by the first +author. But, surely, he is not very likely to invert the order of the +materials before him, especially when no obvious purpose can be served +by such an inversion. Another instance of inversion is this: in Mark +ix. 12, 13 the rejection of the Son of Man is mentioned by our Lord +_between_ two statements of His about Ehas, in Matt. xvii. 12 it is +mentioned _after_ both statements. Such inversions would naturally +take place in the case of oral transmission of the sacred story, but +they would be less likely in the case of one writer copying another. + +{20} + +(d) _Verbal differences._--Striking verbal differences occur even when +the general resemblance is most close. In Matt. ix. 1-17, Mark ii. +1-22, Luke v. 17-39, there are verbal changes even where the sentences +closely coincide. Other instances might be quoted. All three +evangelists have a style of their own, and show a marked preference for +particular idioms and words. In narrating the sayings of our Lord, +they narrate them with some verbal differences, and in the case of the +history of His ministry, they narrate it with numerous verbal +differences. It is therefore evident that St. Matthew and St. Luke, if +they used St. Mark's work, felt themselves at liberty to deal with it +very freely. + +The above brief account of the chief resemblances and differences +between the first three Gospels is an attempt to give a fair though +condensed statement of certain facts which appeal with different force +to different minds. "How came these Gospels to be so alike and yet so +different?" This is the "Synoptic problem," and great divergence of +opinion exists as to the solution. + +[Sidenote: Possible solutions.] + +The most important views propounded to solve the problem are-- + +(1) Both St. Matthew and St. Luke copied the Gospel of St. Mark, while +not omitting to make use of other documents. In the case of St. Luke, +his acquaintance with earlier written stories about our Lord is +rendered indisputable by his own statement. Sometimes it has been +thought that St. Luke made use of the Gospel according to St. Matthew +as well as the Gospel according to St. Mark. This theory is most +appropriately called the _theory of the mutual dependence of the +documents_. + +(2) The three Synoptic Gospels put down in writing different, but +closely similar forms of an oral tradition concerning the teaching of +our Lord. It is thought that the statements made by the apostles about +Christ were repeated by them and occasionally added to, and treasured +up in faithful memories. {21} The idea of a _literary_ connection +between the Gospels is dismissed, and it is held that the methods of +teaching employed among the Jews, and the probable existence of a +school of trained catechists, will account sufficiently for the fixed +form of the tradition. According to this hypothesis the differences +between the Synoptic Gospels are to be explained by the necessity of +teaching different aspects of the truth among different classes of +inquirers, and by the fluctuating memories of the teachers. This +theory is known as the _oral theory_.[3] + +(3) The three Synoptic Gospels are based upon one original Gospel +written in the Aramaic language. A large number of verbal variations +can thus be accounted for. They might have sprung from different +renderings of the same Aramaic original, and various passages derived +from oral tradition might have been added to the original Gospel when +it was translated. It has been held by some that there was at least an +Aramaic document behind Mark, if there was not an Aramaic original +employed by all the Synoptics. The different forms of this hypothesis +can be described as the _theory of an Aramaic original_. + +It is now generally believed that the three evangelists did not employ +one original Aramaic Gospel. The agreement between the Greek words of +the Synoptic Gospels is too close to be explained by the use of an +Aramaic original. The real controversy, therefore, lies between the +scholars who support theory (1) or theory (2). + +[Sidenote: Probable conclusions.] + +On the whole, it appears that a general agreement is being arrived at. +It is becoming evident that the theory of the mutual dependence of the +documents and the oral theory are _both_ partly true, and that neither +of them can be held in an extreme form. In the first place, the +resemblances between the first three Gospels make it extremely probable +that St. Matthew and St. Luke {22} employed the work of St. Mark. In +England, Germany, and France the opinion of scholars seems steadily +tending towards this conclusion. The chief reasons for it are +undoubtedly that (i.) the order of facts in Mark is the _normal order_ +of the whole narrative of the Synoptists, and (ii.) in the main, the +language of Mark explains the verbal agreements between Matt. and Luke. +Therefore among the probable conclusions with regard to the Synoptic +problem we must reckon the fact that _Mark is earlier than Matt. and +Luke, and was employed in the composition of them both_. This is the +first important conclusion. + +But we must also allow room for the influence of oral tradition. + +We have already noticed many differences between the Synoptists, all of +which more or less suggest that the Gospels are largely based on oral +tradition. We may now mention a few other facts which point in the +same direction. There are cases in which Matt. or Luke has a more +decided appearance of originality than Mark. These cases include +words, phrases, and even sections. For instance, Matt. employs several +times the phrase "the Father who is in heaven," a phrase which our Lord +must certainly have used, but which in Mark only occurs once (xi. 25). +Mark i. 40-45, ii. 1-12, iii. 1-6, x. 35, appear less original than the +parallel passages in the other Synoptic Gospels. Moreover, there are +statements in Matt. of a striking kind, which are not at all likely to +have been invented, but which are entirely absent from Mark. We may +notice the texts, "Go not into any way of the Gentiles, and enter not +into any city of the Samaritans; but go rather to the lost sheep of the +house of Israel" (Matt. x. 5, 6); and again, "I was not sent but unto +the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. xv. 24). In both cases +the context has a parallel in Mark, but the verses in question do not +occur in those parallels. + +Also there are certain passages to be found in Mark which are in +neither Luke nor Matt. If we believe that the Gospels {23} are largely +based on oral tradition, it is easy to account for the absence of a +passage in one or two of the three Synoptic Gospels. An incident which +was remembered in one place might be forgotten in another. But if we +exclude the influence of oral tradition, there are only two solutions +of the problem raised by these passages. Either (a) St. Matthew and +St. Luke were ignorant of them, because they were added to Mark later +than the date when they used Mark; or (b) they knew them and omitted +them. In other words, we have to ask, Did they use an original form of +the second Gospel, a form to which German scholars apply the name +_Ur-Marcus_ and French scholars apply the name _Proto-Marc_, or did +they omit passages in Mark which suggested difficulties or appeared +unnecessary? The main argument against the existence of a Proto-Mark +is that neither Papias nor any known Father of the Church preserves the +least recollection of it. It has simply been invented to account for +the difficulties of the Synoptic problem. If, on the other hand, St. +Matthew and St. Luke deliberately abbreviated or altered the narrative +of St. Mark, we must naturally inquire why they did so. The authors +who maintain that they did alter the material which lay before them, +account for some of the changes as having been made from a mere desire +to abbreviate, or to remove a few verses which might prove "hard +sayings" to Jewish or Gentile Christians respectively. Some think that +other passages in Mark were emitted because St. Matthew and St. Luke +considered them to be derogatory to our Lord's power or the character +of His apostles. For instance, St. Matthew omits the rebuke +administered to the apostles in Mark viii. 17, 18, and he does not +mention our Lord's use of spittle as a means of healing. He also in +ch. xiii. 55 represents the Jews as calling our Lord "the carpenter's +son," whereas in Mark vi. 3 they call Him "the carpenter." + +This latter line of argument is often hazardous and occasionally +profane. And in special reference to the points just {24} described, +we may remark that St. Matthew in ch. xiv. 28-33 does not hesitate to +record the weakness of even St. Peter's faith; and that St. John, +although he gives the greatest prominence to the majesty of our Lord, +does in ch. ix. 6 record His use of spittle in healing. And if St. +Matthew thought it irreverent to record the fact that the Jews called +Jesus "the carpenter," he might have naturally shrunk far more from +saying, as he does, that they named Him "the carpenter's son," a title +which might seem to imply an ignoring of His miraculous birth. + +It seems, therefore, that we must be content to acknowledge that we +cannot always determine the reasons which influenced St. Matthew and +St. Luke, but we can say that in some cases they were probably +influenced by the mere desire to abbreviate, and that they were also +influenced by the forms which the oral teaching of the Gospel had +assumed. We may also regard it as almost certain that St. Luke +sometimes altered words in St. Mark's narrative simply because he +preferred a more elegant and less homely form of Greek. The textual +criticism of the oldest manuscripts of the New Testament also points to +the fact that for a few generations, when reminiscences of our Lord and +His apostles were still handed down, writers occasionally tried to make +room for these reminiscences when they copied the books of the New +Testament. A famous instance of this is John vii. 53-viii. 11, which +was almost certainly not written by St. John, and is almost certainly a +genuine story which the apostle knew, and which Christians afterwards +inserted in his Gospel. We believe, then, that _all the Synoptic +Gospels are influenced by oral tradition_. This is the second +important conclusion. + +Thirdly, it seems that _Matt. and Luke, and perhaps Mark, made use of +written collections of Logia, or sayings of our Lord_. Evidence of one +such collection comes to us on the high authority of Papias. He says-- + + +Matthew then composed the Logia in the Hebrew tongue, and every one +interpreted them as he was able. + +{25} + +An equally important statement which Papias makes with regard to the +composition of Mark, is made on the authority of John the Presbyter who +had been a personal follower of the Lord and was an elder contemporary +of Papias. It is at least possible that Papias derived his information +about Matt. from the same authority. It is almost inconceivable that +between the time of Papias and that of Irenaeus, whose life probably +overlapped that of Papias, the name of Matthew became wrongly affixed +to our first Gospel. We may therefore regard it as certain that in our +first Gospel is contained the book of sayings, which St. Matthew +himself wrote. In our third Gospel we find that St. Luke has inserted +much information with regard to our Lord's teaching which is apparently +derived from a version of the Logia. The order of the sayings is more +original in Luke than in Matt. The reason for this assertion is the +following:-- + +The two evangelists arrange the sayings of our Lord differently. In +more than two-thirds of the instances in which they seem to employ some +collection of _Logia_, they place their materials in a different +setting. It has often been remarked that St. Matthew places the +discourses of our Lord together in large blocks, while St. Luke records +them separately, and in many cases records the circumstances which led +up to them. Instances of this are--The Lord's Prayer (Matt. vi. 9-13 +and Luke xi. 1-4); the treasure and the heart (Matt. vi. 19-21 and Luke +xii. 33, 34); God and Mammon (Matt. vi. 24 and Luke xvi. 13). It would +therefore seem plain that either one evangelist or the other altered +the places of these discourses. Examination makes it equally plain +that the alteration was made in Matt. Much of Matt. is arranged in +numerical forms, and this is especially true of those passages which +are not derived from Mark. The numbers 5, 10, and 7 are used as helps +to memory. Thus in Matt. we find _five_ chapters (called by the Jews +"Pereqs") of the sayings of our Lord, ending respectively at vii. 28; +xi. 1; xiii. 53, xix. 1; xxvi. 1. The {26} number five was a favourite +number with the Jews in such cases; thus we have five books of the +Pentateuch, five books of the Psalms, the five _Megilloth_ or festival +volumes, and the five parts of the _Pirqe Aboth_. In chs. viii. and +ix. we have a collection of _ten_ miracles, in spite of the fact that +three of these miracles are placed elsewhere by St. Mark and St. Luke. +The petitions of the Lord's Prayer are arranged as seven, there are +_seven_ parables in ch. xiii., _seven_ woes in ch. xxiii., and the +genealogy of our Lord is arranged in three _fourteens_. As these +numerical arrangements are specially characteristic of Matt., and +certainly appear to be caused by a desire to aid oral repetition, we +are led to the conclusion that the Logia are to be found in a less +artificial and therefore earlier form in Luke. We are also led once +more to the conclusion that though we cannot say that the whole of +Matt. owes its form to oral teaching, yet many sections of it are +moulded by oral teaching. + +It must lastly be noted that although the collection of Logia employed +in Luke contained much material which is also found in Matt., the +parallel passages vary considerably in style and language. Examination +of these passages seldom enables us to prove what expressions were +specially characteristic of the Logia. But we can assert with a fair +amount of confidence that the version, or versions, of the Logia so +employed, had a simple and Hebraic style; and that whereas Luke has +kept the order of the Logia better than Matt., the latter preserves the +style more faithfully. + +In addition to Mark and collections of the Logia, St. Matthew and St. +Luke employed other sources now unknown to us. The narratives of the +infancy and the Resurrection are independent, and are so different that +they point both to the fact that the two evangelists were here +employing different sources, and that each was unacquainted with the +Gospel written by the other. Also, St. Luke's account of our Lord's +ministry in Peraea and elsewhere, contained in ix. 51-xix. 28, is +peculiar to his Gospel. + +[Sidenote: The relation of St. John's Gospel to the Synoptic Gospels.] + +The difference between the theological tone of St. John's Gospel and +that which we find in the Synoptists is mentioned {27} in our account +of the separate Gospels. Besides this difference of tone, there is a +decided difference in the march of the events which are recorded and +some difference in the narrative of passages which are parallel. The +first rough impression which we gather from the Synoptists is that our +Lord did not visit Jerusalem until shortly before the Crucifixion. +Matthew and Mark refer to one Passover only for which Jesus comes to +Jerusalem. The scene of His ministry is Galilee. On the other hand, +the centre of interest in John is not Galilee, but Jerusalem and +Judaea. But a minute examination proves that the narrative of St. John +fits that of the Synoptists in a remarkable manner. In the first +place, the Synoptists give us hints of our Lord's earlier visits to +Judaea and Jerusalem. In Luke iv. 44 (see margin R.V.) we find Him +preaching in the synagogues of Judaea (cf. Acts x. 37). In Luke v. 17 +the presence in Galilee of Pharisees from _Jerusalem_ is a testimony to +the impression which Christ had produced in the holy city. Both Matt. +(xxiii. 37) and Luke (xiii. 34) record the lament of our Lord, "O +_Jerusalem_, . . . how _often_ would I," etc. So from John iv. 3, 43 +we learn of our Lord returning to _Galilee_ after His first visit to +Jerusalem. This second journey into Galilee recorded by St. John +brings us to a point corresponding with the early days of the ministry +in Galilee described by the Synoptists. In John vi.-vii. 9 we have +narratives connected with _Galilee_, and this section belongs to an +interval of time between the approach of Passover in March A.D. 28 and +the feast of Tabernacles in September A.D. 28. Of this period the +Synoptists give a much fuller account. + +The question of the length of our Lord's ministry is thus intimately +connected with that of the scene of His ministry. St. John marks the +length of our Lord's ministry, not by ordinary chronology, but by the +mention of various Jewish feasts. The dates of these feasts show that +His ministry lasted two years and a half. The absence of dates in the +Synoptists {28} has led to the opinion that they represent our Lord's +ministry as only extending over one year. This opinion may be +summarily dismissed. The mention of ripe corn in Mark ii. 23, and +green grass in vi. 39, implies two spring-times before the last +Passover. It is impossible to compress the teaching which the Synoptic +Gospels relate into the period of one year, and they show a hostility +towards Christ on the part of the ruling classes in Jerusalem which +could not have sufficiently fermented in the space of a few months. We +may also notice that there is a close agreement between the Synoptists +and St. John with regard to the points on which the conflict between +Christ and the Jews turned (cf. Matt. xvi. 1-4, Mark viii. 11-13, Luke +xi. 16, 29-32, with John ii. 18). The Jews specially charged Him with +being possessed by a devil (cf. Matt. xii. 24, Mark iii. 22, Luke xi. +15, with John viii. 48 and x. 19), and also with breaking the sabbath +(cf. Matt. xii. 9, Mark iii. 1, Luke vi. 6, xiii. 10, with John v. 10, +vii. 22, ix. 14). + +The dates of two important incidents have been the subjects of much +discussion. A cleansing of the temple by our Lord is related by the +Synoptists at the close of our Lord's ministry (Mark xi. 15). John ii. +14 places a cleansing of the temple at the very beginning of our Lord's +ministry. If we have to choose between one record and the other, we +should perhaps be inclined to say that the narrative in John is the +more probable. But there is no good reason for making such a choice. +No one who is at all familiar with the history of the abuses which took +place in some mediaeval churches would find a difficulty in believing +that the temple needed a second cleansing by our Lord. The first +cleansing is the natural outcome of His righteous indignation in +beholding for the first time the holiest place in the world given up to +common traffic, the second cleansing is appropriate in Him who had then +openly proclaimed His divine authority and Messiahship. + +The day of our Lord's death is a date about which there is an apparent +discrepancy between the Synoptists and St. John. {29} The discrepancy +has been elevated into momentous importance by the sceptics of the last +sixty years, and has been employed as one of the most formidable +arguments against the authenticity of St. John's Gospel. The argument +employed by these critics is as follows:--(1) The Synoptic Gospels +contain the original apostolic tradition, and they agree in stating +that Jesus celebrated the ordinary Jewish passover on the evening +between the 14th and 15th of the month Nisan; they therefore represent +the crucifixion as taking place on the 15th, after the passover had +been eaten. (2) The fourth Gospel places the Last Supper on the +evening between the 13th and the 14th of Nisan. It therefore +represents the crucifixion as taking place on the 14th, and tacitly +denies that Christ ate the usual Jewish passover. (3) The Churches of +the province of Asia, which were founded by St. John, were accustomed +in the 2nd century to keep their passover on the 14th of Nisan, and +declared that they derived their custom from St. John. They +consequently believed that Christ died on the 15th, and that He ate the +usual Jewish Passover. (4) Therefore the fourth Gospel was not written +by St. John, but by a forger who wished to emphasize the break between +Judaism and Christianity. + +This argument can be turned with fatal force against the critics who +made it. It is no doubt true that St. John by numerous indications +(xiii. 1; xviii. 28; xix. 14, 31) implies that the Last Supper was +eaten the day before the usual passover, and that Christ died on Nisan +14. But the usage of the Christians of the Asiatic Churches in the 2nd +century absolutely corroborates these indications. These Churches when +they celebrated the passover were not celebrating the anniversary of +the Last Supper, but the anniversary of the death of Christ, the true +Paschal Lamb. By doing this on Nisan 14, they showed that they +believed that Christ died on that day, and there is particularly strong +evidence of a belief among the early Christians that our Lord did die +on Nisan 14. Moreover, although the account of the Synoptists is not +free from {30} ambiguity, it bears many testimonies to St. John's +chronology. They record as happening on the day of Christ's death +several actions which the Jewish law did not permit on a feast day such +as Nisan 15, and which must presumably have taken place on Nisan 14. +The Synoptists make the Sanhedrim say that they will not arrest Jesus +"on the feast day," the guards and St. Peter carry arms, the trial is +held, Simon the Cyrenian comes from work, Joseph of Arimathaea buys a +linen cloth, the holy women prepare spices, all of which works would +have been forbidden on Nisan 15. Finally, the day is itself called the +"preparation," a name which would not be given to Nisan 15. The +conclusion is irresistible. It is that our Lord died on Nisan 14, that +St. John is correct, and that the Synoptists in most of the passages +concerned corroborate St. John. The only real difficulty is raised by +Mark xiv. 12 (cf. Matt. xxvi. 17; Luke xxii. 7), which seems to imply +that the Paschal lamb was sacrificed on the day before Christ died. If +so, this verse implies that Christ died on Nisan 15. But we must +observe that not one of the Synoptists says that the disciples ate a +lamb at the Last Supper, and also that, for all ceremonial purposes, +the day for killing the lamb began on the evening of Nisan 13. It is +therefore doubtful whether there is even as much as one verbal +contradiction on this point between the Synoptists and St. John. + +The omission of events which are of importance in the Synoptic Gospels +is a striking feature in St. John's Gospel. But these instances of +omission can be more reasonably explained by the hypothesis that the +author was content to omit facts with which the Christians around him +were well acquainted, than by the hypothesis that he was a +spiritualistic writer of the 2nd century who wished to make his Gospel +fit some fanciful theory of his own. In fact, the latter hypothesis +has proved a signal failure. The critics who say that the writer +omitted the story of our Lord's painful temptation as incompatible with +the majesty of the Divine Word, may be asked {31} why the writer gives +no fuller account of the glorious transfiguration than the hint in i. +14. Those who say that sentimental superstition induced the writer to +omit the agony the garden, may be asked why the writer records the +weariness of Christ at Samaria and His tears at the grave, of Lazarus. +There are gaps in the evangelist's narrative, but we cannot argue that +the Gospel is therefore a forgery. The evangelist is acquainted with +the Ascension (vi. 62), though he does not record it; and he knows that +Nazareth was the early home of Christ (i. 46), though he does not +narrate the story of the sacred infancy. The Gospel of St. John is +none the less genuine for being of the nature of a treatise, intended +to bring certain aspects of the life of our Lord to bear upon the +intellectual life of Ephesus. Much has been made of the fact that he +says nothing of the institution of the Eucharist. Nor does he record +the command of Jesus to baptize. Are we to suppose that a writer who +has told us how "the Word was made flesh" so shrank from believing +material things to be connected with a spiritual efficacy that he +rejected the sacraments? Is it not more probable that among people who +were perfectly familiar with both Baptism and the Eucharist he +preferred to tell what Christ had said about being born again (iii.), +and about the assimilation of His life by the believer (vi.)? This +seems to us more reasonable. The fourth Gospel, though it has a +character and purpose of its own, and might even have been written if +there had been no other Gospel, yet was intended to supplement either +the Synoptic Gospels or else a body of teaching corresponding with that +contained in those Gospels. + +The facts which St. John records in common with the Synoptists before +the Last Supper, the Passion, and the Resurrection are--the Baptism of +John (i. 26), the Feeding of the 5000 (vi. 10), the Walking on the Sea +(vi. 19), the Anointing at Bethany, with the action of Judas (xii. 1), +the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem (xii. 12). Even in connection with +these incidents St. John gives his additional details, and {32} +therefore the character of his work is here, as elsewhere, both +independent and supplemental. + +It remains to ask whether any words used by St. John seem to show that +he borrowed expressions from the Synoptic Gospels. + +The following passages may be noticed: John v. 8 f. (Mark ii. 11 f.), +vi. 7, 10, 19 f. (Mark vi. 37, 40, 49 f.), xii. 3, 5, 7 f. (Mark xiv. +3-6), xiii. 21 (Mark xiv. 18), xviii. 18, 17 (Mark xiv. 54, 69), xviii. +22 (Mark xiv. 65). For the quotation from Zechariah in xii. 15, cf. +Matt. xxi. 5. The words of our Lord in John xv. 18-xvi. 2 have been +compared with those in Matt. x. 17-22. Sometimes John has more points +of contact with Luke than with the other Synoptists; _e.g._ there is +the journey of Christ to Galilee before the death of John the Baptist, +the fact that the scourging of Christ by Pilate was intended to +restrain the Jews from demanding His death, and the visit of St. Peter +to the sepulchre. It has been thought that John xii. 3 is based upon +Luke vii. 38. The anointing of our Lord's _feet_ in both is certainly +remarkable. Sometimes John agrees with Matt. and Mark and not Luke, as +in recording the binding of Jesus, the crown of thorns, the purple +robe, and the custom of releasing a malefactor at the feast. Such +coincidences between John and the Synoptic Gospels are so slight and +disconnected that it seems doubtful whether the former uses any +material drawn from the latter. Nevertheless, the story contained in +the Synoptic Gospels, though not quoted, is presupposed. A good +instance is in John vi. 5, where St. John does not stop to explain that +the hour was late and the people therefore hungry. + + + +[1] _Apol._ i. 66. + +[2] The longest instance of a passage in Matt. and Luke being parallel +in these Gospels and without a parallel in Mark is the short passage, +Matt. iii. 7-10, Luke iii. 7-9. + +[3] This theory was first clearly expounded in 1818 by Gieseler, a +celebrated German Protestant Church historian. It has been more +popular in England than in Germany. + + + + +{33} + +CHAPTER III + +THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +St. Matthew is one of the least known of the Apostles. He was first +called Levi the son of Alphaeus, and was a "publican" or collector of +customs at Capernaum. At the call of Jesus, "he forsook all, and rose +up and followed Him." He then made a great feast, to which he invited +his old companions, no doubt that they too might come under the +influence of the Lord. After the appointment of the twelve Apostles, +he was put in the second of the three groups of Apostles. The New +Testament gives us no further information concerning him. An early +tradition narrates that the Apostles remained at Jerusalem until twelve +years after the Ascension, and certainly St. Paul does not seem to have +found any of the Apostles at Jerusalem when he was there in A.D. 56 +(Acts xxi. 17). According to Clement of Alexandria, A.D. 190, St. +Matthew led a rigorously ascetic life, such as is also recorded of St. +James. Nothing certain is known of his missionary labours. Parthia, +Ethiopia, and India were believed in the 4th and 5th centuries to have +been visited by St. Matthew. We learn from Clement of Alexandria that +he did not suffer martyrdom.[1] The fact that he disappears almost +completely from the realm of history is an additional reason for +believing the tradition which connects our first Gospel with his name. +A false tradition would have probably connected it with one of the more +favourite figures of early Christian story. + +{34} + +It is repeatedly asserted by the Fathers that St. Matthew wrote his +Gospel in _Hebrew_, which may either mean the sacred language of the +synagogues, or the popular language of Palestine which we now call +Aramaic. It should, however, be remembered that Papias, our earliest +authority, describes St. Matthew's composition by the word _Logia_, +which seems to point to a list of sacred sayings or "oracles" of our +Lord, rather than to a historical narrative. About A.D. 125, Papias +writes: "Matthew then composed the Logia in the Hebrew tongue, and +every one interpreted them as he was able." [2] About A.D. 185, St. +Irenaeus writes: "Matthew published a Gospel among the Hebrews in their +own dialect." [3] Origen and Eusebius make similar statements. St. +Jerome, in A.D. 392, writes: "Matthew, also called Levi, who from being +a publican became an apostle, first wrote a Gospel of Christ in Judaea, +and in Hebrew letters and words for the benefit of those of the +circumcision who believed. Who afterwards translated it into Greek is +not quite certain." [4] We naturally inquire what became of this +Hebrew Gospel? + +St. Jerome, in A.D. 392, believed that he had found it. He says that +it was still preserved at Caesarea, and that the Nazarenes, a Jewish +Christian sect of Palestine, allowed him to transcribe a copy of it at +Beroea (now Aleppo). In A.D. 398, he says that he had translated this +Gospel into Greek and Latin. It is known that it was used by the +Nazarenes and by the Ebionites, a Jewish sect which admitted that Jesus +was the Messiah, but denied that He was divine. Lastly, we find St. +Epiphanius, about the same time as St. Jerome, describing the Hebrew +"Gospel according to the Hebrews" as the Gospel written by St. Matthew. + +So at the end of the 4th century it was generally believed that the +Gospel used by the Nazarenes, and ordinarily known as "the Gospel +according to the Hebrews," was the original {35} Hebrew version of +Matt. The opinion arose from the two simple facts that it was known +that (1) St. Matthew originally wrote in Hebrew, and that (2) the +Nazarenes possessed _a_ Gospel in Hebrew. The conclusion was natural, +but it was false. Clement of Alexandria and Origen, who quote the +Gospel according to the Hebrews, do not represent it as the work of St. +Matthew. St. Jerome himself felt doubts. When he first discovered the +Hebrew Gospel, he felt the enthusiasm of a critic who has made an +important find. He believed that he had discovered the original +Gospel. He afterwards became more cautious. His later allusions to +the Gospel say that "it is called by most the original Matthew," [5] +and that it is "the Gospel according to the Apostles or, _as most +suppose_, according to Matthew." [6] In fact, this Hebrew Gospel, +which bore sometimes the title of "the Hebrews," sometimes "the +Apostles," sometimes "St. Matthew," was not the Hebrew original of our +present Matthew, nor could it have been written by an Apostle. The +fragments of it which now remain come from two versions. Both versions +show traces of a mixed Jewish and Gnostic heresy, and are plainly +apocryphal. The Holy Spirit is called the "mother" of Jesus, and +represented as transporting Him by a hair of His head to Mount Tabor, +and our Lord is represented as handing His grave-clothes to the servant +of the high-priest as soon as He was risen from the dead. The Gospel +certainly seems not only to be a forgery, but to betray a knowledge +both of our Greek Gospel according to St. Matthew and that according +to St. John.[7] We are obliged to conclude that it throws no light on +the origin of our Matt., and that the original Hebrew Matt. was lost at +an early date. + +On the other hand, it is certain that our Greek Matt. was {36} regarded +as authentic in the 2nd century, and it is plain that it records the +sayings of Christ with peculiar fulness. + +We must now return to what was stated in our previous chapter when +dealing with the Synoptic problem. We there saw that there is a great +mass of common material in all three Synoptic Gospels, and saw that +Mark was probably used as a groundwork for Matt. and Luke. We +therefore are led to the conclusion that the Gospel according to St. +Matthew is a combination of a Greek version of St. Matthew's original +Hebrew Logia--St. Matthew possibly wrote a Greek version of it as well +as the Hebrew--with the Gospel written by St. Mark. The combination +was apparently made either by the apostle himself, or by a disciple of +the apostle as the result of his directions. The Catholic Jewish +Christians, knowing that the Gospel contained St. Matthew's own Logia, +and that the rest of the Gospel was in accordance with his teaching as +delivered to them, called it "the Gospel according to Matthew." The +less orthodox Jewish Christians, as we have seen, invented a Gospel of +their own. + +A little help is given us by the internal evidence afforded by Matt. +The author appears to be writing for Greek-speaking converts from +Judaism, who need to have Hebrew words interpreted to them. Thus he +interprets "Immanuel" (i. 23), "Golgotha" (xxvii. 33), and the words of +our Lord on the cross (xxvii. 46). The numerous quotations from the +Old Testament have for a long time exercised the ingenuity of scholars, +who have believed that they enable us to determine how the Gospel was +written. On the whole these quotations suggest two conclusions: (1) +That the evangelist knew both Greek and Aramaic, (2) that the Gospel is +not a mere translation from the Aramaic or Hebrew. Roughly speaking, +the quotations which St. Matthew has in common with the other +Synoptists are from the Greek (Septuagint) version of the Old +Testament, while those which are peculiar to his {37} Gospel show that +the Hebrew has been consulted. Altogether the quotations number 45. +Of these there are 11 which are texts quoted by the evangelist himself +to illustrate the Messianic work of our Lord, and 9 of the 11 seem to +imply a knowledge of Hebrew. They are i. 23; ii. 15, iv. 15-16, viii. +17, xii. 18-21; xiii. 14-15; xiii. 35b; xxi. 5; xxvii. 9, 10. The +other 34 texts comprise the quotations which are made in the discourses +of our Lord, and they are sometimes called context-quotations or cyclic +quotations, as coming in the cycle of discourses. Perhaps 6 or 7 of +these 34 texts imply a knowledge of the Hebrew. But it is certain that +this class of quotations is far nearer to the Septuagint than the other +class. This conclusion remains good in spite of the fact that even the +Messianic quotations show the influence of the Septuagint, _e.g._ in i. +23 the writer uses the Septuagint, inasmuch as the Greek word +translated "virgin" _necessarily_ implies the unique condition of the +mother of our Lord, whereas the corresponding Hebrew word does not +_necessarily_ imply the same condition. Now, it is plain that if the +Gospel had been translated from the Hebrew, the context-quotations +would probably have been as near to the Hebrew as the quotations made +by the evangelist himself. This is not the case. The quotations in +Matt. show that the writer knew Hebrew but wrote in Greek, and based +part of his work on a Greek document. + +The fact that the Gospel was written in Greek does not prove that it +was not written in Palestine. It has been urged that it cannot have +been written in Palestine, because in ix. 26, 31 we find Palestine +called "_that_ land," but the phrase may refer only to a part of +Palestine, and therefore can hardly be urged as proving anything. It +is well known that educated persons in Palestine were acquainted with +Greek, although the majority spoke Aramaic. The two languages existed +side by side, very much as Welsh and English exist side by side in +North Wales. If the Gospel was not written in Palestine, it was +probably written in South Syria. + +{38} + +[Sidenote: Date.] + +The date must be shortly before A.D. 70. A favourite argument of +modern sceptics is that it contains a reference (xxii. 7) to the +burning of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70, and therefore must have +been written after that event. The argument rests upon the assumption +that our Lord could not have foreseen the event predicted--an +assumption which no Christian can accept. Even the favoured servants +of God in later ages have sometimes possessed the gift of prophecy. +Savonarola certainly foretold the fall of Rome, which took place in +A.D. 1527, and the prophecy was printed long before the event seemed +credible. Much more might the Son of God have foretold the fall of +that city which had so signally neglected His summons. Such +expressions as "the holy city," "the holy place," "the city of the +great King," suggest that when the Gospel was written it had not yet +become the home of "the abomination of desolation." And a far stronger +proof is afforded by the caution of the writer in xxiv. 15, "let him +that readeth understand." This is an editorial note inserted by the +evangelist, as by St. Mark, before our Lord's warning to flee from +Judaea. We learn from the early historians of the Church that the +Jewish Christians took warning from this statement to flee from Judaea +to Peraea before the Romans invested the holy city in A.D. 70. Now, it +would have been absurd for the evangelist to insert this note after the +Roman forces had begun the siege, as absurd as it would have been to +warn the Parisians to flee to England after Paris had been surrounded +by the Prussians in 1870, or to warn the English to leave Ladysmith in +1900 after it was surrounded by the Boers. Another and final proof +that the Gospel was written before A.D. 70 is given by the form in +which the evangelist has recorded our Lord's prophecy of the end of the +world (the so-called "eschatological discourse" in chs. xxiv.-xxv.). +The prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem and that of the last +coming of the Lord are placed side by side with no perceptible break. +Ch. xxiv. 29-31 refers to the {39} last coming of Christ, whereas the +verses which immediately precede it refer to the destruction of +Jerusalem, and so do vers. 32-34. It is impossible to resist the +conclusion that the evangelist believed that the judgment upon +Jerusalem would be immediately followed by the last judgment of the +world. He knows that our Lord foretold both, and both events loom +large in his mind. As a traveller in a valley sees before him two +great mountains which appear close to one another, though really +separated by many miles, so the evangelist sees these two events +together. After the fall of Jerusalem he would almost certainly have +made a definite break between the two subjects. + +[Sidenote: Literary Style.] + +We have already noticed in ch. ii. the fondness for numerical +arrangement, which is a marked characteristic of the style of this +Gospel. There are other proofs of the fact that this Gospel is more +Hebrew in tone than the others. In the other Gospels we find the +expression "the kingdom of God," but here we find it called "the +kingdom of heaven," an instance of the peculiarly Jewish reverence +which shrank from uttering the name of God. There are a few Aramaic +words found in this Gospel--_raca_ (v. 22), _gehenna_ (v. 22), _mammon_ +(vi. 24); and we should add the peculiar use of "righteousness" in vi. +1, where the word is used in the sense of "alms" in accordance with a +Jewish idiom. But the Greek phrases are often neat and clear-cut. +They sometimes seem to imply a play upon words, _e.g._ in vi. 16 and +xxiv. 30. This is another indication that the Gospel, as it stands, +was first written in Greek. The Greek is smoother than that of St. +Mark, though not so vivid. The evangelist writes with a joyous +interest in his work. The historical parts of it are full of beauty, +but he uses them mainly as a framework for the discourses of Jesus, +which he preserves with loving fidelity. + +In St. Matthew's Gospel the Old Testament is frequently quoted, that +the reader may see that Jesus is the realization of {40} the hopes of +the Jewish prophets. With set purpose the fair picture of the Servant +of Jehovah drawn by Isaiah is placed in the middle of the Gospel (xii. +18-21), that we may recognize it as the true portrait of Christ. Close +to it on either side the blasphemies of the Pharisees are skilfully +depicted as a foil to His divine beauty. We have already noticed the +bearing of these quotations on the origin of the Gospel, but we must +speak further of their bearing on the evangelist's view of the Old +Testament. His Messianic quotations are introduced by such phrases as +"that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet," or, "then +was fulfilled," etc. The tendency of modern scepticism to ridicule the +supernatural element in prophecy has caused some writers to depreciate +this method of quotation. And we find even a thoughtful Roman Catholic +writer speaking of it as "giving the impression that the supple and +living story of the life of Jesus is only a chain of debts which fall +due, and fulfilments which cannot be avoided." [8] In particular, it +has been alleged that the Greek word translated "that," or "in order +that," and prefixed to these quotations, implies this fatalistic +necessity. But this particular argument is mistaken. In later Greek +the use of the word was vaguer than it had been formerly.[9] It cannot +be narrowed down so as to prove that the evangelist thought that events +in the Old Testament only took place in order to be types which the Son +of God constrained Himself to fulfil. And, speaking more generally, we +may say that the evangelist shows an exquisite taste in his selection +of Messianic quotations. Convinced that Jesus sums up the history of +Israel, he does not hesitate to quote passages in the Old Testament, +whether they directly refer to the Messianic King, or only call up some +picture which has a counterpart in the life of Christ. + +{41} + +Thus the quotations in i. 23 and ii. 6 directly refer to one who is the +expected King, that in viii. 17 to one who is the ideal martyred +Servant, that in ii. 15 to Israel conceived of as the peculiar child of +God and so a type of Christ. In ii. 23 the evangelist finds in the +name of _Nazareth_ an echo of the ancient Messianic title _Netzer_ (a +branch). In ii. 18 we see that the tomb of Rachel near Bethlehem +reminds him of the mothers of Israel weeping over the death of their +children at the hands of the Babylonians; and as Jeremiah poetically +conceived of Rachel weeping with the mothers of his own day, so St. +Matthew conceives of her as finding her crowning sorrow in the massacre +of the Holy Innocents. + +Three other quotations deserve special notice: (1) That in xxvii. 9, +which the evangelist quotes from "Jeremiah." It is often said that +this is a mere mistake for Zechariah. But it is a quotation combined, +according to the Jewish method known as the Charaz, or "string of +pearls," from Zech. xi. 12 and Jer. xix. 1, 2, 6, the valley of the son +of Hinnom being regarded as typical of "the field of blood." (2) That +in xxvii. 34, from Ps. lxix. 21. It is said that the evangelist, in +order to make our Lord's action correspond with the words of the +Psalmist, makes Him drink "gall" instead of "myrrh" (Mark xv. 23), and +thus represents the soldiers as cruelly giving Him a nauseating draught +instead of a draught to dull His pain. The argument will hardly hold +good, for the Greek word translated "gall" can also signify a +stupefying drug, and thus Matt. and Mark agree. (3) That in xxi. 2-7, +where our Lord is represented as making use of both an ass and a colt +for His triumphal entry into Jerusalem. The other Synoptists mention a +colt only, and it is supposed that the evangelist altered his narrative +of the fact in order to make it agree with a too literal interpretation +of Zech. ix. 9. It must be admitted that the account in Mark and Luke +has an air of greater probability, and it has the support of the brief +account in John. But there is not a decisive contradiction between +Matt. and the other Gospels, and it is therefore unreasonable to pass +an unfavourable verdict on any of them. The story in Matt. cannot be +discredited as containing an apocryphal miracle, and the mere fact that +it is so independent of the other Gospels suggests that it is really +primitive. + + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The chief characteristic of this Gospel is the representation of Jesus +as _the Messiah_ in whom was fulfilled the {42} Law and the prophets. +It was probably placed first in the New Testament because this +Messianic doctrine is the point of union between the old covenant and +the new. St. Matthew's representation of the Messiah is the result of +very careful reflection, and it shows that the evangelist wrote in a +spirit which was philosophical and in one sense controversial. He is +philosophic because he is not a mere annalist. He groups incidents and +discourses together in a manner which brings out their significance as +illustrating the Messiahship of Jesus and the majestic forward movement +of the kingdom of God. He is in one sense controversial because he +wishes his picture of Christ to correct that false idea of the Messiah +and His reign which was ruining the Jewish people. The best kind of +controversy is that which is intent upon explaining the truth rather +than eager to expose and ridicule what is false. So the evangelist +presents to his readers Jesus as the Lord's Anointed with inspired +powers of persuasion. The manner in which he records our Lord's urgent +warnings against going after false Jewish Messiahs at the time when the +destruction of Jerusalem should draw near, is a witness to the depth of +his convictions. Like the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who +wrote shortly before him, he cannot endure the thought of any waverers +or deserters. The Jewish Christian must be loyal to Jesus, even +although the invasion of the holy land by Gentiles may sorely tempt him +to throw in his lot with his patriotic but unbelieving kinsmen. + +The very first verse suggests the nature of the Gospel--"The book of +the generation" (_i.e._ the genealogical tree) "of Jesus Christ, the +son of David, the son of Abraham." This "book" includes the first 17 +verses of the Gospel. While St. Luke traces the genealogy of our Lord +back to Adam, the head of the human race, St. Matthew desires to show +that our Lord, _as the son of Abraham_, is the child of promise in whom +all the families of the earth shall be blessed, and, _as the son of +David_, {43} is heir to the kingdom of spiritual Israel. The genealogy +is partly based on that of the Greek version of 1 Chron. i.-iii., and +is intended to teach certain special truths. It is arranged so as to +be a kind of summary of the history of the people of God, each group of +14 names ending with a crisis. Jesus is the flower and fulfilment of +that history. It furnishes a reply to Jewish critics. They would say +that Jesus could not be Messiah unless Joseph, his supposed father, was +descended from David. St. Matthew shows that St. Joseph was of Davidic +descent. Again, the Jews would say that in any case the Messiah would +not be likely to be connected with a humble carpenter and his folk. +The evangelist's reply is that David himself was descended from +comparatively undistinguished men and from women who were despised. +Thus St. Matthew meets both points raised by the Jews. + +Of recent years another criticism has been passed on this pedigree of +our Lord. A copy of the Old Syriac version of the Gospels, discovered +at Sinai and published in 1894, says that Joseph begat Jesus, and in +this way denies that Jesus was born of a pure virgin. Some writers who +wish to believe that our Lord was brought into the world in the same +manner as ourselves, have said that this Syriac version represents what +was actually the fact. There is, however, no reason for believing +anything of the kind. There is no ground for the notion that the +Syriac genealogy was taken from a primitive Jewish register. It is +merely a translation of the Greek, probably from some Western Greek +manuscript which had "Joseph begat Jesus." When the evangelist wrote +the genealogy, he can only have meant that Joseph was by Jewish law +regarded as the father of Jesus; for his whole narrative of our Lord's +infancy assumes that He was born of a virgin mother. The truth that +our Lord was born miraculously is asserted by St. Luke as well as by +St. Matthew. It is assumed by St. Paul, when he argues that the second +Adam was free from the taint of sin which affected the rest of the +first Adam's descendants. It {44} was also cherished from the earliest +times in every part of the Christian world where the teaching of the +apostles was retained, and was only denied by a few heretics who had +openly rejected the teaching of the New Testament on other subjects. + +Connected with the representation of Jesus as the Messiah is the record +of His continual teaching about the "kingdom of heaven." The "kingdom +of heaven" or "kingdom of God" signifies the reign and influence of +God. The meaning of it is best expressed by the words in the Lord's +Prayer: "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so on +earth" (Matt. vi. 10). The second petition explains the first. The +kingdom comes in proportion as the righteous will of our loving Father +is done among men. The kingdom therefore includes the influence of God +in the heart of the believer, or in great movements in the world, or in +the organization and growth of His _Church_ (xvi. 18; xviii. 17). The +kingdom has both a present and a future aspect. In xii. 28 our Lord +says to His hearers that it "is come upon you," and in xxi. 31 He +speaks of people who were entering into it at the time. But the night +before He died He spoke of it as still future (xxvi. 29). It is plain +that He taught that it was already present, though its consummation is +yet to come. The kingdom is spiritual, "not of this world," it is +universal, for though the Jews were "the sons of the kingdom" (viii. +12) by privilege, it is free to others. The worst sinner might come in +(xxi. 31), if he came with repentance, humility, and purity of heart. +The teaching of Christ with regard to the kingdom was based upon an +idea of God's personal rule, which runs through nearly all the Old +Testament, beginning with the Books of Samuel and revealing itself in +Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Daniel. But our Lord's teaching is original and +distinctive. And it is more distant from the popular Jewish idea of a +Hebrew counterpart to the Roman empire than the east is distant from +the west. + +Nowhere else is our Lord shown to have given such an unmistakable +sanction to the Law. It is here only that we {45} read, "Think not +that I came to destroy the Law, or the prophets: I came not to destroy, +but to fulfil" (v. 17).[10] Here, too, we find an allusion to the +observance of the sabbath _after_ the Ascension (xxiv. 20), a temporary +prohibition of preaching to the Gentiles and Samaritans (x. 5), and the +statement of our Lord, "I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the +house of Israel" (xv. 24). Most remarkable of all is the direction to +obey the scribes and Pharisees (xxiii. 3). On the other hand, there is +a rigorous denunciation of the rabbinical additions to the Jewish Law. +Mercy is preferable to sacrifice (xii. 7), the Son of man is Lord of +the sabbath (xii. 8), moral defilement does not come from a failure to +observe ceremonial (xv. 11), the kingdom will be transferred to a more +faithful nation (xxi. 43), even the strangers from the east and the +west (viii. 11), the Gospel will be for all people (xxiv. 14), and the +scribes and Pharisees are specially denounced (xxiii. 13). + +It has been said that there is an absolute opposition between these two +classes of sayings; that either Jesus contradicted Himself, or the +evangelist drew from one source which was of a Judaizing character, and +from another source which taught St. Paul's principle of justification +by faith _versus_ justification by the Law. But the same divine +paradox of truth which we find in Matt. runs through most of the New +Testament, and is found plainly in St. Paul. In the Epistle where he +exposes the failure of contemporary Judaism most remorselessly, he +asserts that "we establish the Law." The true inner meaning of the +divine revelation granted in the Old Testament _is_ fulfilled in +Christ. Not only so, but Christ Himself was "the servant of the +circumcision," living "under the Law." The limits which He imposed +upon His own ministry (xv. 24) and that of His apostles (x. 5) were +entirely fitting until Christ at His resurrection laid aside all that +was peculiarly Jewish with its limits and humiliations. + +{46} + +ANALYSIS[11] + +The infancy of our Lord: i. 1-ii. 23.--Genealogy from Abraham, +announcement to Joseph, birth, visit of Magi, flight into Egypt, +massacre of innocents, settlement at Nazareth. + + +A. + +Winter A.D. 26 till after Pentecost 27. + +The preparation for the ministry: iii. 1-iv. 11.-- + +The ministry of John the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus, the +threefold temptation. + + +B. + +Pentecost A.D. 27 till before Passover 28. + +The preaching of the kingdom of God by Jesus in Galilee: iv. 12-xiii. +58.--The call of the four fishermen, Jesus preaches and heals (iv.). +The Sermon on the Mount--Jesus fulfils the law, the deeper teaching +concerning the commandments (v.). False and true almsgiving, prayer +and fasting, worldliness, trust in God (vi.). Censoriousness, +discrimination in teaching, encouragements to prayer, false prophets, +the two houses (vii.). The ministry at Capernaum and by the lake is +illustrated by the record of many works of _Messianic healing power_ +(viii.-ix.), the apostles are chosen and receive a charge (x.), and the +ministry is illustrated by words and parables of _Messianic wisdom_ +(xi.-xiii.). We find a growing hostility on the part of the scribes +and Pharisees (ix. 11; ix. 34; xii. 2, xii. 14; xii. 24). Jesus +returns to Nazareth (xiii. 53-58). + +[Perplexity of Herod and death of John the Baptist, xiv. 1-12.] + +{47} + +C. + +Passover A.D. 28 till before Tabernacles 28. + +Climax of missionary work in Galilee: xiv. 13-xviii. 35.--Christ feeds +the 5000, walks on the sea, heals the sick in Gennesaret (xiv.). +Christ now labours chiefly in the dominions of Herod Philip, the +journeys are more plainly marked in Mark. Teaching about defilement, +the Canaanite woman, Christ feeds the 4000 (xv.). + +Leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, Peter's confession of Christ, +Christ's first prediction of His death (xvi.). Transfiguration, +lunatic boy cured, second prediction of death, the shekel in the fish's +mouth (xvii.). Treatment of children, Christ saving lost sheep, +forgiveness (xviii.). + + +D. + +Tabernacles, September A.D. 28 until early 29. + +The ministry in Peraea; xix. i-xx. 34.--Christ forbids divorce, He +blesses children, the rich young man, the difficulties of the rich +(xix.). Parable of the labourers, Christ's third prediction of His +death, the request of the mother of Zebedee's children, the two blind +men of Jericho (xx.). + + +E. + +Passover A.D. 29. + +Last days at Jerusalem, and afterwards: xxi. 1-xxviii. 20.--Entry into +Jerusalem, the cleansing of the temple, the withered fig tree, Christ +challenged, parable of the vineyard (xxi.). The marriage feast, three +questions to entrap Christ, His question (xxii.). On not seeking chief +places, denunciation of scribes and Pharisees, lament over Jerusalem +(xxiii.). + +Predictions of destruction of temple, siege of Jerusalem, the second +coming (xxiv.), three discourses on the judgment (xxv.). + +{48} + +The Council discuss how they may arrest Jesus, the woman with the +ointment, Judas' bargain, the Passover, Gethsemane, the betrayal, the +trial before Caiaphas, Peter's denial (xxvi.). Jesus delivered to +Pilate, Judas' suicide, Jesus tried by Pilate, Jesus and Barabbas, the +mockery, crucifixion, burial by Joseph of Arimathaea, guard granted by +Pilate (xxvii.). + +The women at the sepulchre, the angel, Jesus meets them, the guard +bribed, Jesus meets the eleven in Galilee, His commission to baptize +and teach (xxviii.). + + +_Note on the Date of Matthew._--Irenaeus, apparently following Papias, +says, "Matthew published a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their +own dialect, Peter and Paul preaching the Gospel at Rome" (_Adv. Haer._ +iii. 1). This would fix the date of the Hebrew Matt. about A.D. 63, if +it was the intention of Irenaeus to give chronological information in +this sentence. But the context makes it more probable that this is not +the case, and that he simply wished to make it clear that the teaching +of the four chief apostles, Peter and Paul, Matthew and John, has come +down to us in writing. That of Matthew and John survives in their +Gospels, that of Peter and Paul, though they wrote no Gospels, survives +in Mark and Luke. Eusebius, in his _Chronicle_ dates the composition +in A.D. 41. This he probably does in order to make it fit with the +supposed departure of the apostles from Jerusalem after twelve years +from the Crucifixion. His statement is very improbable. At any rate +our Greek Matt. must have been written after Mark. The frequent +quotations from it in primitive literature from the Epistle of Barnabas +and the _Didache_ onwards, bear witness both to its early date and its +high authority. Internal evidence points to the same conclusion. In +addition to what is said above (p. 38), we may note some passages +likely to perplex the reader. Such are ii. 23, "the ass _and the +colt_" in xxi. 7, the "three days and _three nights_ in the belly of +the whale" mentioned as typical of Christ's rest in the tomb (xii. 40), +the absence of all reference to the _burning_ of the temple in xxiv. 2, +the reference to Zachariah the son of Barachiah (xxiii. 35; contrast 2 +Chron. xxiv. 20). Such verses would probably have been altered if the +Gospel had not gained an authoritative position at a very early date. + + + +[1] Strom. iv. 9. + +[2] Eusebius, _H. E._ iii. 39. + +[3] _Adv. Haer._ iii. 1. + +[4] _De Vir, Ill._ 3. + +[5] _In Matt._ xii. 13. + +[6] _Con. Pelag._ iii. 1. + +[7] So Prof. Armitage Robinson, _Expositor_, March, 1897. + +[8] Batiffol, _Six Lecons sur les Evangiles_, p. 48. + +[9] Burton, _Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of New Testament Greek_, +pp. 92-95. + +[10] In this Gospel only is sin called "lawlessness." + +[11] These analyses of the Gospels are not complete, but are arranged +with the hope that the readers, by studying all the four, may gain a +clearer conception of the life of our Lord. + + + + +{49} + +CHAPTER IV + +THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +John Mark was the son of a Mary who was an influential member of the +Church at Jerusalem, as the Church met in her house (Acts xii. 12). He +was a cousin of Barnabas (Col. iv. 10), who had been a man of some +property. It has been thought that Mark was the "young man" referred +to in the account given by this Gospel of the arrest of Jesus in the +garden. To others the incident would probably have appeared +insignificant. He lived at Jerusalem during the famine in A.D. 45, and +Barnabas took him to Antioch on returning thither from Jerusalem at +that time. He accompanied St. Paul and St. Barnabas on St. Paul's +first missionary journey, and laboured with them at Salamis in Cyprus. +It is possible that Acts xiii. 5 means that John Mark had been a +"minister" of the synagogue at Salamis. At any rate, the Greek can be +so interpreted. After crossing from Paphos to the mainland of Asia +Minor, the missionaries arrived at Perga. Here St. Paul made the great +resolve to extend the gospel beyond the Taurus mountains. St. Mark +determined to leave him. Perhaps he was not prepared for so +magnificent an undertaking as a "work" which included the conversion of +the Gentiles (Acts xiv. 27), or for the substitution of the leadership +of St. Paul for that of St. Barnabas. + +St. Mark returned to Jerusalem, and was again at Antioch about the time +of St. Paul's rebuke of St. Peter. Possibly St. Mark followed the +example of most of the Jewish Christians at Antioch in inducing St. +Peter and St. Barnabas to withdraw from {50} fellowship with the +Gentile converts. Whether he did so or not, it is certain that St. +Paul refused to take St. Mark with him on his second missionary +journey, A.D. 49. St. Barnabas then went home to Cyprus with St. Mark. +We hear no more of the future evangelist until A.D. 60, when we find +that he is with St. Paul in Rome, and completely reconciled to him. He +is the apostle's "fellow-worker" and his "comfort" (Col. iv. 11; +Philem. 24). About four years later, St. Paul, in writing shortly +before his martyrdom to Timothy, requests him to come to Rome by the +shortest route, and to take up Mark on the way, "for he is useful to me +for ministering" (2 Tim. iv. 11). The last notice that we have of St. +Mark in the New Testament illustrates how complete a harmony had been +effected between the expansive theology of St. Paul and the once +cramped policy of St. Peter and St. Mark. In his First Epistle St. +Peter refers to "Mark, my son," and his words make it certain that the +two friends were then together at Babylon, _i.e._ Rome. + +In the 4th century it was widely believed that St. Mark was the founder +of Christianity in Alexandria, and the first bishop of the see which +was afterwards ruled by St. Athanasius and St. Cyril. It is important +to notice that this tradition appears first in Eusebius, and is not +mentioned in the extant works of Clement and Origen, the great +luminaries of the early Alexandrian Church. But it seems to be too +well supported by the great writers of the 4th century for us to regard +it as a fabrication. If the tale is true, St. Mark must have brought +Christianity to Alexandria either after the death of St. Peter about +A.D. 65, or about A.D. 55, in the interval between his separation from +St. Paul and his stay with him at Rome. + +The early Fathers, so far as their testimony remains, are unanimous in +ascribing this Gospel to St. Mark, and they are equally unanimous in +tracing the work of St. Mark to the influence of St. Peter. Justin +Martyr speaks of the "Memoirs of Peter" when referring to a statement +which we find in {51} Mark iii. 17. Papias closely associates the two +saints in his account of the Gospel, and gives us his information on +the authority of John the Presbyter, who was a disciple of the Lord. +Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen say practically +the same thing. This evidence is overwhelming, and it is +uncontradicted by any early authority. The statement of Papias is as +follows: "And the elder said this also: Mark, having become the +interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately everything that he +remembered of the things that were either said or done by Christ; but, +however, not in order. For neither did he hear the Lord, nor did he +follow Him; but afterwards, as I said, he attended Peter, who adapted +his instructions to the needs of his hearers, but had no design of +giving a connected account of the Lord's words. So then Mark committed +no error in thus writing down certain things as he remembered them; for +he made it his special care not to omit anything that he heard, or to +set down any false statement therein." [1] By calling St. Mark an +_interpreter_, Papias perhaps means that he translated statements made +in Aramaic into Greek, which was the language most used by the +Christians of Rome until the 3rd century after Christ. By saying that +St. Mark wrote _not in order_, Papias probably means that the Gospel is +not a systematic history of all our Lord's ministry, or an orderly +arrangement of subjects placed together with a view to instruction like +those in Matthew. So far as we are able to test them, the facts are +related chronologically in the great majority of cases. + +Papias does not tell us when St. Mark wrote his Gospel. Irenaeus +writes: "Matthew also published a written Gospel among the Hebrews in +their own dialect, Peter and Paul preaching the Gospel at Rome, and +laying the foundations of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the +disciple and interpreter of Peter, delivered to us in writing the +things that had been preached by Peter." [2] {52} St. Peter and St. +Paul probably died not later than A.D. 65. Eusebius quotes from +Clement of Alexandria "that Peter having publicly preached the word at +Rome, and having spoken the Gospel by the Spirit, many present exhorted +Mark to write the things which had been spoken, since he had long +accompanied Peter, and remembered what he had said; and that when he +had composed the Gospel, he delivered it to them who had asked it of +him, which when Peter knew, he neither forbad nor encouraged it." [3] +Clement is here relying upon "the presbyters of old," and the antiquity +of the tradition is proved by the fact that it does not claim St. +Peter's direct sanction for the Gospel. Both Irenaeus and Clement were +probably born about A.D. 130, or earlier. Irenaeus was acquainted with +Rome, where St. Peter taught, while Clement lived at Alexandria, where +St. Mark was probably bishop. Moreover, Clement's office of +head-catechist at Alexandria had been previously held by at least three +predecessors, who must have handed down traditions of first-rate value. +The testimony of Clement with regard to St. Mark is not inconsistent +with that of Irenaeus. The Gospel was probably written while St. Peter +was alive, and when he was dead, was given to the Church. Possibly it +underwent some revision before publication. Now, as St. Peter +evidently had not taught in Rome when St. Paul wrote the Epistle to the +Romans in A.D. 56, and as St. Mark was in Rome when he wrote the +Epistle to the Colossians in A.D. 60, we may reasonably date this +Gospel about A.D. 62. It seems to be later than Colossians, as there +is no indication of St. Peter's being in Rome when that Epistle was +written. + +[Sidenote: Literary Style.] + +The internal evidence afforded by the Gospel strongly corroborates the +belief that it was based upon the discourses of one who had been with +our Lord during His ministry. It is marked by a vivid and dramatic +realism. There is a fondness for rapid transitions from one scene to +another, as may be illustrated by the {53} fact that the Greek word for +"immediately" occurs no less than forty-one times. In i. 27 the actual +form of an original dialogue is shown in the abrupt and broken +sentences employed. St. Mark uses different tenses of the Greek +verb--present, perfect, imperfect, and aorist--with singular freedom, +not because he did not know Greek well enough to write with more +regularity, but because he is carried away by his interest in the facts +which he relates. The student will find good instances of this +interchange of tenses in v. 15 ff.; vi. 14 ff.; viii. 35; ix. 34 ff. +St. Mark's language shows that he was well acquainted with the Greek +version of the Old Testament, which has exercised considerable +influence on his style. + +There are many picturesque phrases, such as "the heavens rent" (i. 10) +and "devour houses" (xii. 40). There are little redundancies in which +the author repeats his thoughts with a fresh shade of meaning, as "at +even, when the sun did set" (i. 32); "he looked steadfastly, and was +restored, and saw all things clearly" (viii. 25); "all that she had, +even all her living" (xii. 44). There is a frequent use of popular +diminutives, such as words for "little boat," "little daughter," +"little dog." This is probably due to provincial Custom, and may be +compared with the fondness shown in some parts of Scotland for words +such as "boatie," "lassie" or "lassock," etc. There are several +Hebraisms. Some of the Greek words are frankly plebeian, such as a +foreigner would pick up without realizing that they were inelegant. +There are also some Aramaic words and phrases which the writer inserts +with a true artistic sense and then interprets--_Boanerges_ (iii. 17), +_Talitha cumi_ (v. 41), _Corban_ (vii. 11), _Ephphatha_ (vii. 34), +_Abba_ (xiv. 36), and _Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani_[4] (xv. 34). The +Greek also contains numerous grammatical irregularities which betray +the hand of a foreigner, {54} as in ii. 26; iv. 22; vi. 52; vii. 4, 19; +ix. 18, xi.32; xiii. 34. The use of participles is clumsy, especially +in the account of the woman with the issue of blood (v. 25 ff.). +Finally, there are more Latin words and idioms than in any of the other +Gospels. Latin idioms may be seen in v. 23 and xv. 15, and instances +of Latin words are _speculator_ (vi. 27), _centurion_ (xv. 39), +_sextarius_ (vii. 4), _denarius_ (vi. 37), _quadrans_ (xii. 42). In +xii. 42, xv. 16, Greek words are explained in Latin. + +These facts corroborate the tradition that the writer was a Palestinian +who stayed in Rome, and knew personally some one who had exceptional +knowledge of our Lord's actual words. + +The narrative is particularly fresh, and abounds in vivid details such +as would have been likely to linger in St. Peter's memory. The green +grass whereon the crowds sat, and the appearance of flower-beds which +they presented in their gay costume (vi. 39, 40); the stern of the +boat, and the pillow whereon our Lord slept (iv. 38); the Gerasene +demoniac cutting himself with stones (v. 5); the woman who was a +Syro-Phoenician but spoke Greek (vii. 26); Jesus taking children in His +arms (ix. 36; x. 16); the street where the colt was tied (xi. 4); the +two occasions on which the cock crew (xiv. 68, 72); and St. Peter +warming himself in the light of the fire (xiv. 54);--such are some of +the instances of the writer's fidelity in recording the impressions of +his teacher. This Gospel also abounds in proper names, both of places +and persons. Among the latter may be mentioned the name of Bartimaeus, +the blind beggar (x. 46); the names of Alexander and Rufus, the sons of +Simon of Cyrene (xv. 21); Salome, the mother of Zebedee's children (xv. +40); and Boanerges, their surname (iii. 17). Equally remarkable is the +manner in which the emotions of our Lord and others are recorded. We +notice the indignation and grief which He felt in the synagogue (iii. +5); His compassion for the unshepherded people (vi. 34); His deep sigh +at the sceptical demand for a sign from heaven (viii. 12), {55} His +displeasure at the disciples for keeping the children from Him (x. 14); +His undisguised love for the rich young man who yet lacked one thing +(x. 21); His tragic walk in front of the apostles (x. 32); the +intensity of feeling with which He was driven into the wilderness (i. +12), and overturned the tables and seats in the temple (xi. 15). St. +Mark always seems to be painting our Lord from the life. + +In spite of the fact that St. Mark shows that he knew well how to +compress the material which was at his disposal, there is hardly a +story which he narrates in common with the other synoptists without +some special feature. We may notice the imploring words of the father +of the lunatic boy (ix. 2), the spoken blessing on little children (x. +16), the view of the temple (xiii. 3), and Pilate's question of the +centurion (xv. 44). None of these things are narrated in the other +Gospels. In ix. 2-13 we have the story of the Transfiguration, with +the statement that the garments of our Lord "became glistering, +exceeding white; _so as no fuller on earth can whiten them_." We are +also told that St. Peter then addressed our Lord as "Rabbi," and that +"he wist not what to answer." The same significant phrase, "they wist +not what to answer Him," occurs in St. Mark's account of the agony in +the garden (xiv. 40). These are only a few instances out of many which +show St. Mark's originality, and they are just such personal +reminiscences as we might expect St. Peter to retain. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +Just as the style is realistic and the narrative circumstantial, so the +contents are practical. "He went about doing good" is the impression +which this Gospel gives us of our Lord. The teaching which He +announced to the people is made less prominent than in Matt. If we +count even the shortest similitudes as parables, we find only nine +parables in Mark. Equally remarkable is the absence of quotations made +by the writer. He records numerous references made by our Lord to the +Old Testament, though fewer than Matt. or Luke, but the only quotations +made by St. Mark {56} himself are in i. 2, 3 (Mal. iii. 1; Isa. xl. 3) +and xv. 28 (Isa. liii. 12). On the other hand, we find eighteen +miracles, only two less than in the much longer Gospel of St. Matthew. +The theological tone of Mark may be described as neutral. There is no +trace of the innocent preferences which Matt. and Luke show toward this +or that aspect of the teaching of Jesus. In Mark we do not find so +strong an approval of the more permanent parts of the Jewish Law, or so +strong a denunciation of the Pharisees who exalted the external +adjuncts of the Law, as we find in Matt. Nor do we find such parables +as the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal Son, by which Luke lays emphasis +upon the truth that the Jews have no monopoly of holiness, and that the +outcast is welcome to the gospel. Mark is less Jewish than Matt., less +Gentile and Pauline than Luke. It used to be said that this was the +result of "trimming," and intended to bridge over the differences +between two different schools of theology. But the charge has broken +down. St. Mark, though not anti-Jewish, regards Christ as above the +law of the sabbath (ii. 28), and teaches the necessity of new external +religious forms (ii. 22). Though he is not Jewish, and though he omits +the statement made in Matt. xv. 24, a statement indicating that the +Jews had the first right to be taught by the Messiah, he does record, +like Matt., the still harder statement of the same fact made to the +Syro-Phoenician woman (vii. 27). The truth is that St. Mark is neutral +simply in the sense that he faithfully records a story which was +moulded before doctrinal conflicts had taken place between Christian +believers. The doctrine of St. Mark is archaic. + +One of the most distinctive features of this Gospel is the decisive +clearness with which it shows how Jesus trained and educated His +disciples. The simplicity with which St. Mark describes the faults of +the friends of our Lord is as remarkable as the vigour with which the +gestures and feelings of our Lord are portrayed. St. Mark relates how +that early in the ministry of Jesus, His friends (iii. 21) said that He +was mad, and that "His {57} mother and His brethren" (iii. 31) sought +to bring Him back. The discipline and education of the disciples are +recorded with a plain revelation of their mistakes and their spiritual +dulness. When they had settled in Capernaum Christ shows them that He +must find a wider sphere of work (i. 38); He meets with a significant +silence their obtrusive remonstrance when the woman with the issue of +blood caused Him to ask, "Who touched My clothes?" (v. 30, 31); He +tells them with affectionate care "to rest a while," when they had been +too busy even to eat (vi. 31); He rebukes them gravely when they put a +childish interpretation upon His command to beware of the leaven of the +Pharisees and of Herod, the formalists and the Erastian (viii. 17); +they are unintelligent and uninquiring when He prophesies His death and +resurrection (ix. 32), and after this prophecy they actually dispute +about their own precedence (ix. 34); when Christ goes boldly forward to +Jerusalem, they follow with fear and hesitation (x. 32); He rebukes the +niggardly criticism of those who were indignant with the "waste" of the +perfume poured upon His head (xiv. 6); and in Gethsemane "they all left +Him and fled" (xiv. 50). + +Among these disciples, St. Peter is prominent, and though his +confession of the Messiahship of Jesus is recorded, a confession which +is necessarily central in the Gospel (viii. 29), St. Mark neither +records that our Lord designed him as the rock, nor his commission to +feed the Lord's lambs and sheep. On the other hand, St. Mark inserts +things which were often of a nature to humble St. Peter. He records +the crushing reprimand which he received when he criticized the Lord's +mission (viii. 33); it was Peter's fanciful plan to erect three +tabernacles on the scene of the Transfiguration (ix. 5), it was Peter +who informed the Lord that the fig tree had withered after His curse +(xi. 21), it was Peter whom Christ awoke in Gethsemane by uttering his +name "Simon" (xiv. 37); and Peter's denial appears doubly guilty in +this Gospel, inasmuch as he did not repent until the cock crew _twice_ +(xiv. 68, 72). At the {58} beginning (iii. 16) and at the end (xvi. 7) +Peter occupies a special position. But the conduct of Peter is +narrated in a fashion which renders the notion of fiction quite +impossible. The Gospel cannot have been written by a hero-worshipper +wishing to glorify a saint of old, but must surely have been written by +"the interpreter of Peter." + +In comparing the contents of Mark with those of Matt. and Luke, we are +struck by the absence of many of our Lord's discourses. Yet we find an +eschatological discourse about the second coming in xiii., though much +shorter than those in Matt. xxiv. and xxv. The genuineness of Mark +xiii. has been assailed, and it has been described as an apocalyptic +"fly-sheet," which was somehow inserted in the Gospel. There is no +reason for believing this theory to be true. The chapter was in Mark +when it was incorporated into Matthew, and its teaching agrees with +that attributed to our Lord in the collections of Logia. We have also +the beginning of the charge given to the apostles (vi. 7-11; cf. Matt. +x.). There are a few echoes of the Sermon on the Mount, and only a +specimen of the final denunciation of the Pharisees, which occupies a +whole chapter in Matt. (Mark xii. 38-40, cf. Matt. xxiii.). We find a +few statements made by our Lord which are peculiar to this Gospel: +_e.g._--"the sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath" +(ii. 27), "foolishness" coming from the heart (vii. 22); "every +sacrifice shall be salted with salt" (ix. 49); "Father, all things are +possible unto Thee," in the touching filial appeal during the agony +(xiv. 36). Here alone have we the tiny parable about the growth of the +blade of corn (iv. 26), and that of the porter commanded to watch until +the master's return (xiii. 34). There are two miracles peculiar to +Mark, the cure of the deaf-mute (vii. 32) and of the blind man at +Bethsaida (viii. 22). Among the miracles recorded in Mark, the cures +of demoniacs are prominent. This is in peculiar contrast with John, +where we find no cure of demoniacs recorded. + +In marked contrast to St. Luke, St. Mark appears indifferent {59} to +the political conditions of the countries where our Lord worked. Thus +Herod Antipas is simply called "the king" (vi. 14), whereas both in +Matt. and Luke he is correctly called by the title of "tetrarch," which +only implies governorship of a portion of a country. Yet the narrative +of St. Mark shows that he was quite aware of facts which can only be +explained by the political conditions which he does not describe. He +knows that Tyre and Sidon, Caesarea Philippi and Bethsaida, which were +not under Herod Antipas, were more safe for our Lord than Capernaum. +And he knows that in travelling to Jerusalem He was in greater danger +than while He remained in Galilee, and was meeting His doom at the +sentence of Gentile officials. Although St. Mark is silent as to the +names of many of the places which our Lord visited, he gives us +numerous indications of the various scenes of our Lord's labours. We +are thus able to fix the geographical surroundings of nearly all the +more important events, and construct an intelligible plan of our Lord's +ministry. We can see how He made the shores of the lake of Gennesaret +the focus of His mission, and went on evangelistic journeys from +Capernaum into Galilee. The time of these journeys was largely +determined by circumstances, such as the unregulated enthusiasm of the +mob, the spite of the scribes at Capernaum, or the anger of Herod's +court at Tiberias. Towards the end of the ministry in Galilee our Lord +devoted Himself to the deeper instruction of His Apostles and their +initiation into the mystery of His death (vii. 24 ff.; viii. 27 ff.). +For such teaching the mountain slopes of Lebanon and Hermon afforded +scenes of perfect calm and beauty. + + +{60} + +ANALYSIS + +A. + +Winter A.D. 26 till after Pentecost 27. + +The preparation for the ministry; i. 1-13.--The mission of John the +Baptist and the baptism of Jesus, the temptation. + + +B. + +Pentecost A.D. 27 till before Passover 28. + +The ministry of Jesus in Galilee, journeys from Capernaum; i. 14-vi. +13.--The call of the four fishermen, Jesus preaches and heals at +Capernaum (i. 14-34). + +_First missionary journey, in towns of Galilee_: leper cleansed, return +to Capernaum (i. 38-ii. 1). Work in Capernaum, five grounds of offence +against Jesus, Jesus followed by crowds of hearers on the sea-shore +(ii. 2-iii. 12). Appointment of the twelve, Christ accused of alliance +with Satan, the unpardonable sin, Christ's relation to His mother and +brethren. He begins to teach in parables about the kingdom (iii. +13-iv. 34). + +_Second missionary journey, on the eastern shore of the lake of +Gennesaret_: the storm calmed, Gerasene demoniac and swine (iv. 35-v. +20). Return to the western shore, the cure of the woman who touched +His garment, Jairus' daughter raised (v. 21-43). + +_Third missionary journey, in the western highlands_, including +Nazareth, where He is rejected, and adjacent villages, the mission of +the twelve (vi. 1-13). + +[Perplexity of Herod and death of John the Baptist, vi. 14-29.] + +{61} + +C. + +Passover A.D. 28 till before Tabernacles 28. + +Climax of missionary work in Galilee, journeys from Capernaum; vi. +30-ix. 50.--Christ in a desert place feeds the 5000, visits Bethsaida, +walks on the sea, returns to Gennesaret, heals many (vi. 30-56). +Teaching about defilement (vii. 1-23). + +_Fourth missionary journey, to the north-west into Phoenicia_: the +Syro-Phoenician woman, departure from Tyre and Sidon, approach to the +sea of Galilee through Decapolis, cure of the deaf-mute (vii. 24-37). +Christ feeds the 4000 (viii. 1-9) Christ takes ship to Dalmanutha, +Pharisees seek a sign, Jesus takes ship to the other side, the leaven +of the Pharisees and of Herod, cure of a blind man at Bethsaida (viii. +10-26). + +_Fifth journey, to towns of Caesarea Philippi, special teaching of the +select few_: Peter's confession of Christ, Christ's first prediction of +His death (viii. 27-ix. 1). Transfiguration, lunatic boy cured, +journey through Galilee, second prediction of death, arrival at +Capernaum, the value of a child's example, the danger of causing one to +stumble (ix. 2-50). + + +D. + +Tabernacles, September A.D. 28 until early 29. + +Journey to Jerusalem through Peraea: x.--Christ forbids divorce, +blesses children, the rich young man, the difficulties of the rich, +Christ's third prediction of His death, the request of Zebedee's sons, +Christ's announcement of His mission to serve, blind Bartimaeus cured +at Jericho. + + +{62} + +E. + +Passover A.D. 29. + +Last days at Jerusalem, and afterwards; xi. 1-xvi. 20.--Entry into +Jerusalem, the withered fig-tree, cleansing of the temple, the duty of +forgiveness, Christ challenged (xi.). The parable of the vineyard, +three questions to entrap Christ, His question, denunciation of +scribes, the widow's mites (xii.). + +Predictions of destruction of temple, of woes and of the second coming +(xiii.). + +The Council discuss how they may arrest Jesus, the woman with the +ointment, Judas' bargain, the Passover, Gethsemane, the betrayal, the +trial before the Council, Peter's denial (xiv.). Jesus delivered to +Pilate, trial, Jesus and Barabbas, the mockery, crucifixion, burial by +Joseph of Arimathaea (xv.). + +The women at the sepulchre, the angel (xvi. 1-8). + +Appendix with summary of appearances of the Lord (xvi. 9-20). + + +_Note on the Concluding Section._--The origin of xvi. 9-20 is one of +the most difficult of questions, (a) The section is not found in the +two famous Greek MSS., the Vatican and the Sinaitic, nor is it found in +the very ancient Sinaitic Syriac MS. It is also lacking in one Latin +MS. (k), which represents the Latin version used before St. Jerome made +the Vulgate translation, about A.D. 384. The great scholar Eusebius, +A.D. 320, omitted it from his "canons," which contain parallel passages +from the three Gospels. (b) The language does not resemble the Greek +employed in other parts of the Gospels, differing from it in some small +particulars which most strongly suggest diversity of authorship. (c) +Much of the section might have been constructed out of the other +Gospels and Acts; _e.g._ ver. 9 is thought to be derived from John xx. +14, and ver. 14 from John xx. 26-29. (d) Mary Magdalene is introduced +as though she had not been mentioned previously; but she has already +appeared thrice in Mark (xv. 40, 47; xvi. 1). On the other hand, it is +obvious that the Gospel could never have ended with the words "for they +{63} were afraid," in ver. 8. All the old Latin MSS. contain the +present section except k, and perhaps originally A. The evidence of +the Vatican and the Sinaitic MSS. is not so strong as it appears to be +at first sight. The end of Mark in the Sinaitic was actually written +by the same scribe as the man who wrote the New Testament in the +Vatican MS. And the way in which he has arranged the conclusion of the +Gospel in both MSS. suggests that the MSS. from which the Sinaitic and +the Vatican were copied, both contained this or a similar section. +Moreover, there is considerable reason for thinking that he acted under +the personal influence of Eusebius. The verses are attested by +Irenaeus, and apparently by Justin and Hermas, and were therefore +regarded as authentic, or at least as truthful, by educated men at +Lyons and Rome, in the 2nd century. A possible solution is offered by +an Armenian MS. (A.D. 986), which assigns the section to the "presbyter +Ariston." This is probably the presbyter Aristion whom Papias +describes as a disciple of the Lord (Eusebius, _H. E._ iii. 39). The +conclusion of St. Mark's MS. probably became accidentally detached, and +vanished soon after his death, and the Church may well have requested +one who knew the Lord to supply the deficiency. + + + +[1] Eusebius, _H. E._ iii. 39. + +[2] _Op. cit._ iii. 39. + +[3] Eusebius, _H. E._ vi. 14. + +[4] Also in Matt. xxvii. 46. Observe also the explanation of Beelzebub +(iii. 22), Gehenna (ix. 43), Bartimaeus (x. 46), Golgotha (xv. 22). +Also the explanation of Jewish customs in vii. 3, 4; xiv. 12. + + + + +{64} + +CHAPTER V + +THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The evidence for believing that the third Gospel was written by St. +Luke, the friend of St. Paul, is very strong. In the 2nd century both +this Gospel and Acts were attributed to him. St. Irenaeus, about A.D. +185, writes: "Luke, also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the +gospel preached by him." [1] A few years earlier the author of the +_Muratorian Fragment_ wrote the words, "The third book of the Gospel, +that according to Luke." + +According to Eusebius and Jerome and an unknown writer of the 3rd +century, St. Luke was a native of Antioch in Syria. Of this we seem to +have confirmation in the full account given in Acts of the Church at +Antioch. It is shown by Col. iv. 14 that he was a Gentile, as there is +a distinction drawn between him and those "of the circumcision." From +the same passage we learn that he was a physician. Traces of his +profession have been discovered in the frequency with which he +describes the _healing_ wrought by Christ and His apostles (iv. 18, 23; +ix. 1, 2, 6; x. 9; xxii. 51), and the occasional use of terms which a +physician was more likely to employ than other people (iv. 38; v. 12; +vi. 19; xxii. 44). It is very possible that it is St. Luke who is +described (2 Cor. viii. 18) as "the brother whose praise in the gospel +is spread through all the Churches." This tradition can be traced as +far back as Origen. The fact that he was a dear friend of St. Paul is +{65} shown by the epithet "beloved" in Col. iv. 14; by the fact that he +is one of the "fellow-workers" who send greetings from Rome when St. +Paul, who was imprisoned there, wrote to Philemon; and by the touching +statement in 2 Tim. iv. 11, where St. Paul, as he awaits his death, +writes, "Only Luke is with me." + +St. Luke's relations with St. Paul are further illustrated from Acts. +The literary resemblances between this Gospel and Acts are so numerous +and so subtle that the tradition which ascribes both books to one +author cannot reasonably be controverted. The passages in Acts which +contain the word "we" show that the writer of Acts accompanied St. Paul +from Troas to Philippi in A.D. 50, when the apostle made his first +missionary journey in Europe (Acts xvi. 10-17). The apostle left him +at Philippi. About six years afterwards St. Paul was again at +Philippi, and there met St. Luke, who travelled with him to Jerusalem +(Acts xx. 5-xxi. 18); he also was with the apostle when he made the +voyage to Rome, and was shipwrecked with him at Malta. A writer of the +3rd century (quoted in Wordsworth's _Vulgate_, p. 269) tells us that +St. Luke had neither wife nor children, and died in Bithynia at the age +of seventy-four. A writer of the 6th century asserts that St. Luke was +a painter, and attributes to him a certain picture of the Blessed +Virgin. Another such picture is preserved in the great church of S. +Maria Maggiore at Rome. The legend finds no support in early Christian +writers. At the same time, it bears witness to the fact that this +Gospel contains the elements of beauty in especial richness. It is the +work of St. Luke that inspired Fra Angelico's pictures of the +Annunciation, and the English hymn "Abide with me." + +Although St. Irenaeus is the first writer who names St. Luke as the +author of the third Gospel, the Gospel is quoted by earlier writers. +Special mention must be made of (1) _Justin Martyr_. He records +several facts only found in this Gospel, _e.g._ Elisabeth as the mother +of John the Baptist, the census {66} under Quirinius, and the cry, +"Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit." (2) _Celsus_, the pagan +philosopher, who opposed Christianity. He refers to the genealogy +which narrates that Jesus was descended from the first man. (3) The +_Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne_, written in A.D. 177. (4) +_Marcion_. He endeavoured to found a system of theology which he +pretended to be in accordance with the teaching of St. Paul. He +rejected the Old Testament as the work of an evil god, and asserted +that St. Paul was the only apostle who was free from the taint of +Judaism. The only Gospel which he kept was that according to St. Luke, +which he retained as agreeing with the teaching of St. Paul. The +contents of Marcion's Gospel can be largely discovered in Tertullian. +The differences which existed between Marcion's Gospel and our Luke can +be easily accounted for. Here, as in St. Paul's Epistles, he simply +altered the passages which did not agree with his own interpretation of +St. Paul's doctrine. For instance, in Luke xiii. 28, instead of +"Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob," he put "the righteous." The account +of our Lord's birth and infancy he omitted, because he did not believe +that our Lord's human body was thoroughly human and real. An +interesting modern parallel to Marcion's New Testament can be found in +England. At the beginning of the 19th century the English Unitarians +circulated large numbers of an English version of the New Testament in +which were altered all the passages in the English Authorised Version +which imply that Jesus is God. The translators of this Unitarian +version accepted the Gospels of the New Testament as genuine, although +they used unscrupulous methods to support their assertion that the New +Testament is Unitarian. In the same way Marcion, although he made +unscrupulous alterations in Luke in order to prove that it was really +Marcionite, obviously accepted it as a genuine work of the apostolic +age. + +The Preface of the Gospel begins with a ceremonious dedication to a +person of high rank, named Theophilus. He is {67} called by the title +"most excellent," which ordinarily implies that the person so +designated is a member of the "equestrian order." The evangelist tells +Theophilus that many had taken in hand to draw up a narrative of those +things which are "most surely believed among us." The preface shows us +that many attempts to give an account in order of what our Lord did and +said had already been made. The literary activity of the earliest +Christians is thus demonstrated to us. The preface suggests to us that +substantial accuracy marked these early efforts, and, in a still higher +degree, St. Luke's own Gospel. He does not speak of the earlier works +as inaccurate, and he does distinctly give his reader to understand +that he possesses peculiar qualifications for his task. He asserts +that his information is derived from "eye-witnesses and ministers of +the Word," and that he has himself "traced the course of all things +accurately from the first." This preface certainly shows us that the +writer took real pains in writing, and that he had personally known men +who accompanied our Lord. + +The date can hardly be later than A.D. 80, unless the evangelist wrote +in extreme old age. And the date must be earlier than Acts, as the +Gospel is referred to in that work (Acts i. 1, 2). Can we fix the date +more accurately than this? Many critics think that we can. They say +that it must be later than the fall of Jerusalem, A.D. 70. It is said +that the Gospel presupposes that Jerusalem was already destroyed. The +arguments for this are: (1) In Luke xxi. 20-24 the utter destruction of +Jerusalem is foretold with peculiar clearness. We have already seen +that a similar argument is employed by many in speaking of Matt., an +argument which seems to imply that our Lord did not foretell that +destruction because He could not. This argument must be dismissed. +(2) In Luke xxi. 20 there is no editorial note like that in Matt. xxiv. +15, to emphasize the necessity of paying peculiar attention to our +Lord's warning about the coming destruction, and in Luke xxi. 25 the +final judgment is not so {68} clearly connected with the fall of +Jerusalem as in Matt. xxiv. 29, where it is foretold as coming +"immediately, after the tribulation of those days." Moreover, xxi. 24 +suggests that the writer was well aware that an interval must elapse +between the two great events. This is the only good argument for +placing Luke later than Matt., and it certainly deserves careful +attention. At the same time, we must observe the following facts: (a) +St. Luke probably did not know St. Matthew's Gospel, otherwise he would +not have given such very different, though not contradictory, accounts +of the infancy and the resurrection of our Lord; (b) St. Luke may +perhaps owe the superior accuracy of his report of the eschatological +discourse of Christ to persons whom he knew at Jerusalem in A.D. 56; +(c) St. Luke himself possibly thought that the end of the world would +follow soon after the destruction of Jerusalem, for in xxi. 32 he seems +to connect the final judgment with his own generation. But the +statement is not so strong as in Matt. and Mark. For St. Luke says, +"This generation shall not pass away till all be accomplished," while +Matt. and Mark say, "until all _these_ things be accomplished," +evidently including the final judgment. + +On the whole, it seems reasonable to date the Gospel according to St. +Luke soon after A.D. 70, but it contains so many primitive touches that +it may be rather earlier. It has been urged that both the Gospel and +Acts betray a knowledge of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus, and must +therefore be later than A.D. 94. This theory remains wholly unproved, +and the small evidence which can be brought to support it is far +outweighed by the early features which mark St. Luke's books. + +[Sidenote: Literary Style.] + +The style is marked by great delicacy and power. It is in better Greek +than the other Synoptic Gospels, and the evangelist seems to +deliberately avoid some of the racy, popular words which are employed +by St. Mark. But the beginner should be warned that this Gospel is not +very easy to translate, for it contains a good {69} many words with +which he is not likely to be familiar. The language of St. Luke +contains many proofs that he is writing as a Gentile for Gentiles. +Thus he calls the Apostle Simon, who belonged to the fanatically devout +party known as the "Cananaeans," by the corresponding Greek name +"Zealot" (vi. 15); he seldom uses the Hebrew word "Amen," and he never +uses the word "Rabbi" as a form of address. He adds the word "unclean" +before the word "devil" (iv. 33), as the Greeks believed that some +devils were good and kind, while the Jews believed all devils to be +evil. He also substitutes the word "lawyer" for "scribe." But while +the preface is written in what is perhaps the best Greek in the New +Testament, the evangelist allows his language to be penetrated by his +visions of Jewish scenes. Partly from his study of the Old Testament, +partly from his knowledge of the books and the lives in which he found +a testimony to Jesus, he acquired the art of breathing into his Greek +the simple manner and the sweet tone of a Hebrew story. There is +nothing in all literature more perfectly told than the story of the +walk to Emmaus. Nothing can be better than the delineation of +character which is suggested to us in the story of Zacharias, or of +Anna, or of Zacchaeus. There is always a freshness to remind us that +the Gospel is "good tidings of great joy" (ii. 10), and the Magnificat +(i. 46-55), the Benedictus (i. 68-79), the Gloria in Excelsis (ii. 14), +and the Nunc Dimittis (ii. 29-32), have become for ever part of the +praises of the Christian Church. More often than in any other Gospel +we find such expressions as "glorifying God," "praising God," "blessing +God." Again, St. Luke, in choosing incidents from the life of home, +and more especially in choosing incidents in which women are prominent, +gives a new solemnity to a life which men had hitherto despised. We +always think of the Blessed Virgin as "highly favoured," of Martha +"cumbered about much serving" (x. 40), of the widow with the two mites, +of the daughters of Jerusalem weeping on the way of the cross (xxiii. +28), of the double joy of Elisabeth {70} to bear a son in her old age +and to be visited by the mother of her Lord (i. 43); and we think all +this because St. Luke has told us their story. These passages with +their smiles and tears, their simplicity and their depth, are a divine +contrast to the grotesque passage in the Jewish liturgy, where the men +thank God that they are not women. + +The last point in St. Luke's literary style is his use of phrases which +resemble phrases in St. Paul's Epistles. He writes as a man who has +lived in familiar intercourse with St. Paul. There is a striking +similarity between the words attributed to our Lord in _the institution +of the Eucharist_ (xxii. 19, 20) and those in 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25, a +similarity which is probably to be accounted for by the fact that St. +Luke must often have heard the apostle use these words in celebrating +this Sacrament. Besides this, there are phrases which are parallel +with phrases in every Epistle of St. Paul. A few instances are--Luke +vi. 36 (2 Cor. i. 3); Luke vi. 39 (Rom. ii. 19); Luke viii. 13 (1 +Thess. i. 6); Luke x. 20 (Phil. iv. 3); Luke xii. 35 (Eph. vi. 14); +Luke xxi. 24 (Rom. xi. 25); Luke xxii. 53 (Col. i. 13). + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +It has been well said that St. Matthew's Gospel is in a peculiar sense +_Messianic_, St. Mark's is in a peculiar sense _realistic_, and St. +Luke's is in a peculiar sense _Catholic_. And while St. Matthew takes +pains to connect Christianity with the religion of the past, and St. +Mark allows his interest in the past and the future to be overshadowed +by his resolve to speak of Jesus as actually working marvels, St. Luke +seems, like St. Paul, to be essentially progressive and to have a wider +horizon than his predecessors. He does not manifest the least +antipathy towards Judaism. He has none of that intolerance which so +often marks the men who advertise their own breadth of view. He +represents our Lord as fulfilling the Law, as quoting the Old +Testament, and declaring that "it is easier for heaven and earth to +pass away than for one tittle of the Law to fail" (xvi. 17). But he +writes as a representative Gentile {71} convert. He takes pleasure in +recording all that can attract to Christ that Gentile world which was +beginning to learn of the new religion. We may note the following +points which illustrate this fact: (1) Luke traces the genealogy of our +Lord, not like Matt. by the legal line to Abraham, the father of the +Jews, but by the natural line to _Adam_, the father of humanity (iii. +38), thus showing Jesus to be the elder Brother and the Redeemer of +every human being. (2) While the true Godhead of our Lord is taught +throughout, His true _manhood_ is brought into prominence with peculiar +pathos. We note His condescension in passing through the various +stages of a child's life (ii. 4-7, 21, 22, 40, 42, 51, 52), the +continuance of His temptations during His ministry (xxii. 28), His +constant recourse to prayer in the great crises of His life, His deep +_sobbing_ over Jerusalem (xix. 41), His sweat like drops of blood +during His agony in Gethsemane (xxii. 44), a fact recorded by none of +the other evangelists. St. Luke seems to be filled with a sense of the +divine compassion of Jesus, and thus he relates the facts which prove +the reality of the grace, the undeserved lovingkindness, of God to man. +Rightly did the poet Dante call him "the scribe of the gentleness of +Christ." (3) Corresponding with this human character of the incarnate +Son of God, we find the offer of _universal salvation_. St. Luke +alone--for the words are wrongly inserted in Matt.--records the tender +words of Jesus, "The Son of man came to seek and to save that which was +lost" (xix. 10). St. Paul knew no distinction between Jew and Greek, +rich and poor, but taught that to be justified by God is a privilege +which can be claimed not by birth but by faith; and what St. Paul +enforces by stern arguments which convince our minds, St. Luke instils +by the sweet parables and stories which convince our hearts. It is +here that we find kindness shown to the _Gentile_ (iv. 25-27; xiii. 28, +29), and the _Samaritan_ (ix. 51-56; xvii. 11-19); here we are told of +the publican who was "justified" rather than the Pharisee (xviii. 9), +the story of the penitent {72} thief who had no time to produce the +good works which his faith would have prompted (xxiii. 43), of the good +Samaritan who, schismatic though he was, showed the spirit of a child +of God (x. 30). Last, and best, there is the parable of the Prodigal +Son (xv. 11), and the story of the woman who was a sinner (vii. 37). +To her Christ says, "Thy faith hath saved thee," and to His host He +says, "Her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved +much"--words which no one but the Son of God could dare to say of any +"woman who was in the city, a sinner." In recording these words, St. +Luke proves that Jesus Christ Himself taught the Pauline doctrine that +man is saved by faith; and yet not by an empty faith, but by "faith +working through love" (Gal. v. 6). In this Gospel Jesus is especially +the Refuge of sinners, and the teaching of our Lord may be best +described by the happy phrase which records His address in the +synagogue of Nazareth: "words of grace." + +It is important to notice that in no Gospel do we find such an especial +sympathy shown for the poor. The poverty of the holy family (ii. 7, 8, +24); the beatitude on the poor[2] (vi. 20), with the corresponding woes +pronounced upon the rich (vi. 24 ff.); the parable of Dives and Lazarus +(xvi. 19), the invitation of the poor to the supper of the King (xiv. +21), show this sympathy. In consequence of this, St. Luke's Gospel has +been said to show an _Ebionite_ tendency. But the word is misleading. +It is possible that some early Christians may have called themselves by +the name _Ebionim_, a Hebrew word which designated the poor and +oppressed servants of God. And it is known that in the 2nd century and +afterwards there was a heretical semi-Christian Jewish sect of that +name. But St. Luke's Gospel is utterly opposed to the main tenets of +these heretics, which were a repudiation of Christ's real Divinity and +an insistence upon the necessity of circumcision for all Christians. + +{73} + +Perhaps it is the gentleness of the evangelist, and his preference for +all that is tender and gracious, which causes his account of the twelve +apostles to differ considerably from that in Mark. Their slowness, +their weakness of faith, their rivalries, are set in a subdued light. +He does not tell us that Christ once called St. Peter "Satan," or that +Peter cursed and swore when he denied Christ. He omits the rebuke +administered to the disciples in the conversation concerning the leaven +(Mark viii. 17), the ambitious request of the two sons of Zebedee, and +the indignation of the disciples at Mary's costly gift of ointment +(Matt xxvi. 8). When St. Mark speaks of the failure of the disciples +to keep awake while their Master was in Gethsemane, he says that they +were asleep, "for their eyes were heavy" (xiv. 40). When St. Luke +speaks of it, he says that they were "sleeping for _sorrow_" (xxii. +45). Doubtless both accounts are true, and we can reverently wonder +both at the rugged honesty with which St. Peter must have told St. Mark +about the faults of himself and his friends, and at the consideration +shown by St. Luke towards the twelve in spite of the fact that he was +more closely connected with St. Paul than with them. + +About one-third of this Gospel is peculiar to itself, consisting mainly +of the large section, ix. 51-xviii. 14. St. Luke here seems to have +used an Aramaic document; the beginning of the section is full of +Aramaic idioms. In places where St. Luke records the same facts as the +other Synoptists, he sometimes adds slight but significant touches. +The withered hand restored on the sabbath is the _right_ hand (vi. 6); +the centurion's servant is one _dear_ to him (vii. 2); and the daughter +of Jairus an _only_ daughter (viii. 42; cf. the son of the widow at +Nain, an _only_ son, vii. 12). Among the remarkable omissions in this +Gospel we may notice two sayings which are found in Matt. and Mark, and +which seem to us to have been peculiarly appropriate for St. Luke's +general purpose. The first is the saying of Christ that He had come +"not to be ministered unto, {74} but to minister, and to give His life +a ransom for many" (Matt. xx. 28; Mark x. 45). The second is the +statement that the Gospel "shall be preached in the whole world" (Matt. +xxvi. 13; Mark xiv. 9). With the omission of these sayings we may +compare the omission of any record of the visit of the Gentile wise men +to the cradle of the infant Saviour of the world--an incident which +would probably have appealed most strongly to the heart of St. Luke, if +he had known it. Its absence from this Gospel is one of the many +proofs that St. Luke was not familiar with the Gospel according to St. +Matthew. + +We have already noticed that much of the freshness of this Gospel is +due to its being in a peculiar sense the Gospel of praise and +thanksgiving. It is also peculiarly the Gospel of _prayer_. All the +three Synoptists record that Christ prayed in Gethsemane. But on seven +occasions St. Luke is alone in recording prayers which Jesus offered at +the crises of His life: at His baptism (iii. 21); before His first +conflict with the Pharisees and scribes (v. 16); before choosing the +Twelve (vi. 12); before the first prediction of His Passion (ix. 18); +at the Transfiguration (ix. 29); before teaching the Lord's Prayer (xi. +1); and on the Cross (xxiii. 34, 46). St. Luke mentions His insistence +on the duty of prayer in two parables which no other evangelist has +recorded (xi. 5-13; xviii. 1-8). He alone relates the declaration of +Jesus that He had made supplication for Peter, and His charge to the +Twelve, "Pray that ye enter not into temptation" (xxii. 32, 40). + +As the Gospel according to St. Luke is more rich in parables than any +other Gospel, we may conclude by giving a few words of explanation +concerning our Lord's parables. The word "parable" means a +"comparison," or, more strictly, "a placing of one thing beside another +with a view to comparing them." In the Gospels the word is generally +applied to a particular form of teaching. That is to say, it means a +story about earthly things told in such a manner as to teach a {75} +spiritual truth. The Jews were familiar with parables. There are some +in the Old Testament, the Book of Isaiah containing two (v. 1-6; +xxviii. 24-28). The rabbinical writings of the Jews are full of them. +But the Jewish parable was only an illustration of a truth which had +already been made known. The parables of our Lord are often means of +conveying truths which were not known. They must be distinguished from +(a) fables, (b) allegories, (c) myths. A fable teaches worldly wisdom +and prudence, not spiritual wisdom, and it is put into somewhat +childish forms in which foxes and birds converse together. An allegory +puts the story and its interpretation side by side, and each part of +the story usually has some special significance. A myth takes the form +of history, but it relates things which happened before the dawn of +history, as they appear to the child-mind of primitive men. + +The parables of our Lord were intended to teach the secrets of the +kingdom of God (see p. 44). They unfold these secrets and at the same +time veil them in the illustrations which are employed. These +illustrations attract the attention and inquiry of those who are +spiritually receptive. On the other hand, those who are unworthy or +hardened do not recognize the truth. Nevertheless, the parables were +such miracles of simplicity and power, were so easy to remember, and so +closely connected with everyday objects, that even the dullest man +would awake to the truth if he retained a spark of life. It is +difficult to divide the parables into separate groups. But they may +perhaps be divided into two groups. The first group is drawn from +man's relations with the world of nature and from his simpler +experiences, and the second is drawn from man's relations with his +fellow-men, relations which involve more complicated experiences. The +parables of the second group were sometimes spoken in answer to +questions addressed to our Lord in private; such is the parable of the +good Samaritan, and that of the rich fool. If we desire to study the +parables in special relation to the kingdom of God, {76} we can divide +them into three groups. The first consists of those collected in Matt. +xiii., delivered in and near Capernaum, and referring to the kingdom of +God as a whole. The second consists of those collected in Luke +x.-xviii., delivered on Christ's journeys from Galilee to Jerusalem, +and referring to the character of the individual members of the +kingdom. The third consists of parables spoken during our Lord's last +days at Jerusalem, and referring to the judgment of members of the +kingdom. + +It is difficult to decide whether some of the shorter parables ought to +be regarded as parables or not, but the number is usually estimated at +about thirty, of which eighteen are peculiar to Luke. In John there +are no parables, strictly so called, and St. John never uses the word +"parable." But he uses the word _paroimia_, or "proverb," and records +several proverbial sayings of our Lord which are rather like parables +(John iv. 34; x. i-3; xii. 24; xv. 1-6; xvi. 21). + + + +ANALYSIS + +The infancy of our Lord: i. 1-ii. 52.--Similarity and contrast between +the predictions of the birth of John the Baptist and Jesus, and also +between their birth. The circumcision, the visit of Jesus to the +temple in boyhood. + + +A. + +Winter A.D. 26 till after Pentecost 27. + +The preparation for the ministry: iii. 1-iv. 13.--The ministry of John +the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus, the genealogy from Adam, the +threefold temptation. + + +B. + +Pentecost A.D. 27 till before Passover 28. + +Missionary work of Jesus in Galilee: iv. 14-ix. 6.--Jesus preaches, is +rejected at Nazareth, goes to Capernaum, various miracles (iv.). Call +of Simon, leper cleansed, five {77} grounds of offence against Jesus +(v.-vi. 11). Appointment of the twelve, the sermon (vi.). The +centurion's servant, the widow's son, Christ's description of John and +of the age, the penitent (vii.). Parables, Christ's relation to His +mother and brethren, various miracles (viii.). The mission of the +twelve (ix. 1-6). + +[Perplexity of Herod, ix. 7-9.] + + +C. + +Passover A.D. 28 till before Tabernacles 28. + +Climax of missionary work in Galilee: ix. 10-50.--Christ feeds the +multitude, Peter's confession, Christ's first prediction of His death, +transfiguration, lunatic boy cured, second prediction of death, two +rebukes to apostles. + + +D. + +Tabernacles, September A.D. 28 until early 29. + +Later ministry, chiefly in Peraea: ix. 51-xix. 28.--Jesus rejected by +Samaritans, discouragements (ix.). Mission of the seventy, lament over +cities of Galilee, the good Samaritan, Mary and Martha (x.). Prayer +and the Lord's Prayer, Jesus accused of alliance with Beelzebub, His +saying about His mother, denunciation of a generation which will not +believe without signs, and of the Pharisees and lawyers (xi.). The +leaven of the Pharisees, confidence in God, warnings against +covetousness, anxiety and lack of watchfulness, Christ's coming +"baptism," signs of the times (xii.). The meaning of calamities, +parable of the fig tree, cure on the sabbath, the mustard seed and the +leaven, Gentiles to replace Jews, the Pharisees try to persuade Jesus +to leave the dominions of Herod, Christ's first lament over Jerusalem +(xiii.). + +Lawfulness of healing on the sabbath, humility, inviting the poor, the +King's supper, counting the cost (xiv.). Parables to {78} illustrate +Christ's care for the lost (xv.). The use and abuse of money (xvi.). +Occasions of stumbling, the increase of faith, the truth that we cannot +purchase God's favour by doing more than He commands, the ten lepers, +the coming of the Son of man (xvii.). Answer to prayer, the Pharisee +and publican, little children, the rich young man, Christ's third +prediction of His death, the blind beggar at Jericho (xviii.). +Zacchaeus, the parable of the pounds (xix. 1-28). + + +E. + +Passover A.D. 29. + +Last days at Jerusalem, and afterwards: xix. 29-xxiv. 53.--Entry into +Jerusalem, Christ's second lament over Jerusalem, cleansing of the +temple (xix. 29-xx.). Christ challenged, parable of the vineyard, two +questions to entrap Christ, His question (xx.). The widow's mites, +predictions of the destruction of the temple, siege of Jerusalem, the +second coming (xxi.). Judas' bargain, the Passover, agony on the mount +of Olives, the betrayal, Peter's denial, Jesus tried before the elders +(xxii.). Jesus before Pilate, Herod, Pilate again, Simon of Cyrene, +the daughters of Jerusalem, the crucifixion, burial by Joseph of +Arimathaea (xxiii.). + +The women at the sepulchre, and Peter, the walk to Emmaus, Jesus +appears to the disciples and eats, His commission, the Ascension +(xxiv.). + +The Date of our Lord's Birth.--It is fairly well known that the dates +of our Lord's Birth and of His Death are both, in all probability, +misrepresented in popular chronology. The best ancient chronology +fixes the date of the Crucifixion in A.D. 29. The Birth was probably +about six years before the commencement of our present era. Various +reasons make this date probable, including the fact that there was at +that time a conjunction of Jupiter, Saturn, and Mars, which must have +presented a most brilliant appearance in the sky, and would {79} +certainly have attracted the star-loving sages of the East. The great +astronomer Kepler was of opinion that this conjunction was followed by +the brief appearance of a new star, which is the star mentioned in +Matt. ii. 2. This is of importance in considering the statements of +St. Luke. Several objections have been made to his account of the +census held under Quirinius. (1) It is said that Quirinius was not +governor of Syria when Jesus was born; his administration was from A.D. +6 to A.D. 9, and Quinctilius Varus was governor in A.D. 1. But St. +Luke cannot be proved to say that Quirinius was governor; he describes +his office by a participle which may mean "acting as leader," and there +is proof that Quirinius was engaged in a military command in the time +of Herod, and also proof that some high official twice governed Syria +in the time of Augustus. St. Luke's expression might fit either of +these two facts. (2) It is said that Herod was reigning as king in +Palestine, and that his subjects would not be included in a Roman +census. But in the year 8-7 B.C. Augustus wrote to Herod, saying that +he would henceforth treat him as a subject. His dominions must +henceforth have been treated like the rest of the dominions of +Augustus. (3) It is said that no census took place at that time, and +that if there had been a census, it would have been carried out by +households, according to Roman custom, and not by families. But there +seems to have been a census in Egypt and Syria in B.C. 8, and after +Augustus determined to put Herod under his authority, the census would +naturally be extended to Judaea. Herod would probably be allowed to +carry out the census on his own lines, so long as it was really carried +out. And he would plainly prefer to do it in the Jewish fashion, so as +to irritate the Jews as little as might be. + +The question is still involved in some obscurity, but St. Luke's +accuracy has not been in the least disproved by the controversy. He is +the only evangelist who connects his narrative with the history of +Syria and of the Roman empire, and we have every reason to believe that +he did his work with care as well as sympathy. + + + +[1] _Adv. Har._ iii. 1. + +[2] Matt. v. 3 has "poor in spirit." The same Aramaic word might be +used for both "poor" and "poor in spirit." + + + + +{80} + +CHAPTER VI + +THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +We learn from the Gospels that St. John was the son of Zebedee, a +Galilean fisherman, and was a follower of the Baptist before he joined +our Lord. The Synoptists show that he was one of the most prominent +and intimate of our Lord's followers. With St. Peter and St. James he +was permitted to witness the raising of Jairus' daughter, and to be +present at the Transfiguration, and with them was nearest to Christ at +the agony in Gethsemane. With St. Peter he was sent to prepare the +last Passover. Like his brother St. James, he shared in the fervour of +his mother, Salome, who begged for them a special place of dignity in +the kingdom of Christ. They both wished to call down fire on a +Samaritan village, and St. John asked Jesus what was to be done with +the man whom they found casting out devils in His name. Their fiery +temperament caused our Lord to give them the surname of Boanerges +("sons of thunder"). In the fourth Gospel the name of John the son of +Zebedee is never mentioned, but there are several references to an +apostle whose name is not recorded, but can be intended for no other +than St. John. At the crucifixion this apostle was bidden by our Lord +to regard Mary as henceforth his mother, and the writer claims to have +been an eye-witness of the crucifixion. In the last chapter very +similar words are used to assert that the writer is he whom Jesus loved. + +In Acts St. John appears with St. Peter as healing the lame {81} man at +the Beautiful Gate of the temple, and with St. Peter he goes to Samaria +to bestow the Holy Ghost on those whom Philip had baptized. He was +revered as one of the pillars of the Church when St. Paul visited +Jerusalem in A.D. 49 (Gal. ii. 9). It is remarkable that the Synoptic +Gospels, the fourth Gospel, Acts, and Galatians, all show St. John in +close connection with St. Peter. St. John's name occurs in the +Revelation, which has been attributed to him since the beginning of the +2nd century. + +Numerous fragments of tradition concerning St. John are preserved by +early Christian writers. Tertullian, about A.D. 200, says that St. +John came to Rome, and was miraculously preserved from death when an +attempt was made to kill him in a cauldron of boiling oil. Tertullian +and Eusebius both say that he was banished to an island, and Eusebius +tells us that the island was Patmos, and that the banishment took place +in the time of Domitian. On the accession of Nerva, St. John removed +from Patmos to Ephesus, where he survived until the time of Trajan, who +became emperor in A.D. 98. Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, writing +about A.D. 190, speaks of St. John's tomb in that city, and says that +he wore the _petalon_, the high priest's mitre used in the Jewish +Church. We are told by other writers how he reclaimed a robber, how he +played with a tame partridge, how when too old to preach he was carried +into church and would repeat again and again, "Little children, love +one another." On one occasion a spark of his youthful fire was seen. +It was when the old man indignantly refused to stay under the roof of +the same public baths as Cerinthus, the heretic who denied that Mary +was a virgin when she bore our Lord, and asserted that the Divinity of +Jesus was only a power which came upon Him and went from Him. + +The residence of St. John at Ephesus is attested by the Revelation. +Even if that book were a forgery, no forger at the close of the 1st +century would have ventured to place the hero of his book in a +neighbourhood where he had not lived. {82} Many threads of evidence +lead us back to the statement made by Polycrates about the apostle's +tomb. It was not until long after that date that the Christians began +to carry the relics of saints from place to place, and churches +rivalled one another in producing shrines for the severed members of +one body. There is therefore no reason whatever to doubt that the tomb +at Ephesus marked the resting-place of the apostle. It was known two +hundred years later in the time of Jerome, and visited in 431 by the +members of the great Church Council which met at Ephesus. The Emperor +Justinian built a sumptuous church on the site, and near a modern +Turkish mosque may still be seen the remnants of the church of St. John. + +Until the end of the 18th century the authorship of this Gospel was not +seriously challenged. The only party which ever denied that it was +written by the Apostle St. John was an ignorant and insignificant body +of people mentioned by Irenaeus and Epiphanius. They were known as the +_Alogi_, or "unbelievers in the Word." Their views in no wise +undermine the tradition of the Catholic Church. For the Alogi asserted +that this Gospel was written by Cerinthus, who lived at Ephesus where +St. John lived, and was himself a contemporary of St. John. We have +sufficient knowledge of the teaching of Cerinthus to be perfectly +certain that he could not have written a Gospel which so completely +contradicts his own theories. Therefore the opinion of the Alogi is +absolutely worthless where it negatives the tradition of the Church, +and on the other hand it agrees with that tradition in asserting that +the book was written in the apostolic age. + +During the last hundred years the men who deny that Jesus Christ was +truly "God of God, Light of Light," have strained every nerve to prove +that the fourth Gospel was not written by St. John. It is, of course, +almost impossible that they should admit that the writer was an apostle +and an honest man and continue to deny that the Christ whom he depicts +claimed to be the Lord and Maker of all things. During the controversy +{83} which has been waged during the last three generations with regard +to St. John's Gospel, it has been evident throughout that the Gospel +has been rejected for this very reason. The book has driven a wedge +into the whole band of New Testament students. The critics who deny +that Jesus was God, but are willing to grant that He was the most holy +and the most divine of men, have been forced to side with those who are +openly Atheists or Agnostics. The clue to their theories was +unguardedly exposed by Weizsaecker, who said, with regard to St. John's +Gospel, "It is impossible to imagine any power of faith and philosophy +so great as thus to obliterate the recollection of the real life, and +to substitute for it this marvellous picture of a Divine Being." [1] +This remark shows us that the critic approached the Gospel with a +prejudice against the doctrine of our Lord's Divinity, and rejected the +Gospel mainly because it would not agree with his own prejudice. But +the determination to fight to the uttermost against the converging +lines of Christian evidence has now driven such critics into a corner. +Many have already abandoned the position that the book is a +semi-Gnostic forgery written in the middle of the 2nd century, and they +are now endeavouring to maintain that it was written about A.D. 100 by +a certain John the Presbyter, whom they assert to have been afterwards +confounded with the Apostle John. + +Of John the Presbyter very little indeed is known. Papias, about A.D. +130, says that he was, like Aristion, "a disciple" of the Lord, and +that he had himself made oral inquiries as to his teaching. He seems +to have been an elder contemporary of Papias. Dionysius of Alexandria, +about A.D. 250, mentions that there were two monuments in Ephesus +bearing the name of John, and we may reasonably suppose that one of +these was in memory of the presbyter mentioned by Papias. But a little +reflection will soon convince us that nothing has been gained by the +conjecture that this John wrote the Gospel. If John {84} the Presbyter +was personally acquainted with our Lord, as some writers understand +Papias to mean, then the sceptics are forced to admit that one who +personally knew Jesus, describes Jesus as a more than human Being--as, +in fact, the Divine Creator. This is the precise fact which keeps +these writers from admitting that an apostle wrote the Gospel. If, on +the other hand, they suppose, as some do, that John the Presbyter was +very much younger than the apostles, the sceptics are confronted with +the following difficulties:-- + +(a) There is the important external evidence which shows how widely the +Gospel was regarded in the early Church as the work of St. John. + +(b) There is the minute knowledge displayed of the topography, customs, +and opinions of Jerusalem and the Holy Land as they existed in the time +of Christ. + +(c) There is the impossibility of supposing that Irenaeus, who was +probably not born a year later than A.D. 130, would not have known that +the Gospel was written by John the Presbyter. + +(d) There is the fact that the evidence for St. John having lived in +Ephesus is better than the evidence for a renowned presbyter of the +same name having lived in Ephesus. This has been wisely pointed out by +Juelicher, even though he himself denies that the apostle wrote St. +John's Gospel. And the justice of this argument proves that it is +sheer paradox to maintain, as some now maintain, that the _only_ John +who lived in Ephesus was the Presbyter. + +It is constantly urged by the opponents of the authenticity of this +Gospel that, as it was published at Ephesus at a late period, it cannot +be the work of the apostle, because he never went to Ephesus, and "died +early as a martyr." [2] This is a most unscrupulous use of an inexact +quotation made by some later Greek writers from a lost book of Papias. +It can be {85} traced to Philip of Side (5th century), and it is to the +effect that "John the Divine and James his brother were killed by the +Jews." Papias does not say that they died together, and his statement +is compatible with the belief that St. John survived his brother very +many years. We know from Gal. ii. 9 that he was alive some time after +his brother's death, which was about A.D. 44. And George Hamartolus, +one of the Greek writers who quote the above passage in Papias, +expressly says that the Emperor Nerva (A.D. 96) recalled John from +Patmos, and "dismissed him to live in Ephesus." + +[Sidenote: The External Evidence.] + +The external evidence for the authenticity of this Gospel is in some +respects stronger than that which is to be found in the case of the +other Gospels. Thus the Christian may recognize with gratitude that +his Divine Master has especially added the witness of the Church to the +work of His beloved disciple. All through the 2nd century we have the +links of a chain of evidence, and after A.D. 200 the canon of the +Gospels is known to have been so fixed that no defender of the faith is +called upon to show what that canon was. The earliest traces of the +phraseology of St. John are to be discovered in the _Didache_, which +was probably written in Eastern Palestine or Syria about A.D. 100. The +prayers which are provided in this book for use at the Eucharist are +plainly of a Johannine type, and are probably derived from oral +teaching given by the apostle himself before he lived at Ephesus. In +any case, the _Didache_ seems sufficient to disprove the sceptical +assertion that theological language of a Johannine character was +unknown in the Christian Church about A.D. 100. The letters attributed +to St. Ignatius, the martyr bishop of Antioch, are now universally +admitted to be genuine by competent scholars. They may most reasonably +be dated about A.D. 110, and they are deeply imbued with thought of a +Johannine type. It has been lately suggested that this tendency of +thought does not prove an actual acquaintance with the Gospel of St. +John. But when we find Christ {86} called "the Word," and the devil +called "the prince of this world," and read such a phrase as "the bread +of God which is the flesh of Christ," it is almost impossible to deny +that the letters of Ignatius contain actual reminiscences of St. John's +language. Nor is there the least reason why Ignatius should not have +been acquainted with this Gospel. His younger contemporary St. +Polycarp, whose letter to the Philippians was also written about A.D. +110, quotes from the First Epistle of St. John. And Papias, who +probably wrote about A.D. 130, and collected his materials many years +earlier, also quoted that Epistle, as we learn from Eusebius. Now, the +connection between the Gospel and the Epistle is, as has been cleverly +remarked, like the connection between a star and its satellite. They +are obviously the work of the same author. If Polycarp, who had +himself seen St. John, knew that the Epistle was genuine, he must have +known that the Gospel was genuine. + +The evidence which can definitely be dated between A.D. 120 and A.D. +170 is of extreme interest. It proves conclusively that a belief in +the authenticity of this Gospel was so firmly engrained in the +Christian mind that men holding the most opposite opinions appealed to +its authority. It is true that the "irrational" Alogi rejected it, and +that Marcion repudiated it, not because it was not by an apostle, but +because St. Paul was the only apostle whom he admired. But it was used +by the Catholics, the Gnostics, and the Montanists. St. Justin Martyr +was acquainted with it, and before he wrote, Basilides, the great +Gnostic of Alexandria, borrowed from it some materials for his +doctrine. The equally celebrated Gnostic Valentinus used it, and his +followers also revered it. About A.D. 170 Heracleon, an eminent +Valentinian, wrote a commentary upon this Gospel, of which commentary +some fragments still remain. The Montanists arose in Phrygia about +A.D. 157. Montanus, their founder, endeavoured to revive the power of +prophecy, and his followers maintained that "the Paraclete said more +things in Montanus than Christ {87} uttered in the Gospel." It can +easily be proved that their teaching was an attempt to realize some of +the promises of our Lord contained in St. John's Gospel. And the fact +that the Montanists were strongly opposed to the Gnostics makes it all +the more remarkable that both sects regarded this Gospel as so +important. Somewhat before A.D. 170 St. John's Gospel was inserted by +the great Syrian apologist, Tatian, in his _Diatessaron_, or harmony of +the Gospels, and the apocryphal Acts of John composed near the same +date contain unmistakable allusions to this Gospel. + +The evidence of Irenaeus is the culminating proof of the genuineness of +the Gospel according to St. John. He became Bishop of Lyons in A.D. +177, and remembered Polycarp, who suffered martyrdom at Smyrna in A.D. +156, at the age of eighty-six. Irenaeus, in writing to his friend +Florinus, says, "I can describe the very place in which the blessed +Polycarp used to sit when he discoursed, and his goings-out and his +comings-in, and his manner of life, and his personal appearance, and +the discourses which he held before the people, and how he would +describe his intercourse with John and the rest who had seen the Lord, +and how he would relate their words. And whatsoever things he had +heard from them about the Lord and about His miracles, Polycarp, as +having received them from eye-witnesses of the life of the Word, would +relate, altogether in accordance with the Scriptures." [3] + +Now, it is perfectly certain that Irenaeus, like his contemporaries +Heracleon and Tatian, accepted the fourth Gospel as the work of the +Apostle John. And can we believe that he would have thus accepted it, +if it had not been acknowledged by his teacher Polycarp, who knew St. +John, and was nearly thirty years old at the time of St. John's death? + +{88} + +[Sidenote: The Internal Evidence.] + +The Gospel itself contains manifest tokens that it was written by a Jew +of Palestine, by one who held no Gnostic heresy, and by a contemporary +of our Lord. + +I. _The author was a Jew and not a Gentile._ + +He makes frequent quotations from the Old Testament, and some of these +quotations imply an acquaintance with the Hebrew. This is especially +the case in the verse from the 41st Psalm (xiii. 18), and in that (xix. +37) from Zech. xii. 10, "They shall look on Him whom they pierced." +The Septuagint of Zech. xii. 10, translating from a different form of +the Hebrew, has, instead of the words "whom they pierced," "because +they mocked." It is, therefore, plain that John xiii. 18 is not +derived from the Septuagint. The Gospel is also Hebraic in style. The +sentences are broken up in a manner which is at variance with Greek +idiom. Whereas in St. Luke's two writings the style becomes more Greek +or more Hebraic in proportion to his writing independently or employing +the writings of Jewish Christians, the style of this Gospel is the same +throughout. We may particularly notice the Hebraic use of the word +"and" to signify both "and" and "but" (_e.g._ in v. 39, 40, where "and +ye will not come" means "but ye will not come"). We may also notice +the correct use of certain Hebrew proper names: _e.g._ Judas is called +"the son of Iscariot," showing that the writer did not regard the word +Iscariot as the fixed name of Judas only, but knew that it might be +applied to any man of Kerioth. In fact, the Greek of St. John is +exactly like the English of a Scottish Highlander who has only spoken +Gaelic in his earlier days, and, when he has acquired English, shows +his origin by the continued use of a few Gaelic idioms and his +knowledge of Highland proper names. + +He shows a minute acquaintance with Jewish social and ceremonial +customs. We may notice iii. 25; iv. 9, 27; vii. 2, 23, 37; x. 22; xi. +44; xix. 7, 31; and especially the waterpots (ii. 6), the purification +previous to the Passover (xi. 55), the fear {89} of our Lord's accusers +to defile themselves by entering the praetorium (xviii. 28), and the +Jewish method of embalming (xix. 40). Jewish opinions are faithfully +reflected, _e.g._ as to the importance attached to the religious +schools (vii. 15); the disparagement of the Jews of the "dispersion" +(vii. 35); the scorn felt by many Jews for the provincials of Galilee +(i. 46; vii. 41, 52), and the idea of the soul's pre-existence (ix. 2). + + +II. _The author was a Jew of Palestine._ + +He shows a minute acquaintance with the geography of the Holy Land. At +the present day elaborate guide-books and histories make it possible +for a very clever writer to disguise the fact that he has not visited +the land in which he lays the scene of his story. But even at the +present day such procedure is dangerous, and likely to be detected. In +ancient times it was almost impossible. Yet no one has ever detected +an error in the geography of this Gospel. The writer mentions Cana of +Galilee (ii. 1, 11), a place not noticed by any earlier writer, and +Bethany beyond Jordan (i. 28); he knows the exact distance from +Jerusalem to the better-known Bethany (xi. 18); the "deep" well of +Jacob at Sychar (iv. 11); the city of Ephraim near the wilderness (xi. +54); Aenon near to Salim, where John baptized (iii. 23). This word +Aenon is an Aramaic word signifying "springs," and even Renan ridicules +the notion of such a name having been invented by Greek-speaking +sectaries at Ephesus. The place was too obscure to be known to +ordinary travellers, and, on the other hand, such a name cannot have +been invented by a Gentile. + +The topography of Jerusalem is described with equal nicety. We may +notice viii. 20; ix. 7; x. 23; xviii. 1, 15; xix. 17, 41; and +particularly the pool near the sheep-gate, having five porches (v. 2), +and the place which is called the Pavement, "but in the Hebrew +Gabbatha" (xix. 13). Even a person who had heard of Solomon's porch +and of Golgotha might well have been ignorant of the sheep-gate and the +Pavement, unless he had been in Jerusalem. + +Lastly, the writer shows an acquaintance not only with the {90} Jewish +feasts, but also with facts connected with them which imply special +knowledge on his part. He could not have gathered from the Old +Testament the fact that the later Jews were in the habit of keeping a +feast in honour of the dedication of the temple after its profanation +by Antiochus Epiphanes (x. 22), nor would he have learned how to +introduce an allusion to the rite of pouring forth water from the pool +at Siloam at the Feast of Tabernacles (vii. 37). + +The only important argument which can be urged against the author +having been a Jew is that founded on the use of the phrase "the Jews," +which is said to imply that the writer was not a Jew. Now, in some +passages (as vii. 1), "the Jews" may mean the inhabitants of Judaea, as +distinct from those of Galilee, and such passages are therefore +indecisive. But in other passages the phrase "the Jews" does not admit +this interpretation, and is used with a decided suggestion of dislike. +But when we remember the bitter hostility which the Jews soon +manifested towards the Christians, and remember that in Asia Minor this +hostility was active, the phrase presents no real difficulty. St. Paul +was proud to reckon himself a Jew, but long before the Jews had shown +their full antagonism to Christianity, St. Paul spoke of "the Jews" (1 +Thess. ii. 14-16) with the same condemnation as the writer of the +fourth Gospel. + + +The only important arguments in favour of the author having absorbed +Gnostic views are drawn: (1) _From the alleged Dualism of the Gospel_. +In theology the word Dualism signifies the doctrine that the world is +not only the battle-ground of two opposing forces, one good and the +other evil, but also that the material world is itself essentially +evil. Such was the doctrine of the great Gnostic sects of the 2nd +century. But this Gospel, in spite of the strong contrast which it +draws between God and the world, light and darkness, is not Dualist. +It teaches that there is one God, that the world was made by the Word +who is God, that this Word was made flesh and came to save the world. +In thus teaching that the material world was made by the good God, and +that God took a material human body, this Gospel opposes the +fundamental tenet of Gnostic Dualism. (2) _From the alleged +condemnation of the Jewish prophets by Christ in x. 8_. Other passages +make it perfectly plain that this is not a condemnation of the Jewish +prophets, but of any religious pretenders who claimed divine authority. +In this Gospel an appeal is made to Moses (v. 46), to Abraham (viii. +56), to Isaiah {91} (xii. 41), and, what is most remarkable of all, our +Lord says, "Salvation is of the Jews," _i.e._ the knowledge and the +origin of religious truth came from the Jews. The Jewish Scriptures +are ratified (v. 39; x. 35). It is impossible to find a shred of the +anti-Jewish theories which the Gnostics taught. And though it is true +that some Gnostics were fond of using such words as "life" and "light" +in their religious phraseology, it is much more probable that they were +influenced by the fourth Gospel than that this Gospel was tinged with +Gnosticism. + + +We conclude, therefore, that the author was a Jew of Palestine, and +that he was not a Gentile or in any sense a Gnostic. + +III. _The author was a contemporary and an eye-witness of the events +described._ + +His knowledge of Jerusalem and of the temple, which we have already +noticed, strongly suggests that he knew the city before its destruction +in A.D. 70. So far as can be tested, his treatment of the Messianic +ideas of the people is exactly accurate, and of a kind which it would +have been difficult for a later writer to exhibit. This Gospel +represents the people as pervaded by a nationalist notion of the +Messiah as of a king who would deliver them from foreign powers (vi. +15, xi. 48; xix. 12), a notion which was dispelled in A.D. 70, and +apparently did not revive until the rising of Bar Kocheba in A.D. 135, +a date which is now almost universally recognized as too late for this +Gospel to have been written. We also find the two contradictory ideas +as to the place of the Messiah's origin then current (vii. 27, 42), and +the writer distinguishes "the prophet" (i. 21, 25; vi. 14; vii. 40), +who was expected to precede Christ, from Christ Himself. At a very +early date the Christians identified "the prophet" with Christ, and it +is in the highest degree improbable that any but a contemporary of our +Lord would have been aware of this change of belief. + +It is claimed that the author is an eye-witness in i. 14; xix. 35; and +xxi. 24. We may add 1 John i. 1, for the author of the Epistle was +obviously the author of the Gospel. Numerous details, especially the +frequent notes of time, suggest the hand {92} of an eye-witness. And +the delicate descriptions of the inner life of the disciples and of +Christ Himself point to the same conclusion. The description of the +Last Supper and the words spoken at it suggest with overwhelming force +that the writer knew the peculiar manner of seating employed at this +ceremony. Another Jew would have known where the celebrant sat, but he +would scarcely have been able to make the actions of our Lord and +Judas, St. John and St. Peter, fit their places at the table with such +perfection.[4] + +The Gospel claims that the disciple who "wrote these things" is the +disciple "whom Jesus loved," and who reclined "in Jesus' bosom" at the +Supper. It was not Peter, for Peter did not recline "in Jesus' bosom." +The presumption therefore is that it was either James or John, these +two being with Peter the closest friends of Jesus. It could hardly +have been James, who was martyred in A.D. 44, as the whole weight of +tradition and external evidence is against this. It must, then, have +been John, or a forger who wished to pass for that apostle. And to +suppose that an unknown forger, born two generations, or even one +generation, later than the apostles, could invent such sublime +doctrine, and insert it in so realistic a story, and completely deceive +the whole Christian world, including the district where St. John lived +and died, is to show a credulity which is without parallel in the +history of civilization.[5] + +Now that we have reviewed the internal evidence for the authenticity, +we are able to return with renewed vigour to deal with the popular +rationalistic hypothesis that the author was a Christian who had +learned some genuine stories about Jesus current in the Church at +Ephesus, and then wove them into a narrative of his own composing. We +have observed that the marks of an eye-witness and contemporary of +Jesus are {93} scattered over the whole surface of the Gospel. If the +Gospel is not by St. John, only one other explanation is possible. It +must be composed of three distinct elements: (a) some genuine +traditions, (b) numerous fictions, (c) a conscious manipulation of the +narrative contained in the Synoptists. But the internal evidence is +absolutely opposed to any such theory. We can trace no manipulation of +the Synoptic narrative. The writer seems to be aware of St. Mark's +Gospel, and possibly the other two, but he evidently did not write with +them actually before him. He plainly had a wholly independent plan and +an independent source of information. And if we turn to the passages +which tell us facts not recorded by the Synoptists, it is quite +impossible to separate the supposed fictions from the supposed genuine +traditions. Both style and matter proceed from one and the same +individuality. One passage alone can be separated from the rest +without interrupting the flow of the story, and that passage is absent +in the best manuscripts. It is the story of the woman taken in +adultery (vii. 53-viii. 11). It seems to have been originally placed +after Luke xxi. 36, and was inserted into St. John's Gospel after it +was completed. We cannot apply the same process to any other passage +in the Gospel. It is an organic whole, as much as any play of +Shakespeare or poem of Tennyson. And over the whole book we find the +same morsels of history and geography. They are of a kind which +tradition never hands down unimpaired, and which no Ephesian disciple +of an apostle would be likely to commit to memory. In spite of all +attempts to divide the Gospel into parts derived straight from an +apostle and parts invented by later minds, the Gospel remains like the +seamless coat which once clothed the form of the Son of man. + +[Sidenote: Date.] + +It is important to observe that even the most hostile criticism has +tended to recede in its attempt to find a probable date for this +Gospel. Baur fixed it about A.D. 160-170, Pfleiderer at 140, +Hilgenfeld 130-140; Juelicher and Harnack will not date it later than +110, {94} and the latter grants that it may be as early as 80. The +year 80 is as early a date as the most orthodox Christian need desire, +and we can reasonably believe that it was written by the apostle at +Ephesus between A.D. 80 and A.D. 90. We learn from Irenaeus that St. +John survived until A.D. 98. + +[Sidenote: Literary Style.] + +Several points in the literary style of the apostle have been noticed +in dealing with the internal evidence which they afford to the +authenticity of his Gospel. But it is necessary to add something more, +for there is no writer to whom we can more fitly apply the profound +saying that "the style is the man." The language of St. John is the +result of a long and impassioned contemplation. Whether he writes down +his own words, or records the words and deeds of our Lord, his language +shows the result of careful reflection. + +The teaching of Jesus exhibits a development different from that in the +Synoptists. We find in chs. ii., iii., and iv. that our Lord +definitely taught that He was the Son of God and Messiah quite early in +His ministry, while in the earlier part of Mark our Lord's teaching +about His Messiahship is far less definite. And the method of teaching +is also different. In the Synoptists we find picturesque parables and +pointed proverbs, while in John we find long discourses and arguments. +In the Synoptists the teaching is generally practical, in John it is +much more openly theological. This difference between the Synoptists +and St. John can be partly accounted for by the fact that St. John's +Gospel contains much more of the instruction given by our Lord to His +intimate friends, and that this instruction was naturally more profound +than that which was given to the multitude. But there is another +reason for the difference. If we attend to such passages as xiv. +15-21, 25-26; xv. 26-27, we see that our Lord teaches that there are +two manifestations of His Person, one during the time between His birth +and His death, and the other after the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. +The Spirit is not a substitute {95} for an absent Christ; His coming +brings with it an inward presence of Christ within the Christian soul +(xiv. 18). By the aid of the Spirit, St. John condenses and interprets +the language of our Lord in a manner which can be understood by the +simplest of simple souls who live the inner life. In St. John we find +a writer who is writing when Jesus spoke no longer in parables and +proverbs, but "plainly" (xvi. 25, 29). He records the teaching of +Jesus, as it had shaped itself _in_ his own mind, but not so much _by_ +his own mind as by perpetual communion with the ascended Christ. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +We have noted on p. 31 the fact that St. John's Gospel shows that he +was acquainted with facts in the Synoptic Gospels which he does not +himself narrate. Yet the broad difference between the character of the +Synoptic writers and that of St. John is that the Synoptists are +historical, he is mystical. We do not mean that St. John does not +trouble about historical accuracy. His history is often more minute +than that of the Synoptists. But his purpose is to bring his readers +into deeper life through union with the God who is in Christ and is +Christ. The true mystic ever desires to maintain the knowledge of this +inward union in life with God. It is a knowledge which is made +possible by obedience, made perfect by love, and causes not new +ecstasies, but a new character. St. John adjusts all his material to +this one purpose. "These are written that ye may believe that Jesus is +the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in His +name" (xx. 31). + +The Introduction or Prologue (i. 1-18) teaches that Jesus Christ is +that personal manifestation of God to whom the Jews had given the name +of the Word. The Palestinian Jews were accustomed to describe God +acting upon the world by the name _Memra_, or "Word" of the Lord. The +Alexandrian Jews also were in the habit of giving the title _Logos_, +which means both "Word" and "Reason," to an idea of God which perfectly +expressed all that God is. The Greek Stoics had {96} used the name in +a similar sense, and thus St. John, having realized that Jesus is truly +God made manifest, called Him by a name which every educated Jew and +Greek would understand. Unlike Philo, the great Alexandrian Jew who +tried to combine Greek philosophy with Jewish religion, St. John +teaches that this divine Word is a Person, and took human flesh and +revealed Himself as the Messiah. The whole Gospel shows how this +revelation met with increasing faith on the part of some, and +increasing unbelief and hatred on the part of others. The crises of +this unbelief are represented chiefly in connection with our Lord's +visits to Jerusalem, when He made His claims before the religious +leaders of Judaism. His revelation is attended by various forms of +_witness_. There is that of the apostle himself (i. 14); that of the +other apostles who also witnessed His "glory," as displayed by His +miracles (ii. 11). There is that of John the Baptist (i. 34); and when +we remember that there had existed at Ephesus an incomplete +Christianity which had only known the baptism given by John the Baptist +(Acts xix. 3), we see how fit it was that the apostle should record the +Baptist's testimony to Christ's superiority. There is the witness of +His works, and that which the Father Himself bore (v. 34-36). We +should notice that the miracles are called "signs," and are carefully +selected so as to give evidence to the reader concerning particular +aspects of our Lord's glory.[6] Even the Passion is described as +containing an element of glory (xii. 28, 32), it contains a secret +divine triumph (cf. Col. ii. 15), and is a stage towards the glory of +the Ascension. The "darkness" contends with the {97} divine "light," +but cannot "suppress" it. After the "world" has done its worst, the +final victory of faith is seen in the confession of St. Thomas, "My +Lord and my God" (xx. 28). + +We find other points of doctrine corresponding with the mystical +teaching that "eternal life" does not begin after the last judgment, +but may be enjoyed here and now by knowing "God and Jesus Christ whom +He hath sent" (xvii. 3). Thus the judgment is shown to be executed in +one sense by the mere division which takes place among men when they +come in contact with Christ, according as they are good or bad (v. 30; +viii. 16; ix. 39). The principle of this moral testing is made plain +in iii. 19. Those who stand the test, and believe in Christ, undergo a +resurrection here (xi. 26). On the other hand, there is also a future +judgment (v. 22, 29) and a future consummation (v. 28, 29; vi. 39 f., +xiv. 3). + +Similar beautiful paradoxes are found in the teaching that the "work" +which God requires of us is to believe in His Son (vi. 28, 29); and +that to fulfil God's will is the mark not of servants but of friends +(xv. 14). And those who hope that they are numbered among the friends +of Jesus will find in this Gospel all the deepest experiences of the +soul--the new birth, the finding of the living water and the true +light, and that abiding in Christ which is made complete by the eating +of His flesh and the drinking of His blood. + +To realize the meaning of Jesus it is necessary to follow the guidance +of the Holy Spirit. The Synoptists tell us comparatively little of His +work, though they show us the Spirit descending on Christ at His +baptism, driving Him into the wilderness to be tempted, speaking in His +disciples, pervading His work (Luke iv. 18), and possessed of a +personality into which the Christian is baptized (Matt. xxviii. 19), +and against which blasphemy is unpardonable (Luke xii. 10). In John we +find a much fuller doctrine of the Holy Spirit. The fact that He is +not a mere impersonal influence of God is very clearly shown. And it +is impossible to accept the modern rationalistic {98} hypothesis that +the Holy Spirit is only a phrase for describing the idea which the +apostles had about the invisible presence of Christ. He is called +"another Advocate" (xiv. 16). Christ was an Advocate or Helper; the +Spirit will be another. Again, it is the work of the Spirit to refresh +the memory and strengthen the apprehension of the disciples concerning +Christ (xiv. 26); and our Lord definitely says, "If I go, I will send +Him unto you" (xvi. 7). With regard to the unbelieving world, the +Spirit will prove the sinfulness of opposition to Christ, will convince +the world of His righteousness as testified by the Father's approval +manifested in the Ascension, and will procure the verdict of history +that by the crucifixion the evil spirit who inspires worldliness was +condemned (xvi. 8-11). The Spirit's work is the same in kind as the +work of Christ, but the two Persons are distinct. That Christ +continues His advent and His work in the world through the Spirit +implies neither that the Spirit is an impersonal influence nor that He +is personally identical with Christ. + +This Gospel gives us invaluable help in determining the chronology of +our Lord's ministry. His ministry is connected with six Jewish feasts +(ii. 13; v. 1; vi. 4; vii. 2; x. 22; xii. 1). All are named except +that in v. 1, which is probably Pentecost, A.D. 27. The forty-six +years in ii. 20 are correct. Herod began to rebuild the temple in +20-19 B.C. Therefore the Passover in ii. 13 cannot be before A.D. 27. + + +ANALYSIS + +Introduction: i. 1--i. 18.--The Word ever with God and Himself God, +manifested in creation, in conscience, in the incarnation. + + +A. + +Winter A.D. 26 till after Passover 27. + +The preparation and beginning of the ministry: i. 19-iv. 54.--The +testimony of John the Baptist to Jesus {99} and his baptism of Jesus, +his disciples come to Jesus, the gathering of other disciples, the +promise of seeing heaven opened (i.). Jesus and Mary at the marriage +at Cana, the disciples believe. Jesus at Capernaum. At the Passover +Jesus goes to Jerusalem and cleanses the temple (ii). At Jerusalem +Jesus teaches Nicodemus of the new birth, He labours in Judaea while +John is at Aenon (iii.). The woman of Samaria converted; Jesus returns +and is welcomed in Galilee, is again at Cana, cures the Capernaum +nobleman's son (iv.). + + +B. + +Pentecost A.D. 27 till before Passover 28. + +The increased self-revelation of Jesus at Jerusalem: v.--Jesus cures +the infirm man at the pool of Bethesda, is accused of sabbath-breaking. +He co-ordinates His work and His honour with the work and honour of the +Father, claims to give life now and execute judgment, claims the +testimony of John, of His own miracles, of the Scriptures. + + +C. + +Passover A.D. 28 till before Tabernacles 28. + +Full self-revelation of Jesus in Galilee: vi.--Christ sustains physical +life by feeding the 5000, the people wish to make Him King. He again +shows power over nature by walking on the sea. He reveals Himself as +the Bread sustaining all spiritual life, commands the eating of His +flesh and drinking of His blood. The effect of this teaching is +increased enmity, the desertion by nominal disciples, and intensified +faith as shown by Peter's confession. + + +D. + +Tabernacles, September A.D. 28 till early 29. + +Further self-revelation at Jerusalem: conflict: journey to Peraea; vii. +1-xi. 57.--Jesus at the feast, {100} is accused of having a devil, +defends His former action on the sabbath, attempt to seize Him, His +invitation to all who thirst, the people divided, the officers refuse +to arrest Him (vii.). [Interpolated story of the woman taken in +adultery, vii. 53-viii. 11.] + +Jesus reveals Himself as the Light of the world, the Jews no longer +Abraham's children, the Jews reject His claim to pre-existence, and +attempt to stone Him (viii.). Jesus gives sight to the blind man at +Siloam, discussion about healing on the sabbath (ix.). Jesus the good +Shepherd, at the feast of the Dedication in December the Jews try to +stone Him and He goes east of Jordan (x.). + +Jesus as Conqueror of death goes to Bethany, raises Lazarus and +proclaims Himself as the Resurrection and the Life. On the advice of +Caiaphas, the Council propose to put Jesus to death. After raising +Lazarus Jesus retires to Ephraim, a city on the edge of the wilderness +to the north-east of Jerusalem (xi.). + + +E. + +Passover A.D. 29. + +Last public ministry at Jerusalem: xii.--Mary anoints Jesus for burial, +the entry into Jerusalem, the Greeks who desire to see Jesus, a voice +from heaven promises to glorify Him. Rejecting or receiving Christ. + +Full self-revelation of Jesus to His apostles: xiii.-xvii.--At the +Passover He washes the disciples' feet. Judas pointed out and departs. +The question of Peter (xiii. 37), of Thomas (xiv. 5), of Philip (xiv. +8), of Judas (xiv. 22). The work of the Advocate who is to come (xiv. +26). Abiding in Christ, the new commandment to love one another, the +hatred of the world, future testimony of the Spirit of truth (xv.). +The Spirit will convict the world, guide the disciples. Sorrow only +for a little while, final assurances, warm expression of faith on the +part of the apostles, Christ's warning (xvi.). + +Christ's intercession (xvii.). + +{101} + +The death of Jesus, the apparent triumph of unbelief: +xviii.-xix.--Betrayal in the garden, trial before Annas and Caiaphas, +Peter's denial, trial before Pilate, Jesus or Barabbas (xviii.). + +The scourging, Pilate's futile endeavour to release Jesus, his +political fears, the crucifixion, "behold thy mother," the +spear-thrust, the writer's personal testimony, the burial by Joseph of +Arimathaea (xix.). + +The resurrection, the victory over unbelief: xx.--Mary Magdalene, Peter +and the writer at the sepulchre, the writer records his own conviction. +Jesus manifests Himself to the Magdalene, to the ten disciples, most of +whom had deserted Him, and to Thomas who doubted. Thomas is convinced +of the Divinity of Jesus, the writer states that this Gospel was +written "that ye might believe." + +Epilogue: xxi.--The manifestation of Jesus by the sea of Galilee, the +solemn charge to Peter. The editors of the Gospel assert that the +author was the beloved disciple. + + +(John xxi. 24 was probably written by the Ephesian presbyters who knew +St. John. The rest of the chapter is evidently by the apostle himself, +although, it may have been added at a time later than the rest of the +Gospel, which seems to come to an end with the impressive words in xx. +31. The most contradictory hypotheses have been broached by writers +who have denied the authenticity of ch. xxi. Some have held that it +was added in order to exalt St. John, the apostle of Asia Minor, over +St. Peter, the patron of Rome. Others have held that it was added to +exalt St. Peter. Those who deny the authenticity of the whole Gospel +are compelled to regard ch. xxi. 24 as deliberate false witness.) + + +_St. John's Oral Teaching._--It seems that before St. John wrote his +Gospel, he had adapted it to oral teaching. This is shown by the +arrangement of facts in combinations of 3, possibly suggested by the 3 +manifestations of the Word recorded in the Introduction. There are 3 +Passovers recorded, 3 feasts besides the Passovers, 3 journeys to +Judaea, 3 discourses on the last day of Tabernacles before the address +to believing Jews (viii. 31), 3 sayings from the Cross. If we regard +ch. xxi. as added later by St. John, we find in the rest of the Gospel +3 miracles in Judaea, 3 in Galilee, and 3 appearances of the risen Lord. + + + +[1] _Apostolic Age of the Church_, vol. ii. p. 211. (English +translation.) + +[2] Dr. James Moffat, _Introduction to the Literature of the New +Testament_, p. 601. + +[3] Eusebius, _H. E._ v. 20. It is worth noting that Dr. Moffat, _op. +cit._ p. 609, admits that "if Irenaeus is correct, his testimony to +John the Apostle is of first-rate importance." So he adds, "he must be +held to have mistaken what Polykarp said, and to have confused John the +Presbyter with John the Apostle." + +[4] See Edersheim, _Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah_, vol. ii. p. +494. + +[5] The difficulties which arise from the difference between the +history of our Lord's ministry as given by St. John, and by the +Synoptists, have been discussed on p. 27, ff. + +[6] He changes the good into better (ii. 9); saves the dying (iv. 50); +gives power (v. 8); gives food (vi. 11); gives sight (ix. 7); is Lord +over death (xi. 44); blesses the work done in faith (xxi. 11). It +should be noticed that St. John never mentions that our Lord cured any +one possessed with a devil, which according to the Synoptists was a +common kind of miracle. But St. John does not therefore contradict the +other evangelists. He recognizes that there are visible works of the +devil (viii. 41; cf. 1 John iii. 8), and mentions "the prince of this +world" as causing the trials of our Lord. + + + + +{102} + +CHAPTER VII + +THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The Christian Church has never attributed the Book of Acts to any other +writer than St. Luke. The external proofs of the primitive date of the +book are important, and point to the apostolic age as the date of its +composition. St. Clement of Rome, about A.D. 95, in referring to Ps. +lxxxviii. 20, quotes it in words which are almost certainly based on +Acts xiii. 22. There are two apparent quotations from Acts in the +letters of St. Ignatius and one in the letter of St. Polycarp. It is +also quoted in the works of Justin Martyr, Tatian, and Athenagoras, and +in the letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons written in A.D. 177. +It was evidently read throughout the 2nd century, and it is definitely +assigned to St. Luke by Irenaeus, the _Muratorian Fragment_, +Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria. + +In opposition to this tradition, a persistent effort has been made to +prove that the book belongs to the early part of the and century. +There are certain passages in which the writer uses the _first person +plural_, implying that he was personally present on the occasions +described. The sections of the book in which that peculiarity is found +are ordinarily called the "we sections," and it has been asserted that +though the "we sections" are primitive they have been worked into the +narrative of a later writer.[1] Furthermore it is asserted that {103} +the book was deliberately intended to be a fictitious account of the +primitive Church, and that its special purpose was to balance the story +of St. Peter with that of St. Paul in such a manner as to completely +disguise the fundamental antagonism of the two apostles. + +The force of this argument has been weakened by the general admission +of non-Christian writers that the differences of opinion between the +two apostles were grossly exaggerated by the critics of fifty years +ago. It is therefore granted that there was less necessity for the +forgery than there was said to be by the critics in question. It is +also very obvious that we cannot fairly charge a historian with +dishonesty because he wishes to balance one great character with +another. No one would assert that a modern writer was a partisan or a +liar because he devoted in the same book twenty appreciative pages to +the Evangelical Revival and twenty appreciative pages to the Oxford +Movement. In spite of this fact, the trustworthy character of the book +is still vigorously assailed. It is said that no statement in the book +deserves ready belief except the "we sections," that those sections +were written by an unknown companion of St. Paul, and impudently +"appropriated" by a Christian who wrote between A.D. 105 and A.D. 130. + +This argument about the "we sections" can be completely overthrown by a +consideration of the _linguistic evidence_ of Acts. If language +implies anything, the peculiarities of Acts imply that the author of +the "we sections," who was a companion of St. Paul, was the author of +the whole book. And they also show that the author of the whole book +was the person who wrote the third Gospel. There are many words and +phrases found only in the "we sections" and in the rest of Acts. There +is, too, a large number of words and phrases in the "we sections" which +are rarely used in those books of the New Testament which are _not_ +attributed to St. Luke, and occur frequently in the rest of Acts and in +St. Luke's Gospel. If {104} we compare Acts with St. Luke's Gospel, we +find that Acts contains 108 out of 140 which are characteristic of this +Gospel, whereas it contains only about a half of those which are +characteristic of Matt. and Mark. There are 58 Greek words which are +found in both Acts and Luke and nowhere else in the New Testament.[2] +Among the terms which serve as connecting links between St. Luke's +Gospel and Acts, including the "we sections," occur various medical +phrases. It is becoming more and more widely recognized that these +phrases imply that the writer was a physician, such as we know St. Luke +to have been (Col. iv. 14). It is all the more remarkable that many of +the words peculiar to Acts are found in St. Luke's contemporary, the +physician Dioscorides. + +It is true that the sections taken from Mark show numerous "Lucan" +characteristics as they appear in our third Gospel, but these +characteristics are due to the third evangelist, and not to St. Mark. +So, it can be urged, the "Lucan" characteristics in the "we sections" +are due not to the author, but to an expert editor of a later time. In +reply, we can answer that the cases are not strictly parallel. For if +the "we sections" are not by the writer of Acts, he must have almost +entirely rewritten them, and, at the same time, have been guilty of a +gross fraud, which he stupidly dropped in passages where it could have +been effectively used. + +To this linguistic evidence of authenticity we can add _archaeological +evidence_. The discoveries of the last thirty years have greatly +confirmed the accuracy of the writer in points where a writer of the +2nd century would have betrayed his ignorance. In fact, we are able to +compare his accuracy with the inaccuracy of the writing known as the +_Acts of Paul and Thecla_, a 2nd century blend of sensationalism and +piety based on a document of the 1st century. Now, in almost every +point where we are able to test the knowledge possessed by the author +of Acts with regard to the topography of Asia {105} Minor and the +details of Roman government, it can be pronounced correct. This has +been admirably shown by Prof. Ramsay's works on _The Church in the +Roman Empire and St. Paul_. St. Luke knows that Cyprus was governed by +a pro-consul, which had ceased to be the case early in the 2nd century; +that the magistrates at Philippi were called _strategoi_, and were +attended by lictors, while those at Thessalonica were called +_politarchai_ (xvii. 6), a title which has been verified by +inscriptions. He is aware that the governor of Malta was only called +the head-man (xxviii. 7). He knows that Derbe and Lystra, but not +Iconium, were cities of Lycaonia, and that "great Artemis" was the cry +used at Ephesus in invoking the patronal goddess of the city (xix. 28). +We must not assert that these and similar details absolutely prove that +the writer was a companion of St. Paul; but we can say that he was +peculiarly well acquainted with the life of that period. The account +of St. Paul's voyage and shipwreck is equally accurate. + +A very favourite argument against the genuineness of Acts is that Acts +xv., in its account of St. Paul's third visit to Jerusalem, A.D. 49, is +inconsistent with Gal. ii. It is asserted that the author deliberately +falsified the story in order to represent the older apostles as +promoting the union of Gentile and Jewish Christians, some modern +critics assuming that the apostles would never have done anything so +Catholic. But there is no real discrepancy between the two accounts, +if we are ready to believe that St. Luke gives the public and exterior +view of the proceedings, while St. Paul, as is natural, describes the +personal aspect of those proceedings. According to Acts xv. 2, St. +Paul and St. Barnabas were _deputed_ to go to Jerusalem by the Church +at Antioch; according to Gal. ii. 2, St. Paul went there "by +revelation." The internal motive is surely compatible with the +external. Again, both Acts xv. and Gal. ii. show that the momentous +Council at Jerusalem included private and public meetings. The two +accounts fit one another all the better in consequence of the fact that +Acts {106} lays stress upon the public settlement (xv. 7 f.) and +Galatians upon a private conference (ii. 2). Acts shows that there was +much dispute, and Galatians shows that the dispute included opposition +to St. Paul's methods. Acts shows that St. Paul greatly desired to be +on good terms with the older apostles, Galatians shows that they gave +him the right hand of fellowship. The historical situation, the +occasion of dispute (viz. the attempt to impose circumcision on the +Gentiles), the chief persons concerned and the feelings which they +entertained, are the same in both books.[3] + +As to the fact that St. Paul in Galatians makes no mention of a second +visit to Jerusalem about A.D. 46, he ignores it because it was devoted +to the specific business mentioned in Acts xi. 30; xii. 25. Nothing +arose out of it affecting his relations with the first apostles or his +own apostleship. A description of this visit was therefore quite +beside the argument of Galatians. We cannot therefore say that its +omission in Galatians proves that it was an invention of the author of +Acts. + +The fact that Acts does not depend upon St. Paul's writings and +nevertheless shows many undesigned points of contact with them, leads +us to a very important conclusion. This conclusion is that the writer +of Acts was a companion of St. Paul. It is incredible that a later +writer, who took an eager interest in St. Paul's adventures, should +have made no use of St. Paul's letters. Those letters made a deep +impression upon St. Paul's contemporaries (cf. 2 Cor. x. 10), and they +were carefully treasured by all succeeding generations. We can only +explain the relation between Acts and the Pauline Epistles by the +theory that the author of Acts was sufficiently intimate with the +apostle to be able to write his book without feeling the necessity of +enriching it by references to those Epistles. The theory, then, fits +with the theory which is suggested to us by the "we sections." The +only remaining question is whether this companion was, or was not, St. +Luke. {107} He was evidently with St. Paul at Rome, and this makes it +impossible to attribute the authorship of Acts to Titus, as there is no +hint in the New Testament of Titus being there. Nor was the author +Silas, for Silas was not with St. Paul on the third missionary journey, +while the author of Acts was. Acts xx. 5, 6 seems to prove that the +book was not written by Timothy. No one seems so likely to have been +the author as St. Luke. For the writer of Acts xxvii. 1-xxviii. 16 +evidently accompanied St. Paul to Rome, and we learn from Col. iv. 14 +and Philem. 24 that St. Luke was with the apostle during his first +imprisonment in that city. We may therefore say that every line of +evidence points to the truth of the ancient tradition that St. Luke +wrote Acts. + +The sources of information employed by St. Luke can sometimes be +determined with a high degree of probability. Where he did not draw +upon his own recollections he could often rely upon those of St. Paul. +The apostle was, as we should expect, in the habit of narrating his own +experiences (cf. 2 Cor. i. 8-10; xii. 9; Gal. i. 11-ii. 14; Phil. iii. +3-7; Rom. xv. 16-32). Acts xxi. 19; xiv. 27; xv. 3, 12, 26, show how +St. Paul related his travels. Acts i.-v. probably incorporates an +early Jewish Christian document, and contains features which +unmistakably point to the truthfulness of the record. A good deal of +information was probably obtained from John Mark: it was to the house +of Mark's mother that St. Peter made his way after his escape from +prison recorded in ch. xii. As St. Mark was with St. Luke and St. Paul +at Rome, and acted as St. Peter's interpreter, St. Luke had the +opportunity of learning from him many facts concerning St. Peter. St. +Barnabas also perhaps furnished some details concerning the history of +the early Church at Jerusalem. Some of the converts who fled from +Judaea to Antioch (xi. 19) were probably men who witnessed the wonders +of the Day of Pentecost. And if St. Luke was a Christian of Antioch, +as tradition says, he may have made inquiries of these converts. + +{108} + +From Philip the evangelist, St. Luke may have learnt the history of +events with which Philip was concerned, as he stayed with him at +Caesarea (xxi. 8-12), and he also knew Mnason, who was one of the +"original" disciples of Pentecost (xxi. 16). Finally, we notice that +St. Luke had intercourse with St. James, the Bishop of Jerusalem, +himself (xxi. 18). + +[Sidenote: Date.] + +We have seen above (p. 68) that St. Luke's Gospel was probably written +soon after A.D. 70. As Acts i. 1 shows that Acts was written later +than the Gospel, and as there is just enough difference in style +between the two books to encourage the idea that Acts was not written +immediately after the Gospel, we may reasonably place Acts between A.D. +75 and 80. + +One obvious objection to placing the date of Acts so late is the fact +that the writer does not record the death of St. Paul. This is +certainly startling, for the martyrdom of the great apostle would have +formed an impressive conclusion to the book. But there are several +reasons which may be appropriately suggested to account for the +omission. Possibly the author intended to write a third "treatise," in +which the story of the martyrdom of his two great heroes, St. Peter and +St. Paul, would be recounted; possibly Acts, which ends very abruptly, +was never completed by the author. It is also possible that, after +showing that the Roman civil power had generally been tolerant towards +Christianity, he did not wish to endanger the circulation of his book +by giving an account of Nero's brutal persecution of the Christians. +If the book had contained any such history, the possession of it would +have been regarded as no small offence by the civil authorities. +Several years later, when the Church was probably much stronger, St. +John, in writing the Revelation, disguised his description of Nero in +symbolical language. In any case, St. Luke may have wished both to +show Theophilus that Christianity was compatible with loyalty to the +government, {109} and that the government had for a long time been +tolerant towards Christianity. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The general plan of the book may easily be seen by a glance at the +Analysis printed below. We may describe it by saying that the ruling +ideas are the progress and the continuity of the Church. That is to +say, St. Luke shows how the Church, the divinely organized society +which promotes the kingdom of God, lives and develops through various +stages and crises. It spreads from one upper room in Jerusalem to +Rome, the world's mightiest city. From the election of Matthias, the +new apostle, until the decision reached by the Council at Jerusalem +twenty years afterwards, and recorded in ch. xv., we behold a slow but +sure progress. The secret of this progress is dependence upon the +risen Christ. We cannot conceive how the apostles could ever have come +out of the perplexity and dismay caused by the death of their Lord, and +laboured with such enthusiasm, unless they were certain that the Lord +was indeed risen. Without the resurrection, the Church would have +collapsed at once. Knowing that it could not be possibly disproved, +the apostles appeal to it as their reason for advancing out of Judaism. +Two points with regard to the doctrine implied in chs. i.-xv. deserve +special attention. + +(1) _The doctrine of Christ's Person_. The doctrine is of the simplest +kind, but the facts asserted by the apostles imply that He is divine. +He is the Messiah, anointed by God, and the Holy One, and He is in a +special sense the Holy Servant or Child of God (iii. 14; iv. 27). He +is seated at the right hand of God (v. 31), He is Prince and Saviour. +He fulfils divine functions. It is He who has poured out the Holy +Spirit (ii. 33). He is the object of man's faith, and His name or +revealed personality is declared to have just restored a lame man to +soundness (iii. 16); signs and wonders are expected to be done through +Him (iv. 30). There is "salvation" in none other (iv. 12), and He is +to be "the Judge of quick and dead" {110} (x. 42). St. Stephen in +dying prays to Him. He is perpetually called Lord, and the fact that +the same name is applied to Jehovah in the Septuagint makes it +impossible to suppose that Christ is not regarded as possessed of +divine attributes. + +(2) _The doctrine of the salvation of the world_. Rationalist critics +have asserted that the first apostles had no idea that the gospel was +meant for the world, and that they limited its light to the children of +Abraham. The unfairness of this assertion is shown by the consistent +manner in which the same doctrine of the salvation of all men is +interwoven in different parts of Acts, including the early chapters, +which are generally acknowledged to be derived from an early Jewish +Christian source. The doctrine is that salvation is offered to the +Jews first (iii. 26), but "all that are afar off" may share in it (ii. +39; iii. 25). This is exactly the doctrine expressed by St. Paul in +Rom. i. 16. And the conversion of Gentiles of different classes, as +recorded in Acts, testifies that the apostles acted up to the doctrine. +They did not doubt that the Gentiles had a right to the gospel. The +point which did agitate them was, how much of the Jewish ceremonial +ought the Gentiles to be required to observe. When the Gentile +converts became numerous the question became acute, being sharpened by +the demand of certain Jewish Christians that all converts should be +circumcised. + +St. Peter and St. James set their faces against this demand, and it was +determined on their advice that the Gentiles should only be required to +abstain from "meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things +strangled, and from fornication" (xv. 29). The rule was primarily +meant for Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia. It prohibits complicity in +idolatry, and in the immorality with which Syrian idolatry had been +historically associated. And it prohibits the eating of blood and +things strangled, a practice which might cause friction in the presence +of Jewish communities. Nothing is said about circumcision or the +sabbath. It is impossible to reconcile Acts xv. with the {111} theory +that the original apostles were merely Jewish Unitarians who detested +St. Paul. And the Rationalists who have propagated this theory gain no +help either from Galatians or from Acts xxi. For St. Paul, in writing +to the Galatians, asserts the two central facts which we find in Acts +xv., viz. (i.) that his policy of an open gospel was opposed by a party +which appealed to the original apostles, (ii.) that the original +apostles gave him the hand of fellowship and repudiated the Judaizers. +In Acts xxi. 24 we find St. Paul himself performing a Jewish ceremonial +act at the request of St. James. The request was made in order to +counteract the falsehood that he had been trying to make the Hebrew +converts desert the old Jewish customs. It cannot be interpreted as a +proof of the supposed blind Judaism of St. James. For St. Paul +_voluntarily_ performed a similar act at Cenchreae, and we have no +ground for believing that he always claimed for himself that entire +freedom from Jewish usages which he always claimed for his Gentile +converts. His own words contradict such a notion emphatically (1 Cor. +ix. 20). + +The truth is that it is only by doing violence to all the evidence +which we possess, that anything can be done to support either the +theory of Baur and his school that the apostles of the Church were +divided with regard to the _Law_, or the more recent theory of Harnack +and others that they were divided with regard to the _Person of +Christ_. All the apostles believed that the gospel was for all men on +equal terms, and that Christ was the divine Lord of all. + +In addition to these points, it is necessary to say a few words about +_the ministry of the Church_ which is described in Acts. It is +asserted by such writers as Martineau, Sabatier, and Schmiedel, that +the state of the Church and the ministry in Acts betrays the fact that +the author did not write in the apostolic age. It is said that +"hierarchical ideas" or "hierarchical pretensions" can be detected in +such passages as i. 17, 20; viii. 14-17; xv. 28; xx. 28, and that such +ideas {112} could not have been entertained by the apostles. It is not +possible to give a full discussion of such a theory in this book.[4] +We must be content with noting that, in order to give it any appearance +of validity, it is necessary to reject every part of the New Testament +which does not happen to agree with it. Schmiedel, who places Acts +between A.D. 110 and 130, says that "Acts xx. 18-35 has many ideas in +common with those of the Pastoral Epistles," but that "the author has +not yet reached the stage in the development of Church government which +characterizes the First Epistle to Timothy." [5] He says this simply +because that Epistle, which he regards as a late forgery, shows a form +of Church government practically identical with Episcopacy, while he +thinks that Acts xx. shows a form of government intermediate between +the genuine apostolic form and Episcopacy. To this we may make two +answers; (a) that the Church government in Acts and 1 Timothy is +practically the same, the work of the apostle being in r Timothy partly +delegated to an apostolic vicar; (b) as there is excellent evidence for +regarding 1 Timothy as a genuine writing of St. Paul, it gives us an +additional cause for believing that the description of Church +government in Acts is not fictitious. + + +ANALYSIS + +The outline of the book is laid down in the words of our Lord quoted in +i. 8, "Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon +you: and ye shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, +and Samaria, and unto the uttermost parts of the earth." + +{113} + +A. + +From A.D. 29 to ? 34, + +The Church at Jerusalem: i.-viii. 1.--Introduction; the commission to +the apostles, the Ascension, choice of Matthias in place of Judas (i.). +Outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, Peter's speech, the unity +of the Church (ii.). Cure of a lame man, Peter's speech on the +occasion (iii.). Peter and John imprisoned and before the Council, +their dismissal and return to the Church, community of goods in the +Church (iv.). Ananias and Sapphira, miracles of healing, especially by +Peter, second imprisonment of Peter and John, Peter's speech, +Gamaliel's advice to refrain from persecution (v.). Appointment of the +seven deacons, Stephen's ministry and arrest (vi.). Stephen's defence, +in which he shows that the Jews have always opposed the chief servants +of God and that _true worship is independent of the Jewish temple_, +Stephen's martyrdom (vii.-viii. 1). + + +B. + +From A.D. ? 34 to 46. + +Christianity spreads through Judaea and Samaria and to the Gentiles, +St. Paul's conversion: viii.-xii.--Church scattered by persecution, +Philip in Samaria, Simon Magus, Peter and John at Samaria, Philip +baptizes an Ethiopian proselyte to Judaism (viii.). Conversion of +Paul, his baptism, he is introduced to the apostles, Peter at Joppa and +Lydda, raising of Tabitha by Peter (ix.). Peter and Cornelius, Peter's +trance, he eats with and has baptized _Gentiles_ who had previously +believed in God but were _uncircumcised_ (x.). He explains his conduct +and the Church approves (xi. 1-18). + +Christianity spreads to Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, where it is +preached to _pagan Greeks_ (xi. 19-30). Herod's {114} persecution, +murder of James, Peter's third imprisonment and escape, death of Herod +in A.D. 44, Paul returns from his second visit to Jerusalem (xii.). + + +C. + +From A.D. 47 to 49. + +St. Paul's First Missionary Journey: xiii. 1-xv. 35.--Barnabas and Paul +receive the laying on of hands at Antioch, journey through Cyprus, +Elymas the sorcerer blinded, visit to Antioch in Pisidia, Paul's speech +in the synagogue, he turns to the Gentiles (xiii.). Paul preaches at +Iconium, cures lame man at Lystra, is stoned, returns to Antioch +(xiv.). _Persecution of the Christians by Jews_. + +The Jerusalem Church Council decides that _Gentiles need not be +circumcised_ (xv. 1-35). + + +D. + +From A.D. 49 to 52. + +St. Paul's Second Missionary Journey: xv. 36-xviii. 22.--Paul with +Silas visits the Churches founded during the first journey, Timothy +circumcised (xv. 36-xvi. 5). Paul crosses to Europe, imprisoned at +Philippi, conversion of the jailor (xvi.). At Thessalonica and Beroea, +at Athens, Paul's speech at the Areopagus (xvii.). At Corinth, brought +before Gallic the Roman proconsul, travels by Ephesus and Caesarea to +Jerusalem and Antioch (xviii. 1-22). _Persecution by Jews, or by +Gentiles whose pockets are affected_ (xvi. 19). + + +E. + +From A.D. 52 to 56. + +St. Paul's Third Missionary Journey: xviii. 23-xxi. 16.--Paul revisits +Galatia and Phrygia; Apollos, a converted {115} Jew, defends +Christianity at Corinth (xviii. 23-28). Paul stays at Ephesus, great +riot (xix.). _Roman officials tolerant to Christianity, craftsmen +whose pockets are affected show violence_. Journey to Macedonia and +Greece, Paul at Troas, Eutychus' fall and cure, journey to Miletus +where Paul meets the presbyters of Ephesus (xx.). Voyage to Tyre and +Caesarea (xxi. 1-16). + +F. + +From A.D. 56 to 61. + +St. Paul arrested at Jerusalem, imprisoned at Caesarea, voyage to Rome: +xxi. 17-xxviii. 31.--Paul visits James and the presbyters, the Jews try +to kill him, he is rescued and taken to the castle (xxi. 17-40). His +speech to the Jews, is removed by the chief captain (xxii.). His +speech before the Jewish Council, is taken to Caesarea (xxiii.). +Appears before the procurator Felix (xxiv.). Appears before the +procurator Festus, appeals to the emperor, speaks before Agrippa (xxv., +xxvi.). _Roman officials still tolerant, but obliged to interfere_. +The voyage and shipwreck (xxvii.). Paul at Melita (xxviii. 1-10). He +journeys to Rome and expounds the gospel at Rome, where the Jews had +not previously heard anything against him. He preaches the kingdom of +God for two years (xxviii. 11-31). + + +Similar Characteristics of St. Luke's Gospel and Acts.--Among such are +the continued interest in Samaritans (Acts i. 8; viii. 5-25) John the +Baptist (Acts i. 22; x. 37; xiii. 24; xviii. 25; xix. 3), women (Acts +i. 14; ix. 36; xii. 12; xvii. 4), the poor (Acts ii. 45; iii. 3; iv. +32; ix. 39, etc.). In both books Christ is specially called "Lord," +and is the great Prophet (Luke vii. 16, 39; xxiv. 19-27; cf. Acts iii. +22; vii. 37), also the suffering "Servant" (Luke xxiv. 36, 45; cf. Acts +iii. 13, 18; iv. 27; viii. 32). Notice, too, in both books the long +reports of prayers and speeches. + + + +[1] The "we sections" contain 97 verses. They are xvi. 10-17, xx. +5-15; xxi. 1-18, xxvii. 1-xxviii. 16. + +[2] See Rev. Sir John C. Hawkins, Bart., M.A., _Horae Synopticae_. + +[3] See Lightfoot, _Commentary on Galatians_. + +[4] The reader is referred to Dr. Gore, _The Church and the Ministry_, +p. 234 f. (fourth edition). + +[5] _Encyclopaedia Biblica_, vol. i. p. 49. + + + + +{116} + +CHAPTER VIII + +THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL + +Although the Christian cannot regard the Epistles contained in the New +Testament as having quite the same importance as the Gospels which +record the life and sayings of his Divine Master, he must regard them +as having a profound significance. They deal with the creed and the +conduct of the Church with an inspired insight which gives them an +undying value, and they are marked by a personal affection which gives +them an undying charm. They lend, too, a most powerful support to the +historical evidence of the truth of Christianity. We have already +noticed that the earliest Gospel was probably not written before A.D. +62, while St. John's Gospel is probably as late as A.D. 85. But +several of the twenty-one Epistles in the New Testament are certainly +earlier than A.D. 62, and out of the whole number only the three by St. +John can be confidently placed at a later date than St. John's Gospel. +Now, these twenty-one Epistles assume the truth of the story contained +in the Gospels. They do more than this. For they prove that during +the lifetime of men who had personally known Jesus Christ, there were +large numbers of earnest men and women who were at home with the same +ideas as those which Christians have cherished until modern times. +Some of these ideas explain what we find in the Gospels. For instance, +the doctrine of the Atonement is more plainly expounded in the Epistles +than in the Gospels. This doctrine, together with those which concern +the Person of Jesus Christ, the Holy {117} Trinity, the sacraments, the +Church, and the ministry, could be shown to have existed about A.D. 60, +even if the Gospels had perished or were proved to be forgeries. The +indirect evidence which the Epistles give to the life and teaching of +our Lord is therefore of immense importance. If the infidel says that +these doctrines are mere theories, we can ask him how these theories +arose, and challenge him to produce a cause which so adequately +accounts for them as the incarnation of the Son of God. + +The origin of "spiritual letters" or "epistles" was perhaps due to the +wisdom and originality of St. Paul. At any rate, there is nothing +improbable in this conjecture, nor need it draw us into any sympathy +with the recent attempts to use it as a means for discrediting those +Epistles in the New Testament which bear the names of other authors. +It is possible that the earliest Epistle is that of St. James, and we +have no means of telling whether St. Paul did or did not anticipate him +in writing Epistles. In any case, if St. Paul is not the pioneer, he +is the captain of epistle-writers. St. Cyprian, St. Jerome, St. +Bernard, and in modern times Archbishop Fenelon and Dr. Pusey, have +illustrated the power of making a letter the vehicle of momentous +truths. But on the greatest of them there has fallen only a portion of +the mantle of St. Paul. + +We possess thirteen Epistles written by St. Paul. There is no real +reason for doubting the genuineness of any of them, and a remarkable +change has lately taken place in the manner in which the opponents of +orthodox Christianity have treated them. When the ingenious attempt +was made, sixty years ago, to prove that St. Paul invented a type of +Christianity which was not taught by Christ, it was held that only +Galatians, Romans, and 1 and 2 Corinthians were genuine. The other +Epistles attributed to St. Paul were said to be forgeries written after +St. Paul's death, and intended to act as certificates for the Catholic +faith of the 2nd century. Since then criticism has grown wiser. The +genuineness of Philippians and 1 Thessalonians was first conceded. +Then it became necessary to {118} admit the genuineness of Colossians +and Philemon; and 2 Thessalonians and Ephesians are now being placed in +the same list even by some extreme critics. In fact, the use made of +St. Paul's Epistles in the 2nd century, and the impossibility of +finding any one who had the genius to personate the great apostle, are +two things which have disabled fancy-criticism. The Epistles to +Timothy and Titus are still confidently rejected by some authors, but +this confidence is being undermined. Some special attention is given +to the question of their genuineness in this book. + +The writings of St. Paul fall into four groups, each group being shaped +by something which is unmistakably novel and by something which it has +in common with the other groups. + +I. A.D. 51. 1 and 2 Thessalonians. + +II. A.D. 55-56. 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Romans. + +III. A.D. 59-61. Colossians, Philemon, Ephesians, Philippians. + +IV. A.D. 61-64. 1 Timothy, Titus, 2 Timothy. + +St. Paul was in the habit of dictating his letters. In Rom. xvi. 22 +occurs the name of Tertius, who was then acting as his secretary. But +St. Paul wrote the little letter to Philemon himself, and in Gal. vi. +11-18 we find a postscript which the apostle wrote in his own large +handwriting. Similar instances are found in 1 Cor. xvi. 21-24 and Col. +iv. 18, while in 2 Thess. iii. 17 he shows us that he sometimes made +these additions in order to protect his converts from being deceived by +forged letters written in his name. + +In order to enter into the spirit of St. Paul's letters it is necessary +to understand his history, a brief outline of which will now be given. + +Saul, who changed his name to Paul, was born at Tarsus in Cilicia, a +city which prided itself upon its good education. The language of the +city was Greek; Saul's father was a Jew and a Roman citizen. He was +trained at Jerusalem by {119} Gamaliel, a renowned Pharisee. The +future apostle was therefore born a member of the most religious race +in the world, spoke the language of the most cultivated race in the +world, and lived under the most masterly and fully organized +government. All these three influences left their mark on a soul which +was always impressible towards everything great and noble. But his +nature was not only impressible; it was endowed as well by God with a +strong pure heat which could fuse truths together into an orderly and +well-proportioned form, and purge away the falsehoods which clung to +truths. It is plain that he was not a Pharisee of the baser sort, even +when he believed that the Messiah was a pretender. Righteousness was +his ideal, and because he hated sin, a struggle raged between his +conscience and his lower instincts (Rom. vii. 7-25). He fiercely +persecuted the Christians, whom he regarded as traitors to their race +and their religion. On his way from Jerusalem to Damascus with a +warrant from the high priest to arrest the Christians, he was converted +(about A.D. 35) by a direct interposition of the risen Lord. Every +effort has been made by modern rationalists to explain this revelation +as either an imaginary vision or an inward light in his conscience. +The fact remains that St. Paul never speaks of it as a merely inward +reality, that he does not number his conversion among the ecstatic +states to which he was subject (2 Cor. xii. 1), and that he reckons the +appearance of Christ to himself as an outward appearance like the +appearances to the older apostles (1 Cor. xv. 5-8). We cannot get +behind the statements made by St. Paul and those made in Acts by his +friend, St. Luke. They show that he was met and conquered by Christ. +The appearance of Christ changed his whole career, transformed his +character, convinced him that Jesus was the Messiah, and that salvation +can only be obtained by faith in Him--that is, by a devoted adherence +to His Person and His teaching. After preaching Christ in Damascus, he +retired into the keen air and inspiring solitude of the Arabian desert. +{120} During this period the outline of his creed seems to have grown +clear and definite. It afterwards expanded and developed, as truly as +youth passes into manhood, but there is no evidence for any material +alteration having taken place after his return from Arabia. Many +Christians doubted the sincerity of his conversion, but St. Barnabas, a +conciliatory and kind evangelist, introduced him to St. Peter and St. +James at Jerusalem, A.D. 38. His life being threatened by the +Greek-speaking Jews, he departed for Tarsus. In due time he was +brought by St. Barnabas to aid the new mission to the Gentiles at +Antioch, a large and splendid city, admirably adapted for the first +propagation of the gospel among the heathen. In A.D. 46 he paid with +Barnabas a second visit to Jerusalem, taking thither a contribution +from Antioch to relieve the famine which raged there. In A.D. 47 he +went from Antioch in company with Barnabas on his first missionary +tour, visiting Cyprus and part of Asia Minor. On his return, A.D. 49, +he attended the Council at Jerusalem (Acts xv.; Gal. ii.), at which he +insisted that converts from paganism should not be required to submit +to circumcision and the other ceremonial rules of the Jewish Church. +Only once again has any Council of the Church had to discuss such a +burning and weighty question, and that once was at the Council of +Nicaea in 325, when it was determined to describe the fact that Jesus +is God in language which would admit of no possible mistake or +jugglery. At Jerusalem, in A.D. 49, the Church had to determine +whether it was sufficient for a man to be a Christian, or necessary for +him to become a Jew and a Christian simultaneously. Some Judaizing +Christians maintained the latter. Faithful to the teaching of our +Lord, who laid on no Gentile the necessity of adopting Judaism, the +Church decided that Gentile converts need not be circumcised. + +In A.D. 49, soon after the Council at Jerusalem, St. Paul began a +second missionary journey, and crossed over into Europe, where he +founded several Churches, including those of Philippi and Thessalonica. +At Athens he seems to have made {121} but little impression, but at +Corinth, the busy and profligate centre of Greek commerce, he was more +successful. He stayed there for eighteen months, and during this stay +he wrote the Epistles to the Thessalonians. They are marked by the +attention given to _eschatology_, or doctrine of "the last things"--the +second coming of Christ, the resurrection of mankind, and the judgment. + +This second journey closed with a visit to Jerusalem, and was followed +by an incident which shows that the apostle's long warfare with Judaism +was not over. The Judaizers had been defeated at the Council of +Jerusalem, and they were aware that the Gentiles were pouring into the +Church. So they attempted a new and artful plan for securing their own +predominance. They no longer denied that uncircumcised Christians were +Christians, but they tried to gain a higher status for the circumcised. +They asserted that special prerogatives belonged to the Messiah's own +people, and to the apostles whom He had chosen while He was on earth. +When St. Paul went from Jerusalem to Antioch in A.D. 52, St. Peter, +fearing to offend these Judaizers, was guilty of pretending to believe +that he agreed with them.[1] He refused to eat with Gentile +(uncircumcised) Christians. He thereby tried to compel the Gentiles to +"Judaize" (Gal. ii. 14), treating them as if they were an inferior +caste. St. Barnabas was carried away by St. Peter's example. St. Paul +then openly rebuked the leader of the apostles. It is on this incident +that F. C. Baur and the Tuebingen school founded their fictitious +history of a doctrinal struggle between St. Paul and the original +apostles. The fundamental falsehood of this history lies in the fact +that there was no real difference of opinion between St. Peter and St. +Paul. The latter rebuked the former for "dissembling," _i.e._ for +acting on a special occasion in a {122} manner contrary to his +convictions and openly professed principles. + +The Judaizing party not only tried to inoculate the Church with +Judaism, but strained every nerve to undermine the authority of St. +Paul. They said that he had no authority to preach Christ unless it +was derived through the Twelve, and they showed "letters of +commendation" (Gal. ii. 12; 2 Cor. iii. 1), to the effect that they +represented the first apostles and came to supply the defects of St. +Paul's teaching. With these opponents he was in conflict during his +third missionary journey, which began about August, A.D. 52. On this +journey he revisited Galatia and Phrygia, made a long stay at Ephesus, +and went to Macedonia and Greece. During this third missionary journey +he wrote 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans. It is hard to +determine the exact order in which they were written, as Galatians may +have been written before 1 Corinthians. These Epistles are the noblest +work of St. Paul. The persistent efforts of his opponents compel him +to defend both his principles and his character. Amid the perplexity +of the time, his clear and clarifying mind formulated Christian +doctrine so perfectly that he compels his readers to see what he sees. +This group of Epistles is mainly devoted to _soteriology_, or the +method by which God saves man. It contains abundant teaching about +God's purpose of saving us, the use of the Jewish law, the struggle +between our flesh and our spirit, the work of Jesus Christ in dying and +rising for us, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the morals and worship +of the Church. St. Paul's arguments are mainly addressed to believing +Christians, whom he wishes to preserve from Jewish or heathen error. +They are marked by the strongest light and shade. Nowhere does sin +appear more awful, and the love of God to undeserving man appear more +generous. At one moment the apostle writes as a logician, at another +as a mystic. Now he is stern, and now he is pathetic. In compass, in +variety, in depth, these four Epistles are great works of art, and all +the greater {123} because the writer esteems his intellectual powers as +nothing in comparison with the story of the Cross. + +In May, A.D. 56, St. Paul was arrested at Jerusalem, after which he was +detained by the Roman procurator Felix for two years at Caesarea, and +then sent to Rome because he appealed to have his case tried by the +emperor. He arrived at Rome early in A.D. 59, and was imprisoned for +two years in his own hired house before his trial. During this +imprisonment he wrote the Epistles to the Colossians, Ephesians, and +Philippians, and the exquisite private letter to Philemon. In +Philippians there is a strong reprimand of the infatuation of trusting +in Jewish privileges, but it is plain from Colossians and Ephesians +that Gentile Christianity was already firmly established, and that in +Asia Minor the Judaizing heresies were becoming fainter and more +fanciful. St. Paul criticizes a Judaic Gnosticism, a morbid mixture of +Jewish ritual with that Oriental spiritualism which fascinated many +devotees in the Roman empire at this period. The Philippians do not +seem to have been infected with the same religious malaria as the +Christians who dwelt in the valley of the Lycus. But St. Paul in +writing to them, as to the Colossians and Ephesians, takes great pains +to show who Christ is and what our relation towards Him ought to be. +This group is therefore distinguished by its _Christology_. + +St. Paul was released from his first imprisonment at Rome, though we +know no details of his release. He again resumed his missionary life, +and wrote the First Epistle to Timothy and that to Titus. According to +a tradition of very great antiquity, he visited Spain. But the changed +attitude of the Roman government towards the Christians soon cut short +his work. Earlier in his career the Roman officials had regarded the +new religion with easy though somewhat supercilious toleration. In 2 +Thessalonians we find St. Paul apparently describing the Roman +authorities as the restraining power which hindered the malice of +antichristian Judaism from working revenge upon {124} the Church. At +Ephesus he had been personally protected from the mob by the men who +were responsible for the public worship of the Roman emperor. But +under Nero an active persecution of the Christians was set on foot, and +St. Paul was again imprisoned at Rome. During this last imprisonment +he wrote his Second Epistle to Timothy. This letter, like the First +Epistle to Timothy and that to Titus, deals specially with the +organization and ministry of the Church, and was intended to +consolidate the Church before the apostle's death. The martyrdom of +the apostle probably took place in A.D. 64. His tomb, marked by an +inscription of the 4th century, still remains at Rome in the church of +"St. Paul outside the walls," which stands near the scene of his +martyrdom. Unless the relics were destroyed by the Saracens who sacked +Rome in 846, they probably remain in this tomb. The festival of June +29, which in mediaeval times was kept in honour of St. Peter and St. +Paul, and which in our present English Prayer-book is wrongly dedicated +to St. Peter only, is probably not the day on which either of the +apostles suffered. It is the day on which their relics were removed +for safety to the catacombs in the time of the persecution of the +Christians by the Emperor Decius, A.D. 258. + + + +[1] The above account places the dispute at Antioch before the third +missionary journey. Some writers of deserved repute place it in the +winter of A.D. 48, before the Council of Jerusalem. + + + + +{125} + +CHAPTER IX + +1 AND 2 THESSALONIANS + +THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +Among all schools of thought there has been an increasing conviction +that this Epistle is genuine. It was included in Marcion's +_Apostolicon_, or list of Pauline writings, it is contained in the +_Muratorian Fragment_, it is quoted by the great Fathers of the close +of the 2nd century, and is found in the Old Latin and Peshitta Syriac +versions of the New Testament. The earnest and affectionate tone of +the Epistle is thoroughly Pauline, and the argument that it is not +genuine because it does not contain the same pronounced anti-Jewish +teaching as we find in Romans is precarious, though it has seemed to +some sceptics to be convenient. The argument might be turned in the +opposite direction. For it would be just as reasonable to say that the +absence of anti-Jewish doctrine proves that the Epistle was written +before the great conflict with the semi-Christian Jews began, as to say +that it proves that it was written by a forger after the conflict was +over. One paragraph in the Epistle points decisively to an early date. +In iv. 13-18 we find that some Thessalonians were under the delusion +that it would be an exceptional thing for a Christian to die before the +second coming of our Lord, and that those who did so die would miss +some of the felicity appointed for the rest. Such a delusion must have +been dispelled at a very early date. Moreover, the {126} comfort which +St. Paul administers to those who are agitated by this notion gives us +the idea that he expected Christ to return in his own lifetime. In +this respect he writes to the Thessalonians something very different +from what he writes in his later Epistles (Phil. i. 21-24; 2 Tim. iv. +6), or even in 2 Cor. v. 1. We need not be surprised that God left the +great apostle in ignorance of an event which it is not given even to +the angels to understand (Matt. xxiv. 36). But a forger, living after +the apostle's death, would not be at all likely to represent his hero +as falling into such a mistake. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +Thessalonica, the modern Saloniki, was the capital of part of +Macedonia, situated in the middle of the bend of the Thermaic Gulf, and +not far from Mount Olympus, the snow-clad home of the gods of Greece. +It was a busy mercantile town, and in ready communication with Italy, +as the great road called _Via Egnatia_ passed through its walls. It +contained then, as now, a considerable number of Jews among its +inhabitants. In Christian times it became a great ecclesiastical +centre, and was influential in the conversion of the Slavs and +Bulgarians. It is still famous for its splendid Byzantine churches, +though the finest have long since been converted into mosques by the +Turks. + +The Church was planted there by St. Paul on his second missionary +journey, in A.D. 50 (Acts xvii.). He preached first to the Jews, and +after his third visit to the synagogue he was rejected by the Jews, and +he turned to the Gentiles. Some of these Thracian Gentiles were +converts to Judaism, but they were people whose character could be +trusted. In the mean time his Philippian converts twice sent aid to +him (Phil. iv. 16). Previous to this the apostle had been earning his +own bread, no doubt by tent-making. St. Paul was forced to leave +Thessalonica in consequence of a riot stirred up by the Jews. He +visited it again before his last journey to Jerusalem in A.D. 56. + +1 Thess. i. 9 shows that the majority of the Christians had {127} been +Gentile idolaters, though there were a few of Jewish blood. It was +among the sturdy people of Macedonia that St. Paul won his steadiest +recruits for Christ. Here, as in the letter to Philippi, we find that +he uses words of more than ordinary affection. These converts are to +St. Paul his "joy and crown" (1 Thess. ii. 19; Phil. iv. 1). He +compares his relation with them to that of a nurse with her own +children (1 Thess. ii. 7). When he wrote to the Corinthians he +displayed his Macedonians as brilliant examples of Christian liberality +and Christian loyalty (2 Cor. viii. 1-5). In this passage he alludes +to their poverty, and these Epistles show that they had to work for +their bread. They were exposed to bitter and continuous persecution +from Jews, who were capable of inciting the roughs of the town to set +on St. Paul (Acts xvii. 5). + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The Epistle was written from Corinth on the occasion of St. Paul's +first visit there. When St. Paul had to leave Beroea in A.D. 50, Silas +and Timothy remained (Acts xvii. 14, 15; xviii. 5). He sent for them +to meet him at Athens, and when they had come, he despatched Timothy to +Thessalonica (1 Thess. iii. 2). In October A.D. 50, St. Paul arrived +at Corinth from Athens: Timothy and Silas rejoined him at Corinth, and +the letter was written soon afterwards, probably early in A.D. 51. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The immediate cause of the Epistle was the arrival of Timothy with news +from Thessalonica. The apostle's reasons for writing were: (a) to calm +and encourage the converts whom he had so abruptly left; (b) to urge +them to perform their ordinary duties. They had fallen into a state +bordering on religious hysteria. Quite determined to be true to +Christ, they had been demoralized by the strain of facing constant +hostility. They had begun to take excessive interest in unfulfilled +prophecy and eschatological speculation. The result was that +individuals had become careless as to the performance of simple duties. + +The apostle comforts the Thessalonians by reminding them {128} of the +happiness and reality of their own spiritual experience. He wishes +them to see plainly the working of God both in his own preaching of the +gospel and their acceptance of it. On the one hand, he gladly +recognizes the _faith, charity, hope,_ and constancy under persecution: +the story of their conversion, as it had been known everywhere, has won +many friends for the Faith (i.). On the other hand, St. Paul is aware +that his own conduct has not been unworthy of an apostle. Probably to +vindicate himself against Jewish calumnies, he declares that his +ministry at Thessalonica was bold, pure, honest, and gentle. Moreover, +he did not quarter himself upon his converts; he worked with his hands, +and was just and fatherly (ii. 1-12). + +After a thanksgiving for the manner in which they received the word of +God, he speaks of his eager wish to see his friends again. He had sent +Timothy that he might comfort them, and Timothy has returned with glad +tidings. He prays for their establishment in holiness (ii. 13-iii. 13). + +He goes on to exhort them to avoid impurity and work quietly, and then +he speaks of the eschatological difficulties. The Thessalonians +wondered whether the Christians already dead would miss a share in the +joy of Christ's second coming. St. Paul replies that those who are +alive at Christ's appearing will have no advantage over the dead (iv. +15). On the contrary, the dead will rise first, and then the living +Christians will be caught up together with them to meet the Lord. The +day will come with surprise, and will terrify the unprepared (iv. 1-v. +3). + +He then calls them to watchfulness and sobriety. There follows an +exhortation to obey the clergy, and the early date of the Epistle is +again suggested by the fact that the titles which are used in his later +epistles are not given to the clergy of Thessalonica. The existence of +an order of prophets seems implied (v. 20). The Epistle has a special +blessing for these troubled Christians who look so wistfully for "the +coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." + +{129} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving, and congratulation. The good fruit borne by +Christianity at Thessalonica is known of through all Macedonia and +Achaia (i.). + +The character of the apostle's ministry there, a fresh thanksgiving, +the apostle desires to see his friends, but is hindered by Satan +working through adverse circumstances (ii.). + +Timothy's expedition, a prayer (iii.). + +Encouragement to obedience, exhortation against impurity and to work; +the blessed dead and Christ's second coming. The sudden coming of the +Lord (iv. 1-v. 3). + +Practical conclusion based on the above doctrine (v. 4-28). + + + +THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE THESSALONIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The external evidence for the genuineness of the Second Epistle is even +stronger than that of the First. It is mentioned by Polycarp,[1] and +apparently by Justin Martyr.[2] It is also supported by the same +versions of the New Testament and by the same Fathers as the First +Epistle. In modern times it has been rejected even by some who accept +1 Thessalonians. Some of the objections which have been raised are +almost too trivial to deserve attention. But the prophetic and +apocalyptic passage in ii. 1-12 has been regarded by many critics as a +serious stumbling-block. It has been urged (a) that 1 Thessalonians +implies that St. Paul believed Christ would return immediately, whereas +2 Thessalonians implies that certain important occurrences must first +intervene. But there is no real contradiction. For 1 Thessalonians +represents the return of Christ as certainly sudden {130} and _possibly +soon_; it does not represent it as certainly immediate. A thief may +come suddenly in the night, and yet the man who gives warning that the +thief will come, does not necessarily mean that the thief is coming +without delay. It has been urged (b) that the doctrine of Antichrist +in 2 Thessalonians is un-Pauline, and depends on the Book of +Revelation. But there is not the least improbability in supposing that +St. Paul was in touch with these ideas about the end of the world. We +know that such ideas were common among the Jews at this period. Nor is +there any proof that the teaching of 2 Thessalonians on this subject is +derived from the Revelation of St. John. Moreover, on the least +Christian view with regard to Christ and the Gospels, it is irrational +to deny that our Lord made various predictions about His second coming. +We find a list of such predictions in Matt. xxiv. and in the parallel +passages of the other Gospels. It is therefore natural to find St. +Paul speaking about the end of the world in language which resembles +that used by our Lord, or that found in Daniel, Ezekiel, and the later +Jewish Apocalypses. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +St. Paul sent this Epistle from Corinth, probably towards the end of +the year 51. + +Several modern writers have dated 2 Thessalonians earlier than 1 +Thessalonians. The grounds for this view are the references in this +Epistle to the teaching lately given by St. Paul while at Thessalonica. +But although these references would be natural in any Epistle written +first after his departure from that place, they do not necessarily +imply that 2 Thessalonians was the first. Moreover, ii. 2 probably +contains a reference to the First Epistle, and this letter was +apparently written to clear up a difficulty which the First Epistle did +not solve. Persecution had continued at Thessalonica, and higher +excitement and wider confusion prevailed. The Thessalonians were more +sure than ever that Christ's advent was coming immediately, on the +strength, perhaps, of some words in St. Paul's earlier letter to them, +{131} supported by a forged letter which pretended to be his and by +feigned revelations. The result was entire neglect of daily duties. +"There is no reason," men said, "why I should work for my living or try +to be provident, because the Lord is sure to come to-day or to-morrow." + +As the circumstances are so similar to those in the First Epistle, and +as Silvanus (otherwise Silas) and Timothy are still with the apostle, +we may be sure that 2 Thessalonians was written during St. Paul's first +stay at Corinth. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle consists of instruction and exhortation. The most +characteristic passage is ii. 1-12. The apostle declares that he never +taught that the day of the Lord is about to dawn immediately (ii. 2). +It must be preceded by several events. There will be an apostasy, the +revelation of "the man of sin, the son of perdition," who will assume +equality with God and sit in the temple of God. Over against this "man +of sin" we find placed "one that restraineth now." Many strange +interpretations of these two phrases have been devised, and the fancy +of commentators has ranged over various historical monsters from +Mohammed to Napoleon Bonaparte. One favourite idea is that the +description of the man of sin "setting himself forth as God" refers to +the worship offered to the Roman emperors, and to the attempt made by +Caligula in A.D. 39 to place his statue in the temple at Jerusalem. +But it seems far better to regard the man of sin as hostile Judaism, +personified in an Antichrist who pretends to be the representative of +God foretold in Mal. iii. 1. The other force which St. Paul personifies +is the curbing power of a strong government as then seen in the +administrative system of the Roman empire. The power of Rome protected +him against Jewish fanaticism at this period (Acts xix. 35-41; xxii. +22-29), but in this truly irreligious fanaticism he discerned a latent +mysterious evil (ii. 7) which would afterwards reveal itself in hideous +excesses. While "the man of sin," or {132} "wicked one," thus wreaks +his will, Christ will come and consume him with the breath of His mouth. + +St. Paul understood the real genius of the antichristian Jews. Early +in the 2nd century they began a series of rebellions against the power +of Rome, committing horrible atrocities. These rebellions culminated +between A.D. 132 and 135. The Jews then rallied round a pretended +Messiah, Simon Bar Kocheba, whom they named "Prince of Israel"; they +killed the Christians who refused to blaspheme Jesus, and they captured +Jerusalem from the Romans. After a fierce struggle the Romans took +Jerusalem again, and crowds of Jews were either massacred, or sold as +slaves by the oak of Abraham at Hebron and in the markets of Egypt. + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving for faith, charity, steadfastness, the +certainty of Christ's coming to "render vengeance" and "to be glorified +in His saints" (i.). + +Apocalyptic passage, renewed thanksgiving, exhortation to hold the +traditions already received, invocation of Christ and our Father to +comfort and stablish the converts (ii.). + +St. Paul requests their prayers for himself, anticipates their +Christian progress, excommunication of disorderly brethren commanded. +The apostle had worked for his living, they must do likewise. He +commends them to the Lord, and appends a salutation in his own hand as +a seal of authenticity (iii.). + + + +[1] _Ad Phil._ ii. + +[2] _Trypho_, 110. + + + + +{133} + +CHAPTER X + +THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Romans is +admitted by almost every modern critic, Christian or not Christian. It +was always acknowledged by F. C. Baur, who rejected all the Epistles +bearing the name of St. Paul except these four. This Epistle is +referred to in several writings of the 2nd century, and is unmistakably +mentioned in the letter written to the Corinthians by St. Clement of +Rome about A.D. 95. He says, "Take up the Epistle of the blessed Paul +the apostle. What did he first write to you in the beginning of the +Gospel? Of a truth he sent a letter to you by the Spirit concerning +himself, and also Cephas and Apollos, because you had even then formed +parties" (cf. 1 Cor. i. 12). The style of the Epistle is spontaneous, +vivid, and coherent. The authenticity is only disputed by a tiny group +of infidel writers who, in reaction against Baur, have endeavoured to +make good their unbelief by asserting the genuineness of the Scriptures +which Baur rejected, and rejecting what Baur defended. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth" (i. 2). In former times +Corinth had been the most important city in Greece after Athens itself. +It was one of the earliest homes of Greek art, and its position made it +so favourable for commerce that it attracted a colony of Phoenician +traders at a very remote period. When its art declined, it remained +celebrated for its wealth and its {134} extreme licentiousness. The +patron deity of the Corinthians was Aphrodite, who was no other than +the foul Phoenician Astarte. Her temple on the rock of the +Acrocorinthus dominated the city below, and from it there came a stream +of impure, influences "to turn men into swine." + +In B.C. 146 the city was captured by the Roman general Mummius. It was +left desolate until B.C. 46, when Julius Caesar refounded it as a Roman +colony. The Romans called the whole of Greece the province of Achaia, +and constituted Corinth the capital of it. While Athens was still the +seat of the greatest university in the world, where lived most +vigorously the glorious memories of bygone Greece, the government of +the province was directed from Corinth. When St. Paul visited it, it +was under a proconsul, Junius Gallio, the brother of the philosopher +Seneca. The possession of two good harbours, and its position on the +quickest route from Rome to the East, caused a rapid revival of +Corinthian wealth and Corinthian manners. There was also a good deal +of literary and philosophic culture. In the time of St. Paul the +descendants of the original Roman colonists probably formed a small +aristocracy among the mass of Greek dwellers at Corinth, and some +settlements of various nationalities, including one of Jews, were +living there. A few miles away, at the shrine of Poseidon, were held +the athletic Isthmian games, and still by the sea-shore there grow the +pine trees, such as furnished the quickly withering wreaths which were +given to the victors in the race. + +The Church of Corinth was founded by St. Paul on his second missionary +journey, during his first visit to Europe. His stay at Corinth lasted +for eighteen months. There is an account of it in Acts xviii. He +laboured at tent-making, and found a home with a devout Jewish couple, +Aquila and Priscilla. At first he preached in the synagogue, where he +converted the ruler of the synagogue, Crispus. Being rejected by the +Jews, he turned to the Gentiles, and held his meetings {135} in the +house of Justus, a converted proselyte. The Jews prosecuted St. Paul +before Gallio, who, however, dismissed the case with contemptuous +indifference. The converts to Christianity were numerous. They were +mostly Gentiles (1 Cor. xii. 2), but there were a few influential +Jewish Christians and some Gentiles who had been proselytes of Judaism. +It is clear that the Church contained a few men of good birth and +education (1 Cor. i. 26), but the majority were from the poorer +classes. The Corinthians as Christians were by no means entirely free +from the characteristics which had marked them as citizens. They were +ready to form cliques and quarrel in the name of Christ, and they still +showed the same quarrelsome mood in the time of St. Clement. They +found it hard to hate the sensuality which in their earlier days they +had regarded as divine. They were puffed up with eloquence and +philosophic speculation, and forgot that there is no "sweetness and +light" comparable to the Gospel. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +This Epistle was written from Ephesus in the spring of A.D. 55. The +note at the end of the Epistle to the effect that it was written "from +Philippi," though ancient, is incorrect, and is due to a +misunderstanding of xvi. 5. + +When St. Paul left Corinth in April, A.D. 52, to go to Jerusalem, +Apollos came to take his place, and preached with much success (Acts +xviii. 27). St. Paul returned to Ephesus at the end of the summer of +52, and Apollos left Corinth and joined St. Paul. Soon some Judaizing +teachers appeared at Corinth, and the apostle was obliged to go +thither, though "in sorrow" (2 Cor. ii. 1; cf. 2 Cor. xii. 14; xiii. +1). After this disciplinary visit he returned to Ephesus, and sent the +Corinthians a sharp letter, now lost, about the relations which they +should have with open and notorious evil-livers (1 Cor. v. 9). + +St. Paul's next news from Corinth caused him to write this letter. +Some members of Chloe's household told him of the development of +factions there; and a letter was sent, perhaps {136} by the hands of +Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (xvi. 15-18), asking for advice +about matters of grave importance, including litigation between +Christians and an unseemly freedom in public worship. Realizing the +serious state of affairs, St. Paul determined to visit Corinth a third +time, and sent Timothy as his representative to prepare for his coming +(1 Cor. iv. 17, xvi. 10). After Timothy's departure he wrote this +Epistle. + +The above account assumes that St. Paul's _second visit_ to Corinth was +paid before 1 Corinthians was written, but it is thought by some +writers of repute that it was paid after 1 Corinthians was written and +before 2 Corinthians. + +[Sidenote Character and Contents.] + +This Epistle, like each of the three other Epistles belonging to the +same group, has a perfectly distinct character of its own. It expounds +the doctrine of a crucified Christ as applied to social difficulties. +What Romans does as a theological treatise, and Galatians as a +controversial admonition, and 2 Corinthians as a record of personal +experience and vocation, this 1 Corinthians does as an instruction for +influencing a corrupt urban life with the leaven of the gospel. It is +very practical in tone, and the doctrine which it contains is not +stated separately, but is throughout woven into the cords of the +apostle's argument. There is nothing in the New Testament equal to +this Epistle in its power of bringing us close to the difficulties of +the Church in an ancient city. We seem to see the men and women who +composed it--their eagerness for religious novelties, their debased +surroundings, their anarchic divisions, their frail sense of moral +responsibility. And a modern reader will probably lay the letter down +with a conviction that our great modern cities have much to learn from +the words written by St. Paul to Corinth, "the light of Greece." + +The Epistle is very olderly in arrangement. It deals first with the +report which St. Paul had received about the Corinthian Church +(i.-vi.); then it answers various questions {137} which the Corinthians +had submitted to him (vii.-xi. 1). Then follow directions based on the +report and the questions. + +The letter opens with a significant salutation and thanksgiving (i. +1-9). St. Paul then proceeds to rebuke the Corinthian _tendency to +party spirit_. There were apparently four parties in the Church. The +first asserted that they were followers of _Paul_; the second preferred +the rhetorical preaching of _Apollos_ to Paul's simplicity; the +third--probably Judaizers--ranged themselves under the name of _Cephas_ +as the leader of the original apostles; the fourth repudiated human +leaders, and arrogantly named their clique that of _Christ_, thereby +insinuating that the other parties were less Christian than themselves. +It is evident that all these four names were really used as party +watchwords. St. Paul says that he has _transferred by a fiction_ (iv. +6) the action of the wranglers to himself and Apollos. He means by +this, not that the Corinthians did not employ these names in their +strife, but that he and Apollos were in no sense responsible for the +strife. Some perplexity has been caused by the name of the +Christ-party. It is thought by some that they were rigid Jewish +Christians from Jerusalem (2 Cor. iii. 1; xi. 22). But it is more +probable that they were only a body of Christians who protested against +the parties named after human leaders, and saying, "We are the people," +made a new party of their own. + +St. Paul shows that this sectarian spirit is entirely alien to the +whole principle and history of the Christian faith. That faith, though +it is a wisdom which comes from God, does not lend itself to pride of +intellect. It is deliberately content to be counted foolish by the +world; its sign is the cross, its converts are the poor and +insignificant Corinthians, its eloquence the unpolished speaking of the +apostle himself. And as to their personal preferences for receiving +spiritual benefits from one Christian teacher rather than another, this +shows a complete misconception as to the source of the benefit and the +position of the teacher. This is explained in iii. 1-iv. 5. All +spiritual {138} increase comes from God. Christ is the Foundation. +Human teachers are not figure-heads of different schools, but the +instruments and the stewards through whom God dispenses His gifts. It +is not the duty of Christian teachers to put forward original ideas on +religion. + +Then the apostle, after referring to their ostentatious +self-righteousness, pathetically shows the unfitness of pitting against +one another teachers who share in an equality of forlorn destitution +and contempt (iv. 6-13). He concludes this section with an +affectionate but authoritative speech: he says that he has sent Timothy +to Corinth, and hopes shortly to come himself (iv. 14-21). + +The apostle proceeds with sharp decision to deal with _a case of +incest_. The Corinthians had treated this gross offence almost with +levity, but St. Paul declares that the offender shall be excommunicated +and shall be punished by disease (v. 1-8). After explaining some +advice of his earlier letter (v. 9-13), he goes on to rebuke a third +abuse--_litigation_ between Christians in pagan law-courts. The love +of law-suits was mischievous in itself, as involving a breach of +Christian brotherhood. It was also scandalous in its effects, as +exposing the bickerings of the disciples of Christ to the ridicule of +unbelievers. A stern rebuke of vice follows (vi. 1-11). Then comes an +indignant and lofty argument against fornication, which is a defilement +of the temple of the Holy Ghost (vi. 12-20). + +St. Paul now turns to the various questions that the Corinthians have +asked him. He first gives some advice about _matrimony_, carefully +distinguishing between statements which he makes on his own authority, +and rules laid down by Christ, and also between counsels of perfection +and the obligations of ordinary Christians. It is excellent to lead a +single life, but in view of prevailing sensuality, he recommends +marriage as generally more prudent. He advises that when people do +marry, there should be a fulfilment of conjugal duties except for {139} +occasional devotion "unto prayer." One permanently important assertion +in the apostle's teaching is that both marriage and celibacy imply a +"gift from God." St. Paul would have had no sympathy with either any +mediaeval depreciation of married life, or the modern English notion +that a man has not "settled down" until he has married (vii. 1-40). + +The next question is whether converts may eat _meat that has been +offered to idols_. With strong common-sense, the apostle points out +that there is here no alternative between essential right and wrong. +You may eat it, because an idol is nothing, but you must take care not +to hurt the consciences of other Christians (viii.). You may eat +anything that you buy in the market-place, but you must not attend an +idolatrous feast in a temple, and if you are at a private house you +must not eat food offered to idols if your attention has been directly +called to its character (x. 23-32). St. Paul illustrates his meaning +by reference to his own self-denial--the policy he had at Corinth of +exacting no payment for his ministry, his tactful caution, his severe +self-control (ix.). The need of such self-control is proved by the +fact that the ancient Jews, in spite of their high privileges, fell +into carelessness and sin (x. 1-13). The Corinthians must not be like +the Jews. The nature of the Eucharist warns them to be scrupulously +careful about temple feasts. There cannot be a drinking of the chalice +of Christ and of the cup of devils (x. 14-22). + +Chapter xi. deals with _public worship_. St. Paul gives directions for +women to cover the head in church, and then comes a reference to the +Holy Eucharist which is of extreme interest and importance. It was the +custom for Christians to meet together before the Eucharist for a +common meal called the Agape, which was intended to commemorate the +Lord's Last Supper. St. Paul complains that this meal has been made an +occasion of sin among the Corinthians: the richer people had overeaten +themselves, while the poor were left hungry and ashamed. The apostle +sets off the unfitness of {140} this conduct by a brief exposition of +the Eucharist; the preliminary meal, so much misused by these +ungracious and ungenerous Christians, was intended to be a preparation +for the ineffable Feast, at which the Fare was the very Body and Blood +of Jesus Christ, and at which His death was solemnly represented (xi. +2-34). + +St. Paul deals next with _spiritual gifts_, saying that they come from +God, and so give no ground for boasting, and that the exercise of them +is only pleasing to God if it be joined with charity. After a sublime +chapter on charity, he lays down some regulations for those who +possessed these abnormal gifts, which, it is evident, were already the +cause of disorders in the Church. The Corinthians, with their craving +for the miraculous, tended to set a high value on speaking with +tongues, but St. Paul upholds the superiority of the more intelligible +and useful gift of prophecy (xii.-xiv.). + +The Epistle concludes with a splendid argument for the reality of the +_Resurrection_. It is directed against some false philosophy. St. +Paul claims for the fact of the resurrection of Christ the witness of +Scripture, of many honest and intelligent Christians, and of himself. +Then he goes on to show to the Corinthian objectors what a denial of +the resurrection of the dead involves. It means that Christ did not +rise, that I am preaching deceit, that you are believing a lie, that +the dead in Christ have no existence except as memories, that we who +have foregone the pleasures of this life have done so in pursuit of a +delusive phantom. But it cannot be so. Christ is really risen. And +St. Paul passes on to demonstrate the happy consequences which follow +from this. The Resurrection is the earnest of all that Christ will do +for man; and in the light of it Christian baptism for the sake of the +dead[1] and Christian heroism have their meaning (xv. 1-34). + +{141} + +In order to remove difficulties from the mind of an objector, St. Paul +discusses the kind of body which we shall have at the Resurrection. He +shows by analogies from nature (a) that God is able to effect the +transformation of a seed-grain into a new product, and can therefore +transform us while retaining a connection between our present and +future body; (b) that God is able to create a variety of embodiments, +and can therefore give us a higher embodiment than we now possess. +There will be a spiritual body adapted to the spiritual world, as truly +as our natural body is adapted to life in this world. Thus the gospel +is truly a gospel for the body as well as for the spirit. Our whole +personality will be saved, and nothing will be discarded (xv. 35-58). + +St. Paul concludes with an order for the collection of alms on behalf +of the faithful in Jerusalem, and says that he hopes to come soon to +Corinth. After some personal matters, he characteristically appends +with his own hand a curse on those who do not love the Lord, and a +prayer and loving message for the faithful. + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving (i. 1-9). + +(1) Evils in the Church: i. 10-vi. 20.--Sectarianism. This is rebuked +on the ground that all the apostles, etc., are working for one end, and +all their power is God's. Christ is supreme over all (i. 10-iv. 21). + +Incest. The Church is to deliver the sinner to Satan (the severest +form of excommunication). St. Paul mentions a previous warning not to +associate with immoral Christians (v.). + +{142} + +Going to law with a Christian in the pagan courts is rebuked. Warning +against profligacy (vi.). + +(2) Answers to a letter from the Corinthians: vii. 1-xi. 1.--Marriage +and celibacy. It is well to avoid marriage. But the married must not +separate. Under present circumstances, the apostle would prefer others +to be unencumbered as he is (vii.). + +Food offered to idols. Christian liberty (viii.). St. Paul's example +in not claiming one's own rights (ix.). Danger of thinking that we +stand. We are "one bread," and must seek each other's good (x.-xi. 1). + +(3) Other evils in the Church: xi. 2-34.--Women to be covered. Conduct +at the Eucharist and the Agape. An account of the institution of the +Eucharist. + +(4) Answer to a question concerning spiritual gifts: xii.-xiv.--Unity +in diversity (xii.). Charity the greatest gift (xiii.). Prophesying +and tongues compared (xiv.). + +(5) Vindication of the Resurrection: xv.--The evidence for Christ's +resurrection.[2] The nature of our resurrection. + +(6) Some directions and personal details: xvi. + + + +[1] 1 Cor. xv. 29. This verse is very obscure. It has been +interpreted as meaning that when a convert died before it was possible +for him to be baptized, it was a custom of the Corinthians to allow a +friend to undergo baptism in his stead. But perhaps it simply means +being baptized for the sake of some dear one who was a sincere +Christian, and begged that his or her surviving relatives would be +baptized and meet him or her hereafter. + +[2] It is important to notice that St. Paul, in writing of the death +and resurrection of our Lord, gives powerful evidence in support of St. +John's assertion that our Lord died on Nisan 14 (see above, p. 29). In +1 Cor. v. 7, 8 he says, "Our Passover also hath been sacrificed, even +Christ: wherefore let us keep the feast"; and in 1 Cor. xv. 20 he calls +Christ "the first-fruits of them that are asleep." Now, if Christ died +on Nisan 14, when the Passover lamb was sacrificed for a feast, and if +He rose on Nisan 16, when the Passover firstfruits were offered in the +temple, this double comparison is exquisitely appropriate. But if the +statement in John is false, St. Paul's comparison is forced and +unnatural. + + + +{143} + +CHAPTER XI + +THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of this Epistle is almost universally admitted, +although it is not quoted quite as early as the First Epistle. The two +Epistles are interwoven with each other by several threads of thought, +such as St. Paul's intention to visit Macedonia, his decision with +regard to the incestuous man, and his direction to collect alms for the +Christians of Jerusalem. Moreover, this Epistle agrees with the Book +of Acts, and at the same time is plainly independent of it. Acts does +not mention _Titus_, whose name is prominent in 2 Corinthians, and at +the same time Acts xx. 5, 6 corroborates the account of the visit to +_Troas_ in 2 Cor. ii. 12, 13. The whole style of the Epistle is so +natural and impassioned, so wonderful in its light and gloom, that +there is only one author to whom we can possibly attribute it. + +There is, however, a difficulty with regard to the last four chapters. +It is thought by some critics that they are a separate Epistle written +by St. Paul to the Corinthians, and afterwards joined to chs. i.-ix. +These writers are usually of the opinion that the last four chapters +were written before i.-ix., and that their theory will account for the +fact that they are more severe and depressed in tone. Now, it is true +that i.-ix. seem more hopeful than x.-xiii., and also that i.-ix. +contain two references to a previous letter (ii. 4; vii. 8, 9). We +find, too, in 2 {144} Cor. i. 23; ii. 1, 4, that the apostle shows a +shrinking from the thought of another visit to Corinth, while in 1 +Corinthians no such feeling is manifested. If, however, 2 Cor. +x.-xiii. had been written in the interval, the feeling is not +unreasonable. But the facts of the case seem to be most easily +explained by the belief that there was a letter written between 1 and 2 +Corinthians, but that this letter has been lost. In spite of the +difference in tone between the two parts of 2 Corinthians, there is +sufficient continuity of theme to make us hesitate to detach them. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto the Church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which +are in the whole of Achaia." The latter part of the address shows us +that St. Paul felt it necessary to vindicate himself to all the +Christians in Greece (Hellas). His opponents had evidently been +extremely active. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The Epistle was written in A.D. 55, a few months after 1 Corinthians, +from some town in Macedonia, probably Philippi. It was sent by the +hands of Titus and perhaps St. Luke (2 Cor. viii. 18-23). + +The First Epistle was received submissively by the Corinthians, the +strife of parties subsided, and the case of incest was dealt with as +the apostle required. In consequence of this happy result, it seems +that St. Paul decided to visit the Corinthians on his way to Macedonia, +sailing straight to Corinth from Ephesus (2 Cor. i. 15), as well as to +pay them the visit which he had promised before (1 Cor. xvi. 5). + +Timothy, who had arrived at Corinth in accordance with St. Paul's +previous wish (1 Cor. iv. 17; xvi. 10), soon returned to Ephesus with +news of a second and more serious crisis. We do not know what caused +it, or what was precisely its character, but it is certain that St. +Paul's motives and authority were harshly and openly challenged. +Perhaps Timothy himself was insulted, and therefore, indirectly, the +apostle who gave him his commission and authority. St. Paul wrote at +once a {145} very sharp letter, which is the _second lost letter_ to +the Corinthians, and he resolved to return to his earlier plan of +visiting them only as he came south from Macedonia. He made this +resolution to spare them for the present the pain of meeting him. This +lost letter was probably sent by Titus (2 Cor. xii. 18), who also +carried instructions with regard to the collection for the poor at +Jerusalem. Apparently St. Paul thought that it would be wiser not to +entrust Timothy with the delicate task of again calming the Corinthian +wranglers. As soon as Titus left, St. Paul was full of nervous +apprehension as to the effect which this letter would produce. He set +out from Ephesus (2 Cor. i. 8-10) in great anxiety, his departure being +perhaps precipitated by the riot so graphically described in Acts. He +tells us himself that when he came to Troas he had still no relief for +his spirit--no news from Corinth. Though he found an opening for the +gospel at Troas, he hurried on into Macedonia, and at last Titus came +with joyful news of the penitence and submission of the Corinthians. +St. Paul then wrote this Epistle. Towards the end of December, A.D. +55, he reached Corinth, where he stayed for three months. + +The Book of Acts fits perfectly with the Epistles. From Acts xx. 1-3 +we see that St. Paul did visit Macedonia and Greece at the close of his +stay at Ephesus, and from Acts xix. 22 we see that he sent Timothy +before him. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle has the nature of a letter sent by a spiritual father to +his children rather than of a doctrinal treatise with an argument +carefully built up. Its value for us lies chiefly in the vivid reality +with which it reflects the personality of the writer, his love for his +converts, his intense conviction that his apostolic commission and +power are entirely genuine--a conviction which is set off by his wish +always to associate himself with the weakness and fragility of ordinary +human nature. Throughout the Epistle there are scattered allusions to +Christian doctrine which are of the very highest importance. Before +giving an outline of the {146} Epistle, we may notice one or two +doctrinal passages of special importance. + +First, with regard to the Resurrection. The teaching of 1 Corinthians +is further explained. St. Paul shows how entirely he has thrown off +the feeling of terror which environed the ordinary Jewish idea of +death. The sense of union with God by which a few Jews in some rare +flashes of inspiration knew that they would live after death, is here +triumphant. St. Paul regards death as a portal to that happy existence +which can only be described as being "at home with the Lord" (2 Cor. v. +1-8; cf. Phil. i. 23). Union with Christ _now_ absolutely guarantees +union with Him hereafter. The resurrection-body which in 1 Corinthians +he described as "a spiritual body," he poetically calls the "house from +heaven" which God will provide for the redeemed spirit. Then he thinks +of this new body as a _robe_. And as he hopes that Christ will come +again before we have put off our present body in death, he says that he +desires to be clothed with the new body over his present body, "if so +be that being clothed we shall not be found naked." The last phrase is +obscure, but it probably is a fresh rebuke of those Corinthians who +denied the resurrection of the body. If so, it means "assuming, as is +indeed the case, that we shall really be found clothed with a body at +Christ's coming, and not naked (_i.e._ bodiless spirits)." + +Secondly, with regard to the work of Christ. In 2 Cor. iv. 4 He is +called the "image of God." Now, St. Paul teaches that we men may +reflect the likeness of Christ to God: + + "The truth in God's breast + Lies trace for trace upon ours impressed: + Though He is so bright and we so dim, + We are made in His image to witness Him." + +But St. Paul also teaches that the relation between the Son and the +Father is unique. He means that Christ reveals the Father completely +in virtue of this eternal relation between them. We are made to become +like God, but the Son is not {147} made; He does not belong to the +class of created things (1 Cor. viii. 6). And St. Paul never speaks of +Christ _becoming_ the Son of God. He regards Christ as having always +been the Son, exercising divine functions, and therefore as "God +blessed for ever" (Rom. ix. 5). In 2 Cor. iii. 17, 18 he asserts that +the Lord is the divine Spirit who animates the new dispensation. The +old Jewish dispensation is described as "letter," because it was a +system of outward commandments; the Gospel dispensation is described as +"spirit," because it is a system of spiritual principles which are +summed up in Christ. We by reflecting His glory are transformed into +the same image by successive stages of glory. This glory comes from +the Lord Jesus, who is the Spirit of Christianity (2 Cor. iii. 18). It +is important to notice that St. Paul does not confuse the Second Person +of the Trinity with the Third Person, and that for many years the +Christians used occasionally to describe the divine nature of the Son +by the word "Spirit." They gradually gave up this manner of speaking, +as it was ambiguous. + +In 2 Cor. v. 18-21 there is an important statement on the Atonement. +The close connection between the Atonement and the Incarnation is shown +in the assertion that "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto +Himself," and the love of both the Father and the Son is shown in the +words that "He made Him to be sin on our behalf." The first statement +saves us from the idea that God selected a holy man to reveal His will, +and then gave up this best of men to unimaginable suffering. No! it +was God Himself who came in the Person of the Sufferer. The second +statement implies that Christ, though sinless, was treated as a sinner. +He thus by dying accomplished the end which our punishment would +accomplish, namely, the expression of God's hatred of sin and love of +righteousness. + +The Epistle opens with an introduction and thanksgiving, in which there +seems to be a note of sadness, marking the effect which the crisis in +Corinth has left on the mind of St. Paul. He proceeds to give a +personal explanation. The visit to the {148} Corinthians on the way to +Macedonia was abandoned only because of the pain which it would have +given them; the sharp letter was not written in wrath, but in sorrowful +love (i. 23-ii. 1-4). St. Paul goes on to ask pardon for the man who +caused the recent disturbance (ii. 5-11). + +Then, whilst he is describing his journey to Macedonia (ii. 12-17), he +breaks off suddenly into a digression, in which he describes the +dignity of the apostolic ministry, its superiority over the Mosaic +ministry, the nature of its commission, and the seal of it in a life +which is always martyrdom (iii. 1-vi. 13). St. Paul concludes this +section with a short appeal to the Corinthians to avoid contamination +from heathenism (vi. 14-vii. 1). + +He then returns to the situation of ii. 13. He tells us with how much +joy he received the news that Titus brought him--joy for the +Corinthians, for Titus, and for himself. The next two chapters (viii., +ix.) contain instructions and exhortations respecting the fund +mentioned in 1 Cor. xvi. 1. The last four chapters follow quite +naturally. The apostle speaks with plain severity to rebuke those who +created the recent disturbance, and to warn any there may be whose +submission perhaps has not been quite entire. The prevailing tone is +that of pathetic and sorrowful expostulation. St. Paul repeats the +unkind things that have been said of him--how unimposing his presence, +that he depends on alms, that he is only eloquent with his pen. But he +defends his apostleship with absolute though very humble confidence, +counting up the things that he can say for himself--his share in Jewish +privileges, his sufferings for Christ, the revelations that God has +sent him, the signs of his success, the continual weakness that Christ +gives and blesses. Truly, the apostle is even greater than his grief. + +The Epistle concludes with a benediction, in which St. Paul +co-ordinates the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. From primitive +times these words have been used as the introduction to the most solemn +part of the Greek liturgy, from which they were taken into the services +of the Church of England. + +{149} + +ANALYSIS + +(1) St. Paul's thankfulness and exhortation: i. 1-ii. 17.--Salutation, +thanksgiving, the promised visit postponed, the previous letter, the +penitent offender. St. Paul's journey to Macedonia, triumph in Christ. + +(2) The Apostle's ministry: iii. 1-vii. 1.--His converts are his +letters of commendation, the superiority of this ministry of the gospel +above that of the Mosaic dispensation (iii.). + +Christ the subject of his preaching, present light affliction resulting +in eternal glory (iv.). + +Inspiring hopes of the resurrection, constraining love of Christ, the +ministry of reconciliation based on the atonement (v.). + +He persuades and suffers (vi. 1-13). + +Warning against being yoked with unbelievers (vi. 14-vii. 1). + +(3) The Corinthian Church and Titus: vii. 2-ix. 15.--The visit of Titus +to Corinth, the godly sorrow that followed (vii. 2-16). + +The collection for the poor at Jerusalem, Macedonian generosity, praise +of Titus (viii.). + +Exhortation to a generosity like that of the Macedonians (ix.). + +(4) A sorrowful expostulation: x.-xiii.--A warning to those who despise +his authority (x.). + +His rights and his sufferings for Christ (xi.). + +Revelations given, but also a thorn in the flesh, the signs of an +apostle, how he and Titus had dealt with the Corinthians (xii.). + +He repeats that he will come to Corinth a third time, exhortation, +benediction (xiii.). + + + + +{150} + +CHAPTER XII + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +This Epistle, being one of the four Epistles which are almost +universally unquestioned, requires little or no defence. The Pauline +authorship "has never been called in question by a critic of first-rate +importance, and until recently has never been called in question at +all." The writings of those Fathers of the Church who lived nearest to +the apostolic age contain several possible allusions to it, and it is +expressly named by Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. +The internal evidence shows that it must belong to the time of the +apostles, for the errors which are criticized in it are different from +the Ebionite ideas which existed at the beginning of the 2nd century, +and from the Gnosticism which existed even before the apostles were all +dead. They are evidently earlier than these heresies. Still more +convincing is the vehement and pathetic energy which marks this +Epistle. There is a ring of reality in its broken sentences and +earnest appeals. It displays none of the careful patchwork which we +should expect from a forger; it consists only of the quick hot words of +a man who is very deeply moved. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto the Churches of Galatia." What is the meaning of the name +"Galatia"? Students are still divided on the question. If the word +"Galatia" is used in a popular sense to describe the country inhabited +by the Galatai, then it means North Galatia, a district in {151} the +extreme north of Asia Minor. It was mainly inhabited by Celts, who +came thither from Europe in the 3rd century B.C., and spoke a Celtic +language as late as the 2nd and even 4th century after Christ. This +language is mentioned by Pausanias, and St. Jerome says that it was a +dialect only slightly varying from that used in Gaul by the Treveri. +But if the word "Galatia" is used in a political sense, signifying a +particular province of the Roman empire, then it means a large area +much further south, including Pisidia, Lycaonia, and part of Phrygia. +In this province were Pisidian Antioch, Derbe, Iconium, and Lystra, +where St. Paul founded Churches in A.D. 47, on his first missionary +journey. The latter explanation is almost certainly correct. + +No good argument can be brought forward in favour of North Galatia +which cannot be balanced by a better argument in favour of South +Galatia. For instance, though St. Luke in Acts uses the popular and +not the political names for districts, this cannot be urged in favour +of St. Paul's adopting the same usage. On the contrary, he uses Asia, +Macedonia, and Achaia in their political sense, and so we may suppose +that he would do the same in the case of Galatia. Again, though there +were in North Galatia Jews who would tempt the converts to Jewish +observances, there were Jews in plenty in South Galatia also. And +while many writers have said that the Celtic blood of these +recalcitrant Christians is proved by the enthusiasm, fickleness, +superstition, love of strife, and vanity which St. Paul rebukes, we may +reasonably urge that these defects are not confined to the Celts. The +Phrygians doted on a sombre and mysterious religion. In heathen times +they loved the worship of Cybele, with its exciting ceremonial and +cruel mutilations. And when they adopted Christianity, though their +morality was generally austere, their credulity was intense. In the +2nd century many of them embraced the new revelations of Montanus, and +in the 4th they largely affected the hard Puritanism of Novatian. In +religious matters the Celts are very little {152} inclined to +fickleness, and their superstitions are more closely connected with +dreaminess than with vehemence. + +The following facts also deserve attention; (1) It would be strange if +Acts gave us no account of Churches in which St. Paul took so much +interest. If Galatia be North Galatia, there is no such account in +Acts. If it be South Galatia there is, and the polite and natural +manner of addressing the inhabitants of the cities of Antioch, Derbe, +etc., would be "Galatians." Their bond of union was association in one +Roman province. (2) It is improbable that St. Paul would take the very +difficult journey necessary for visiting the Celtic Galatians. His +usual plan was to travel on Roman high-roads to the big centres of +population. North Galatia was both isolated and half-civilized. Also, +he says that he visited the Galatians on account of an illness (iv. +13). It is incredible that he would have chosen the long unhealthy +journey to North Galatia when he was ill. But it is extremely probable +that he left the damp lowlands of Pamphylia for the bracing air of +Pisidian Antioch. The malady was probably the malarial neuralgia and +fever which are contracted in those lowlands. (3) The Epistle contains +technical legal terms for adoption, covenant, and tutor, which seem to +be used not in the Roman but in the Greek sense.[1] They would hardly +be intelligible except in cities like those of South Galatia where the +institutions were mainly Greek. + +Assuming that the "Galatians" are those of South Galatia, we note that +in Gal. iv. 13 St. Paul speaks of preaching to them "the first time." +This first time must be the occasion mentioned in Acts xiii., xiv. The +second time is that in Acts xvi. 1-6. The Christians were mainly +converts from heathenism (iv. 8; v. 2; vi. 12), but some were no doubt +Jews or proselytes. {153} After the second visit of St. Paul, his +converts were tampered with. Some Judaizers had put a perverse +construction upon his action in promulgating the decrees of the Council +of Jerusalem of A.D. 49, and in circumcising Timothy. They urged that +St. Paul had thereby acknowledged his inferiority to the other +apostles, and practically advocated a return to Jewish ceremonial. +Instigated by other Judaizers from Jerusalem, the Galatians had changed +their Christianity into a semi-Judaism, and this all the more readily +because of their previous familiarity with the Jewish religion. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The place and date are both uncertain. The words, "I marvel that ye +are so _quickly_ removing from Him that called you" (i. 6), suggest +that it was written not long after the conversion of the Galatians. +But we cannot place it, as some writers have done, before 1 and 2 +Thessalonians. Its style is allied with that of 1 and 2 Corinthians +and Romans. It must be earlier than Romans, as it is like a rough +model of that Epistle. If written soon before Romans, it was probably +composed at Corinth early in A.D. 56. It may, however, have been +written as early as A.D. 52, before St. Paul's third missionary journey. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle is intended to recall the Galatians to St. Paul's true +gospel. In order to do this, he vindicates his own apostolic authority +to preach it, and expounds its great principle--justification by faith, +and not by observance of the Jewish law. + +After a salutation, without the congratulations which the apostle +ordinarily offers, St. Paul expresses his astonishment at their +perversion, and vehemently asserts that if any one dares to preach a +gospel other than that which the Galatians first received, let him be +anathema (i. 1-10). The history of St. Paul's reception of the gospel +is then set out. It came to him by revelation of Jesus Christ: this is +at once the demonstration of its unique authority, and the decisive +fact which settles the relation of St. Paul to the other apostles. He +did {154} not receive from them the gospel he preached, and, to +emphasize this, St. Paul counts up the various opportunities he had of +intercourse with them, and says what use he made of each (i. 11-ii. +10). The best illustration of the independence of his position is the +attitude which he adopted towards St. Peter, the prince of the +apostles, when at Antioch he deceitfully took the same sort of line +with respect to Jewish ceremonial that the Galatians are taking now +(ii. 11-13).[2] St. Paul describes the speech he made in opposition to +St. Peter, but while he is dictating it, he is carried away by an +orator's enthusiasm: he forgets that he is telling the story only of an +old debate, and at some points we cannot confidently distinguish the +rebuke to St. Peter from the exhortation to the Galatians (ii. 14-21). + +Then, still as if he were making a speech, the apostle proceeds to +argue as he does later in the Epistle to the Romans. He recalls to the +"bewitched" Galatians the happy memories of the days when they first +heard of Christ--the out-pouring of the Spirit, the first sharp +persecution endured so well. Did not all this happen when they were +under the gospel of Faith (iii. 2-5)? The true sons of Abraham are +those who accept the gospel (iii. 6-9). On the other hand, the people +who still desire to be under the Law can only avoid being under a curse +by keeping the whole Law--and this is impossible (iii. 10). God's will +is plain: He has said, "The righteous shall live by faith" (iii. 11, +12). Moreover, whatever claim the Law had on us is now discharged by +the satisfaction made by Christ (iii. 13, 14). Now St. Paul goes on to +show that the promise made by God to Abraham binds Him still. Just as +no subsequent transaction can nullify a Greek "covenant," _i.e._ will, +so the Law cannot nullify the earlier promise of God (iii. 15-18).[3] +Then he compares the promise made to {155} Abraham with the Law. The +latter was a contract, a mutual agreement between two parties involving +mutual obligations; if the Jews did not keep the Law, God was not bound +to bless them. But in the case of the promise, there is no suggestion +of contract. Then, lest his readers should suppose that there was an +inconsistency in the fact that God was the Author of both the Law and +the promise, St. Paul adds an explanation (iii. 19-22). The Law would +have been contrary to the promise if it had been intended to produce +the same result as the promise by another method. But, on the +contrary, the Law was added as a parenthesis in order to make known +transgressions, and with the result that it increased them (iii. 19). +Scripture shut up all mankind in the fold of sin, that they might look +forward to the reign of faith as the only means of escape. To +emphasize further the contrast between the Law and the promise, St. +Paul asserts that the Law did not come direct from God to man. It +came, as Jewish traditions said, from God and the angels to Moses, the +mediator, and from him to the Hebrews. The Law had a mediator, +therefore it involved two parties--God and the Hebrew people. But +there was no such mediator in the case of the promise. God spoke +directly to Abraham. And God in the Person of Christ spoke directly to +mankind. Thus the promises are greater and more gracious than the Law. +It is important to observe that the argument implies the Divinity of +Christ. + +Before Faith came, the Law played the part of a Greek "tutor," _i.e._ a +trusted servant who attended a child. He took the child to the house +where he was taught, and kept him from harm and mischief. And we, if +we wish to be still under the Law, shall be as foolish as a grown-up +son who wishes to be under a steward and a guardian. We must leave the +mere rudiments of religion now that we have reached a stage at which we +have been taught that God is indeed our Father (iii. 23-iv. 11). + +St. Paul supports this conclusion from his arguments by a {156} +touching appeal, in which he gratefully recalls the kindness he +received from the Galatians when he came to them in all the weakness +and distress of fever (iv. 12-20). Then he interprets for them the +story of Hagar, probably in answer to a reference in a letter which +they had sent him (iv. 21-v. 1). The Jew is in bondage like Hagar's +child, the Christian is free like Sarah's child. + +After this we have another appeal, a medley of exhortation, warning, +denunciation, and pathetic entreaty: the apostle, himself so +appreciative of great ideas, tries to make the unaspiring Galatians +understand that they are called to the perfect freedom which is the +service of God (v. 2-26). The Epistle closes with some plain words +which the apostle wrote with his own hand in large characters so as to +emphasize them for his readers. The motive of the Judaizers is boldly +labelled. Then, as if there had been a question of his own humility, +he associates himself with the crucified Christ, for whose sake he +bears in his flesh the eloquent marks of the Roman rods and the stones +of the Jews. It was the cruel custom in Asia Minor, a custom not yet +extinct, for masters to wound their slaves with marks which made it +impossible for them to escape recognition. And so St. Paul glories in +the pitiful scars on his body, because they prove Whose he is and Whom +he serves. + +{157} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, rebuke (i. 1-10). + +(1) St. Paul defends his apostleship: i. 11-ii. 21.--He was called by +God in spite of his fanatical Judaism, God's Son was revealed in him, +he conferred with no man, but retired to Arabia, then three years after +his conversion he stayed fifteen days with Cephas, and afterwards +preached in Syria and Cilicia (i.). + +Fourteen years after his conversion[4] he again went to Jerusalem "by +revelation." False brethren attempted to get Titus circumcised, but in +vain. James, Cephas, and John were most friendly to Paul and Barnabas, +agreeing that they should go to the Gentiles while remembering the poor +in Jerusalem. Cephas rebuked at Antioch by St. Paul (ii.). + +(2) St. Paul defends justification by faith: iii. 1-v. 1.--Galatian +fickleness, even Abraham was justified by faith, and in the Old +Testament the righteous live by faith, the Jewish Law merely a +parenthesis between God's promise and its fulfilment, the Law a tutor +to bring us to Christ (iii.). + +Judaism is the state of a son who is a minor, Christianity is the state +of a son who has attained his majority. Why return to the beggarly +rudiments of knowledge? The Jew is like the child of Hagar, the +Christian is like the child of Sarah (iv.-v. 1). + +(3) Practical exhortation: v. 2-vi. 18.--Circumcision useless, freedom +and love are the allies of the true Law, the works of the flesh and the +fruits of the Spirit (v.). Bearing one another's burdens, supporting +our teachers. A conclusion in St. Paul's handwriting (vi.). + + + +[1] The law implied in Gal. iv. 2 is in accordance with Syrian law. If +a father died, he left his son under the authority of a steward until +he was fourteen, and left his property in the hands of a guardian until +he was twenty-five. It is probable that in South Galatia as in Syria +this law was made under the reign of the Seleucids. + +[2] For the explanation of this quarrel, see p. 121. + +[3] The argument about "seeds" and "seed," in iii. 16, looks like a +mere verbal quibble in English. But it becomes quite intelligible when +we remember that in rabbinical Hebrew the word "seed_s_" was used in +the sense of descendant_s_. + +[4] See Gal. ii. 1, "at an interval of fourteen years." This third +visit to Jerusalem (the second mentioned here) was in A.D. 49. The +verse probably means fourteen years after his _conversion_, and eleven +years after his first visit. If we reckon the fourteen years from his +_first visit_ to Jerusalem, the first visit would be in A.D. 33. This +will not agree with Acts ix. 25, 26; 2 Cor. xi. 32, which show us that +the first visit was made while Aretas ruled at Damascus. Aretas became +master of Damascus in A.D. 37. + + + + +{158} + +CHAPTER XIII + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE ROMANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of this Epistle, like that of Galatians and 1 and 2 +Corinthians, is practically undisputed. No one ever seems to have +questioned it between the time that Marcion drew up his _Apostolicon_, +about A.D. 140, and A.D. 1792. Before the time of Marcion it is quoted +by St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius, and St. Polycarp. And there seem +to be some reminiscences of it in 1 Peter. It is first definitely +mentioned by name in the writings of St. Irenaeus, who quotes it +several times. This early and frequent use postulates for the Epistle +a very authoritative source. There is no one that we know of among the +first Christians who could have written it except St. Paul. What he +tells the Romans about his personal wishes and intentions is exactly +consonant with what he says elsewhere. The notices that he gives them +of his movements perfectly accord with the notices in Acts. The +primary conceptions of the Epistle are more or less common to all St. +Paul's works. They are concerned with the guilt and the power of sin, +the eternal purpose which God has for man, the meaning of Christ's +death and the effect of His resurrection, the nature of our acquittal +by God and our new spiritual life. + +The only serious question with regard to the criticism of the outward +letter of the Epistle, is connected with the last two chapters (xv., +xvi.). Baur rejected both as spurious compilations, {159} intended to +reconcile "Paulinism" with the more Jewish school of early Christian +thought. But Baur's habit of pronouncing spurious every book or part +of a book which did not agree with his peculiar estimate of St. Paul, +is now discredited. In spite of this, many critics think that xv. and +xvi. do not belong to this Epistle. They are generally admitted to be +by St. Paul, but it is thought that they are simply pages which have +become detached from some other writings of the apostle. Chapter xvi. +in particular is supposed to be a fragment of an Epistle to Ephesus. +It abounds in personal greetings to intimate friends; and yet it is +difficult to believe that St. Paul had many friends in Rome before he +visited it. And among these friends are Prisca and Aquila (xvi. 3), +who certainly stayed at Ephesus, where St. Paul had laboured for two +years and must have had many friends. The tone of xvi. 17-20 is +thought to imply sectarian divisions which the rest of the Epistle +ignores. And the final doxology appears in different places in +different MSS., a fact which suggests that the early Church doubted +where the Epistle ended. No real importance need be attached to +another argument used by some critics, viz. that Marcion omitted xv. +and xvi. He would have rejected them, whether genuine or not, on +account of the sanction given to the Old Testament in xv. 4. + +On the other hand, the integrity of the Epistle is maintained by some +of the best recent critics, including Sanday, Zahn, and Godet. The +best MSS. place the final doxology in its present position. The fact +that the majority of cursive MSS. and some valuable versions, such as +the later Syriac and the Armenian, place it at the end of xiv. seems to +be accounted for by the fact that the last two chapters were often +omitted in the lessons read in church, being considered unimportant for +the purposes of general edification. The fact that the Epistle seems +to come to an end at xv. 33, and also at xvi. 20, before the final +doxology in xvi. 27, suggests the best solution. It is that the +apostle, after concluding the argument of the Epistle, made various +{160} additions of a personal nature with reference to himself and his +friends as they occurred to his mind. He then summed up the whole +argument in xvi. 25-27, where the obedience of _faith_ is stated to be +the purpose of God's final revelation. The number of friends mentioned +in xvi. is not incredibly large when we remember the easy and frequent +intercourse which existed between Rome and the east. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"To all that are in Rome, beloved by God, called to be saints." It has +been well said that the universality of the gospel made St. Paul desire +to preach it in the universal city. He longed to "see Rome;" he was +conscious that Christ had called him to "bear witness at Rome." He +himself had the freedom of the city of Rome, and he was inspired with +the hope, which was fulfilled three hundred years afterwards, that the +religion of Christ would be the religion of the Roman empire. The +territory then ruled by Rome more nearly embraced the whole of the +civilized world than any empire that has since been seen. It included +London and Toledo, Constantinople and Jerusalem. Roman soldiers kept +their watch on the blue Danube, and were planting outposts on the +far-off grey Euphrates. The city of Rome itself contained about a +million and a half of inhabitants. It was well governed and +sumptuously adorned. A real belief in the homely vulgar gods of their +forefathers had declined among educated people, and the humane +principles of Stoic philosophy were instilling a new regard for the +less fortunate classes of mankind. Strange foreign devotions were +satisfying some of the yearnings which found no nourishment in the hard +old Roman paganism. Men who took no interest in Jupiter were attracted +by Mithras, the Eastern god of the light. Women who could obtain no +entrance into the exclusive sisterhood of the Vestal Virgins, could +find occupation in the worship of the Egyptian Isis. Some vague belief +in a Divine One was rising in minds who thought that Jupiter Mithras +and Isis were only symbols of a power behind the mists of human wisdom. +Jews {161} of all classes were numerous, though the majority were as +poor as those of East London. They made some converts, and Poppaea, +the mistress of Nero in A.D. 58, dallied with Judaism as with a new +sensation. Men and women of every race were included among the slaves +of Rome, and the arts and elegance of Greek and Syrian slaves often +proved a staircase by which new religions found a way into the chambers +of the great and wealthy. In spite of some signs of moral vigour, +society was cankered with pride of class and with self-indulgence. It +possessed no regenerating force capable of checking the repulsive vice +which was encouraged by the obscenity of actors and the frivolity of +sceptics. + +We are told that "sojourners from Rome," both Jews and proselytes, were +in the crowd which listened to St. Peter's address on the Day of +Pentecost (Acts ii. 10). It is possible that these men brought news of +the gospel to the large body in Rome of Jews, and of Gentiles +influenced by Jewish ideas. In any case, communication between the +chief cities of the empire was at this time so frequent that we may be +sure that the principles and attractions of Christianity were soon +heard of at Rome. Gradually a small band formed there of people who +were interested and pleased by what they had learnt of Christ; it is +probable that St. Paul sent Aquila and Prisca from Ephesus to give them +definite instruction. It does not seem that they had been visited by +an apostle (xv. 20). The Epistle is addressed to a community +consisting of Jews and Gentiles, but the Gentiles are by far the more +numerous. + +The apostle's claim in ch. i. to address this Church as within the +jurisdiction of "the apostle of the Gentiles," his direct appeal to the +Gentiles in xi. 13, and the statement of his priestly office exercised +over the Gentiles in xv. 16, show that the Church of Rome was Gentile +in character. The proper names in the Epistle afford us little +indication of the proportion of Jews and Gentiles. The majority of the +names are Greek, and four names are Latin; but the Jews of that time, +like the {162} Jews of the present day, often passed under Gentile +names. We know how the English Jews now disguise Moses as "Moss" Judah +as "Leo," and Levi as "Lewis." + +The majority of the converts were probably in a humble social position. +When St. Paul wrote to the Philippians, there were Christians in the +imperial household itself, and it is possible that the Narcissus +mentioned in Romans may be the freedman of the Emperor Claudius, put to +death in A.D. 54. Ordinary slaves and freedmen seem to have been the +principal element among those who were first "called to be saints" at +Rome, but before long there were people of good birth and cultured +intelligence who turned gladly from the lifeless old Roman religion and +the fantastic new-fashioned Eastern cults to this original faith in the +incarnate God. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +St. Paul wrote this letter towards the end of his stay at Corinth, at +the close of A.D. 55 or the beginning of A.D. 56 (see xvi. 1; xv. +23-26, and Acts xix. 21). + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +St. Paul writes as the apostle of the Gentiles to the Christians of the +greatest of all Gentile cities. He does so with a solemn sense of +special responsibility. Profoundly impressed with the grandeur of the +Roman name, the position of this promiscuous little body of converts is +to him enormously significant. They are the representatives of the +faith of Jesus in the capital of the world; they are the first members +of a Church to which God seems to give the most magnificent of all +opportunities. And the thought is scarcely absent from his mind that +this may be the last Epistle he will ever send. He is going to +Jerusalem, and has a sad foreboding of what may await him there (xv. +31). + +The manner and style which give the Epistle a unique place among the +works of St. Paul are caused by these considerations. He wishes to +tell the Roman Christians his very best ideas in the very best way: +this may be his last chance of doing so. He puts aside, then, all +clamour of personal debate, and sets {163} himself to produce an +ordered theological treatise. Never elsewhere does the apostle write +with so careful method, so powerful concentration, so effective +marshalling of arguments, so stirring yet measured eloquence. + +The Epistle opens with a brief introduction. Paul, the apostle of +Christ, wishes to preach the gospel to those in Rome whom Christ has +called. Then he begins at once to describe the set of circumstances +which the gospel is intended to meet. The Gentiles have not been true +to such knowledge as they had of God, and by an inevitable process they +have passed on to unnatural and vicious excess (i. 18-32). And when +St. Paul turns to the Jews, he finds they are in no better case. With +fuller knowledge they have sinned scarcely less. Strict justice will +be meted out by God to all, the Jew coming first and then the Gentile. +The Gentile will not escape, for the Gentiles, whom we conceive of as +having no law, have a law in that moral sense which makes them +instinctively put in practice the precepts of the Law, and their inward +thoughts accuse or defend them (ii. 1-16). The Jew may boast of his +Law and his knowledge of revelation, but he is no better in practice +than a Gentile. And as for his circumcision, it is worthless unless he +is also spiritually circumcised in the heart (ii. 17-29). + +After a parenthetical discussion of difficulties suggested by a +possible Jewish opponent (iii. 1-8), St. Paul shows that the Jews are +not in a worse case than the Gentiles. Both are under the dominion of +sin, and Scripture says so. The whole system of Law is a failure. Law +does nothing but give a clear knowledge of sin (iii. 9-20). + +St. Paul then brings forward his great remedy--the answer of God to the +need which is represented by universal human sinfulness. Man has +failed to correspond to the suggestions of conscience, he has failed to +fulfil the requirements of the written Law, but now he may come into a +right relation with God by identifying himself with Jesus Christ. He +may be justified (_i.e._ accepted as righteous) by an act of God's +grace (_i.e._ by an {164} undeserved act of God's love) on account of +the redemption wrought by Christ, whom God has set forth as a +propitiation to show His own righteousness. God could no longer allow +man to mistake His patience with our sins for slack indifference. Man +must no longer seek to be justified before God on the strength of what +he himself has done, but on the strength of his faith in Christ, _i.e._ +his devoted personal adhesion to Christ (iii. 21-26). St. Paul tells +the Romans that this justifying faith excludes glorying, can be +realized by Gentile as well as Jew; that by it we establish the Law +(iii. 27-31), as the Jewish dispensation, rightly understood, testifies +to its necessity. In fact, Abraham himself was justified by faith +(iv.) Then St. Paul sets forth in glowing and stately words what are +the consequences for us which follow from being so justified. We are +at peace with God, and share in His love, and this is the secure ground +of Christian hope for life and after death (v. 1-11). The effects of +Christ's death are computed by an _argumentum a fortiori_ from the +results of Adam's fall (v. 12-21). + +The apostle now carefully refutes the notion that the doctrine of +justification by faith encourages Antinomianism. Liberty does not mean +licence. St. Paul was quite alive to the fact that skilful opponents +and brainless admirers would misrepresent his doctrine, which was also +Christ's. He therefore takes great pains to show that the connection +between the righteousness of Christ and the righteousness of a +Christian is not arbitrary or fictitious. His argument throughout +implies that man actually receives "the righteousness of God," that is, +the righteousness which is inherent in God, and is bestowed by God upon +man when he unites himself with Christ (vi.-viii.). + +Shall I go on sinning that God's mercy may be all the greater in +forgiving me? God forbid: for when I went down into the waters of +baptism, I shared in the death of Christ; and when I rose from them, I +rose as a sharer in His risen life. Because I am united thus to the +life of Christ, sin is foreign to my nature (vi. 1-14). I am no longer +under law, but under grace: but {165} to be the slave of sin and be +occupied with uncleanness, and to gain the wages of death, is +inconsistent with being the slave of righteousness, occupied in a +course of purification and rewarded with the gift of life (vi. 15-23). + +Next, St. Paul asks why it is that we are no longer under the Law? +Because we have no connection with that state of sin to which the Law +was applicable. Our soul is like a wife whose lawful husband is dead. +Or, to put the truth into another form, our old state was killed by our +identification with Christ crucified, and we are espoused to Christ +risen (vii. 1-6). What, then, shall we think of the Law? Is it sin? +No. It reveals the sinfulness of sin, and it irritates dormant sin +into activity. A thing cannot be identical with another thing which it +exposes and irritates. But why did God permit the Law, which is holy, +to prove fatal to my soul (vii. 13)? He did not. The Law was not +fatal, though sin was all but fatal. Sin was permitted to do its worst +that its real hideousness might be apparent. This is what took place. +The Law gave me an ideal, but my better self, which corresponds to the +Law, could not keep me from ding wrong or make me do right. I became +involved in a terrible conflict. This was the opportunity of Christ. +He has delivered me from that state of the body which involved me in +sin and death. Without Him, I should still be serving the Law of God +with my conscience, and the law of sin with my body (vii. 25). + +Where the Law of Moses failed, Christ splendidly succeeds. He not only +sets before men an ideal, but also helps them to attain it, and fulfil +the righteous claims of the moral Law, by uniting Himself with them by +the Spirit (viii. 1-10). Men are now in a new relation to God: they +call Him Father, He sees in them His sons. Though with all creation we +wait still in fruitful pain for the fulness of redemption, we wait with +confident hope. The Spirit is with us to help and to pray, we remember +God's high purpose for us, we have known His love in the past, Jesus in +infinite exaltation is interceding for us; {166} who, then, shall ever +be able to separate us from the love of God (viii. 11-39)? + +St. Paul turns now to a parenthetical discussion which necessarily +suggests itself here. It has practically happened that God's own +people, the children of Abraham, in spite of their privileges, are +excluded from this new salvation which comes from acceptance of Christ. +This does not mean that God has been unfaithful. St. Paul vindicates +His action toward them, and he shows that it has been consistent with +His previous action towards the Israelites (ix. 6-13), righteous (ix. +14-21), and merciful (ix. 22-29). God has always shown that He is free +to select whom he likes to carry out His purpose in the world.[1] The +Jews are rejected because they seek to be justified, on the strength of +their own works (ix. 30-33; x. 1-3): now, the method of the Law has +been superseded by Christ's, which is an easier method (x. 4-10) and +universal (x. 11-13). And the Jews have had every opportunity for +hearing of it (x. 14-21). But God has not rejected them entirely or +finally (xi. 1-10); and if their fall has led to the preaching of the +gospel to the Gentiles, how much more happily fruitful will be their +reception into the Church (xi. 11-15)! We may hope for this ultimate +acceptance of the gospel by both Jew and Gentile because of the +original holiness of the Jewish stock. The Gentiles are grafted into +that: just as we may be cut off from it if we sin, so the Jews more +easily may be grafted in again if they will (xi. 16-24). St. Paul now +shows how the hardening of the Jews and the disobedience of the +Gentiles alike have served the purposes of God. Israel as a nation +shall be saved by the Messiah. The chapter closes {167} with words of +reverent admiration for the wonderful workings of the Divine Providence +(xi. 25-36). + +After this long doctrinal argument, St. Paul insists upon certain +practical duties (xii.-xv. 13). We may notice in xiii. 2 ff. the +emphasis which is laid upon the dignity of the civil government, a +dignity which was immeasurably degraded ten years later by the wanton +persecution of the Roman Christians. And xiii. 13 is a verse ever to +be remembered by the Church as the verse by which God brought Augustine +from free thinking and licentious living to be numbered among the +saints. In xiv. begins some considerate advice about certain +Christians "weak in faith." They seem to have formed a party, but not +a party which can be identified with any other religious clique +mentioned by the apostle. Their vegetarianism and their observance of +particular holy days have suggested the theory that they were +Christians who followed the ascetic practices of the Jewish sect of +Essenes. The theory that they were Gentiles who affected the customs +of the Pythagoreans has commended itself to other writers. On the +whole, the number of Jews in Rome supports the theory that these were +Jewish Christians. St. Paul deals very tenderly with these total +abstainers from meat and wine. He evidently does not put them on the +same level as the sectaries of Galatia or Colossae. + +The Epistle closes with various references to personal matters, +including the expression of a desire to visit Spain and Rome (xv. 34). + +{168} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation and introduction (i. 1-15). + +(1) DOCTRINAL.--The subject of the Epistle. How is righteousness to be +attained? Not by man's work, but by God's gift, through faith, _i.e._ +personal attachment to Christ (i. 16, 17). + +A. Righteousness as a state of man in the sight of God (Justification): +i. 18-v. 21. + +a. Righteousness was never attained before Christ came. The Gentiles +neglected their conscience until they sank into abominable sins; future +judgment will certainly come on all men without respect of persons; the +Jews, too, have no right to criticize the Gentiles--they had the Law of +Moses, while the Gentiles only had the unwritten law of conscience, yet +they failed. The Jewish quibble that there was no good in being a Jew +if God condemned him, is refuted. The witness of the Old Testament to +the universality of sin is quoted (i. 18-iii. 20). + +b. Exposition of the new method of attaining righteousness. It is +independent of the Law, is universal, is obtainable through Christ's +death which manifests God's righteousness. This method excludes human +boasting, and can be experienced by Jew and Gentile alike (iii. 21-31). + +c. The relation of this new method to the Old Testament. Abraham, the +typical saint of the Old Testament, was not justified because of works, +or circumcision, or law. His faith shows that the Old Testament +supports the Christian method of salvation (iv.). + +d. The blessed state of the justified Christian. He is filled with +hope, and this hope is guaranteed by the proved love of God. What a +contrast between this blessedness and the effects of Adam's fall! The +work of Christ resembles that of Adam, because it passes from one man +to all men: it differs greatly, because Adam's fall brought sin, our +condemnation, our death. Christ's gift brings grace, our acquittal, +our life. The Fall brought sin, Law increased sin; Grace is greater +than sin (v.). + +{169} + +B. Righteousness as necessarily involving moral progress +(Sanctification); vi.-viii. + +a. Refutation of the theory that we may continue to sin in order to +give God fresh opportunities of displaying His lovingkindness. Our +baptism implies union with the sinless Christ. Refutation of the +theory that we may as well sin as not sin because we are no longer +under the Law. Our marriage to Christ must be fruitful (vi. 1-vii. 6). +The Law is not to be disparaged, though it is impotent to rescue me in +the terrible moral conflict under which I should suffer, if it were not +for Christ (vii. 6-25). + +B. Where the Law of Moses failed, the incarnation of Christ succeeds. +The life of Christian righteousness is ruled by the Holy Spirit. It +implies filial confidence in God, a glorious inheritance, divine +assistance, inviolable security (viii.). + +C. The problem raised by the fate of the Jews: ix.-xi. + +a. Their rejection from their privileged position a sad contrast to +their high destiny; the entire justice of God in forming a new Israel +of Jews and Gentiles alike (ix.). + +b. The cause of their rejection was that they sought to be justified in +their own way and not in God's way, and this in spite of Christian +opportunities and prophetic warnings (x.). + +c. Consolations which qualify the severity of their fate. Their +unbelief is only partial and temporary, and God's purpose is to restore +all. Doxology (xi.). + +(2) PRACTICAL.--The Christian sacrifice, and the duties of a Christian +(xii.). Church and State, the law of love, the approaching judgment +(xiii.). + +Toleration for weak and eccentric Christians; vegetarians, observers of +private holy days and total abstainers, not to be disturbed; we must do +nothing that makes a brother stumble. Christ pleased not Himself; He +was both a minister of the circumcision and the hope of the Gentiles +(xiv. 1-xv. 13). + +Personal conclusion (xv. 14-xvi. 27). + + + +[1] The Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, as taught in the +writings of Calvin and in the Presbyterian Westminster Confession, is a +complete perversion of St. Paul's teaching. Calvin teaches a +predestination to heaven or hell; St. Paul here speaks of an +appointment to certain duties on earth. The Calvinists asserted that +some men "cannot be saved;" St. Paul teaches that God so acted "in +order that He might have mercy upon all" (xi. 32). + + + + +{170} + +CHAPTER XIV + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS--THE + EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON + + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +There is no good reason for doubting that this beautiful Epistle is the +work of St. Paul. It is full of Pauline thought, and is well attested +by external evidence. It is apparently quoted in the very ancient work +known as the Epistle of Barnabas, and Justin Martyr quotes the title of +Christ "the firstborn of all creation" (Col. i. 15). It is included in +Marcion's canon and in the _Muratorian Fragment_, as well as in the Old +Latin and Peshitta Syriac versions. The notion that it is only a weak +reflection of Ephesians seems incredible, for neither of the two +Epistles is appreciably inferior to the other, and in each one there +are several unique passages which represent as high a level of +intellectual and spiritual attainment as the passages which are in some +degree common to the two. Moreover, we cannot trace any definite +method according to which the one writing has been used for the other, +and destructive critics have only destroyed one another's arguments in +their attempts to show which of the two Epistles is genuine, or why +they both are forged. It is also important to consider the association +of this Epistle with that to Philemon: the transparent genuineness of +the latter makes it practically certain that Colossians is genuine as +well. + +Objections to the authenticity of Colossians have been {171} steadily +growing fainter. It was denied by Mayerhoff in 1838, and by the whole +Tuebingen school, in spite of very strong external evidence. (1) The +heresy opposed by St. Paul was said to be a form of 2nd-century +Gnosticism; but the affinities which it shows with Judaism point rather +to the 1st century. (2) There are a large number of words which St. +Paul uses nowhere else, thirty-four being found in no other part of the +New Testament; but several of these words are called forth by the +special error which St. Paul rebukes, and the Epistle does contain +eleven Pauline words used by no other New Testament writer. (3) The +doctrine has been declared to be not Pauline, but a further development +of St. Paul's doctrine of the dignity of Christ. This objection rests +entirely on the hypothesis that Jesus Christ was not God, but was +gradually deified by successive generations of His followers. The +critics who declared that no apostle believed Christ to be more than an +ideal or half-divine man, and said that St. John's writings are +forgeries of the 2nd century, described the doctrine of Colossians as a +transition from the true Pauline doctrine to the doctrine of the Logos +contained in the fourth Gospel. But St. Paul states nothing about +Christ in this Epistle which is not implied in earlier Epistles. He +only makes fresh statements of truth in view of fresh errors. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +Colossae was the least important town to which any Epistle of St. Paul +which now remains was addressed. The place was on the river Lycus in +Phrygia, about ten miles from Laodicea and thirteen from Hierapolis, +and thus the three towns were the sphere of the missionary work of the +Colossian Epaphras (Col. iv. 12, 13). Colossae had been flourishing +enough in the time of Herodotus, but now, overshadowed by greater +neighbours--Laodicea, Hierapolis, and Chonae--and perhaps shaken by +recurring earthquakes, it was sinking fast into decay. Still it +derived importance from its situation on the great main road which +connected Rome with the eastern provinces, the road by {172} which +Xerxes had led his great armament against Greece. And as the people +had a special way of their own for producing a rich dye named +_Colossinus_, it retained a fair amount of trade. We may account for +the presence of Jews at Colossae which is suggested in the Epistle, by +remembering its convenient position and its trade speciality. The +people were mainly the descendants of Greek settlers and Phrygian +natives, and the intellectual atmosphere was the same as that of which +we have evidence in other parts of Asia Minor: every one was infected +with the Greek keenness for subtle speculation, and the usual Phrygian +tendency to superstition and fanaticism. Thirteen miles away, at +Hierapolis, was growing into manhood the slave Epictetus, who later on +will set out some of the most noble and lofty of pagan thoughts. The +persistent love of the people of this neighbourhood for the +angel-worship which St. Paul rebukes, is illustrated by the facts that +in the 4th century a Church Council at Laodicea condemned the worship +of angels, and that, in spite of this, in the 9th and 10th centuries +the district was the centre of the worship of St. Michael, who was +believed to have opened the chasm of the Lycus, and so saved the people +of Chonae from an inundation. + +Colossae, being exposed to the raids of the Moslem Saracens, +disappeared from history in the 8th century. + +The Church at Colossae was not founded by St. Paul, and he was not +personally acquainted with it (Col. ii. 1). But we can hardly go so +far as to say that he had never seen the town at all. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +St. Paul sent this letter, together with that to Philemon and the +circular which we call "Ephesians," by Tychicus from Rome, probably in +A.D. 60. He alludes to his imprisonment twice incidentally, and again +with pathetic simplicity in the postscript added by his own hand, +"Remember my bonds." + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +Some difficulties are connected with the heresy taught by the religious +agitators at Colossae. It is plain that their {173} teaching affected +both doctrine and practice. They appealed to visions and a knowledge +of the celestial world (ii. 18), and therefore set up a worship of +angels which tended to thrust Christ from His true position in the +creed of the Church. They treated the body with unsparing severity +(ii. 23), they abstained from meat and drink, and paid a punctilious +attention to festivals, new moons, and sabbaths (ii. 16). St. Paul +calls these practices "material rudiments" (ii. 8), elementary methods +now superseded by faith in Christ. Moreover, it is almost certain that +literal circumcision was practised (ii. 11). These things point to +Judaism. And yet St. Paul does not seem to be rebuking a return to the +Judaism of the Old Testament. He could hardly have described a +compliance with Old Testament injunctions as an "arbitrary religion" +and "doctrines of men" (ii. 1, 22, 23). It might be Pharisaism, but if +we look in the direction of Judaism, it is most natural that we should +think of a Judaism resembling that of the Essenes. The Essenes were +vegetarians, they avoided wine, they kept the sabbath with special +scrupulousness, and had some secret teaching about the angels. These +resemblances have tempted some commentators to identify the false +teachers with the Essenes. But there is nothing to prove that the +Essenes worshipped the angels, and St. Paul makes no mention of the +Essene veneration for the sun, or their monastic life, or their +elaborate process of initiation. Besides this, the principal community +of Essenes dwelt by the Dead Sea, and it is very doubtful if any +existed in Asia Minor. + +It is best to confess our ignorance. All that we can say is that the +scruple-mongers at Colossae taught doctrines which had points of +contact with Essenism. They employed some affected interpretation of +the Old Testament. They also were influenced by heathenism in their +conception of half-divine beings intermediate between God and the +world. How far they held any definitely dualistic view of matter we +cannot tell. {174} But their system was a mischievous theosophy, which +they endeavoured to popularize under catchwords like "wisdom" and +"philosophy." The fact that there was at this time such a widespread +tendency to adopt an exaggerated asceticism and theories about +mediatorial spirits, makes it unnecessary to suppose that the Colossian +heresy need be affiliated to any particular school of speculation. + +The Epistle consists mainly of a more or less indirect argument against +the insidious "philosophy" of the heretics, with an exhortation and +personal notes. + +Perhaps we account most naturally for the broken order and lax +coherence of this letter, by the suggestion that, as St. Paul dictated +it, there was present with him a sense of almost nervous hesitation. +He has exactly a gentleman's reluctance to do an ungracious action: +while he knows that it is his duty to warn the Colossians of a serious +danger, he knows that unless he does so with much tactful delicacy, +they will resent his interference. So he begins by saying what polite +things he can about them, and instead of going on at once to talk of +the heresy, he first says with plain significance that he perpetually +prays for their perfection in knowledge, activity, and constancy. An +incidental allusion to God's method for human salvation gives St. Paul +an opportunity for making a digression--one of the most important +statements in the New Testament--concerning the nature and work of +Christ (i. 14-20). He shows the Colossians what views they ought to +hold concerning Him. This would keep them from giving to the angels +what is due to Christ alone. Christ is the Redeemer. He was born +prior to all creation, even the angels, and all creation coheres +through union with Him (i. 15-17). He is the Head of the Church in +virtue of His resurrection, and as embodying the full number of divine +attributes (i. 18, 19). He is the Saviour of angels and men by His +death, and in this salvation the Colossians ought to share (i. 20-23). + +It seems that now he will deal with the heresy, but again he {175} +postpones it. He breaks in with a digression of a pastoral character. +He speaks of his commission to preach (i. 24-29), his anxiety even for +Churches that he has never visited (ii. 1-5), and he exhorts the +Colossians to continue in their original faith (ii. 6, 7). + +At last he enters upon the main business of the Epistle and begins +dogmatic controversy. After a warning against spurious philosophy, he +asserts that Christ is the sole incarnation of Deity, to whom all +spirits are subject (ii. 9, 10). This is the true doctrine: God has +not divided His attributes among a group of angels; all are to be found +in Christ. And the true method of salvation is simply that union with +Christ which begins with baptism, the Christian's circumcision. In it +we receive that forgiveness which was won for us when Christ died, and +both blotted out the Law and triumphed over evil angels (ii. 13-15). +The apostle then directly condemns the practices of the false +teachers--their anxious and mechanical conduct with regard to food and +seasons, their intrusion into celestial secrets and their doctrine of +angel-worship, their loose hold on Christ the Head, symptoms of an +affected humility which is no real check against the indulgence of the +flesh (ii. 16-23). + +He then turns to practical exhortation. In the bracing words made +familiar to us by the Epistle for Easter Day, St. Paul bids the +Colossians leave the gently stimulating exercise of intellectual +theorizing and listen to the stern demands made by Christ on life and +character. They have risen to a life hid with Christ in God; they must +make dead the faculties of sensual action, angry thinking, and evil +speaking: this is implied in forsaking heathenism for the universal +Christ (iii. 1-11). Live quietly in peace and love, show a gracious +life in a gracious worship, consecrate your words and deeds by doing +all in the name of the Lord Jesus (iii. 12-17). + +Then the special duties of wives and husbands, children and fathers, +slaves and masters, are dealt with. Prayer and thanksgiving are +enjoined on all alike, and the Christians are bidden {176} to "buy up +the opportunity" of furthering the cause of God in their dealings with +the outer world, having their speech seasoned with the salt of +wholesome wisdom (iii. 18-iv. 6). A few words are said about Tychicus, +Onesimus, and other friends, including "Luke, the beloved physician," +and the Epistle ends with a farewell which St. Paul wrote with his own +hand. Before writing it, the apostle directs that this letter should +be read at Laodicea, and that the Colossians should procure another +letter which had been left in that city. This was probably the +so-called Epistle to the Ephesians. + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving, the apostle's prayer for the readers (i. +1-13). + +Christ, who redeemed us, is pre-eminent in Person, being the Head of +the natural creation, and of the spiritual creation, because the sum of +divine attributes dwells in Him (i. 14-19). He is pre-eminent in work, +having reconciled us to God (i. 20-23). + +St. Paul's own commission and his anxiety (i. 24-ii. 7). Warning +against the delusion of a false philosophy. The "fulness" is in +Christ, therefore the Colossians must avoid semi-Jewish practices and +also avoid the worship of angels (ii. 8-19). The converts have died +with Christ to their old life and earthly ordinances (ii. 20-25). + +The converts have risen with Christ to a new life and heavenly +principles, vices must be made dead, virtues must be put on (iii. 1-17). + +Obligations of wives and husbands, children and parents, slaves and +masters (iii. 18-iv. 1). + +The duty of prayer and thanksgiving, and right behaviour towards the +unconverted (iv. 2-6). + +Personal conclusion, and a message relating to an Epistle from Laodicea +(iv. 7-18). + +{177} + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO PHILEMON + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of this winning little letter could never be doubted +except by the most dryasdust of pedants. It is no proof of acuteness +to detect the artifice of a forger in its earnest simplicity, its +thoughtful tact, and affectionate anxiety. There is about it a +vivacity and directness which at once and decisively stamp it as +genuine. And external evidence shows that it was included in the +earliest lists of St. Paul's Epistles. It was accepted by Marcion, +included in the _Muratorian Fragment_, and expressly attributed to St. +Paul by Origen. It shows a number of coincidences with Colossians, +Ephesians, and Philippians, and it is especially connected with +Colossians by the proper names which it contains, such as Archippus, +Aristarchus, Mark, and Luke. No evidence exists to show that any early +Christians denied this Epistle to be by St. Paul. But it does appear +that some of them half disliked its inclusion in the Canon, thinking it +too trivial to be numbered with the Scriptures. To modern readers it +manifests a great treatment of little things, which is one of the +surest proofs of inspiration. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +The Epistle is addressed to Philemon, a substantial citizen of +Colossae. He has been converted by St. Paul, who writes with deep +appreciation of his faith in Christ, and of the kindness that he has +shown to the saints. He gives him the honourable title of +"fellow-worker." Religious services and the social gatherings of +Christians are held in Philemon's house. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +This Epistle was written during St. Paul's first imprisonment in Rome, +A.D. 59-61. In ver. 10 St. Paul alludes to his "bonds." + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +Philemon had a Phrygian slave named Onesimus, who first {178} robbed +him and then ran away. Onesimus was able without much difficulty to +get to Rome, and here he met the apostle, who received him into the +Church. The young convert served him with such eager willingness that +St. Paul would have been glad to keep him with him, but he decides to +send him back to Philemon with this letter to ensure his forgiveness. + +We have, therefore, in this letter a picture of St. Paul in a new +relation. There is no other letter in the New Testament of such a +private nature except 3 John. The great apostle of the Gentiles is +taking his pen to provide a dishonest runaway slave with a note that +shall shield him from the just anger of his master. He writes both +with a strong sense of justice and with his own perfect diplomatic +instinct. The letter is at once authoritative, confident, and most +gentle. He does not command or insist, yet it is quite clear that +Philemon must do just what he asks. There is no violent attack upon +slavery as an institution. Any such attack would have been both +foolish and criminal. For it would have encouraged slaves to make +Christianity a cloak for revolt, and precipitated horrors far worse +than those which it could have professed to remove. But St. Paul +asserts a principle which will eventually prove fatal to slavery. When +he tells Philemon to receive Onesimus "as a brother beloved," he is +really saying that our estimate of men must not be based on their +social class, but rather on their relation to God. + +This letter has been compared with a letter written under similar +circumstances by the younger Pliny, one of the best of the pagan +gentlemen of Rome. But while the letter of Pliny is more elegant in +language, the letter of St. Paul is a finer masterpiece of feeling. A +Roman slave was still allowed no rights and no family relationship, and +for the smallest offence he might be tortured and killed. In the next +century the Emperor Hadrian first took away from masters the power of +life and death over their slaves, and it was not until the time {179} +of the Emperor Constantine, who established Christianity, that the laws +affecting slavery pointed to the future triumph of emancipation. But +the ancient conception of slavery was doomed as soon as "slave-girls +like Blandina in Gaul, or Felicitas in Africa, having won for +themselves the crown of martyrdom, were celebrated in the festivals of +the Church with honours denied to the most powerful and noblest born of +mankind." [1] + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation from Paul and Timothy to Philemon and Apphia (? wife), to +Archippus and the Church in Philemon's house; thanksgiving for +Philemon's faith; a plea for the pardon of Onesimus, St. Paul promises +to be responsible for what was stolen; a lodging to be prepared for St. +Paul; concluding salutations, benediction. + + + +[1] Lightfoot, _Colossians and Philemon_, p. 325. + + + + +{180} + +CHAPTER XV + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE EPHESIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The Pauline authorship of this Epistle is well attested by external +evidence. Before 150 we have proof of its wide use among both heretics +and Catholics; it is quoted probably by St. Clement and St. Polycarp, +and some of its characteristic ideas are to be found in a more +developed form in the _Shepherd_ of Hermas. There is one clear +reference to it in St. Ignatius, and two other possible references. We +trace an interesting connection between the thought of this Epistle and +that of the Revelation and the Gospel of St. John (_e.g._ ch. xvii.) +and the First Epistle of St. Peter. Perhaps we may account for it by +accepting Renan's suggestion that St. Peter, St. John, and St. Paul +were in Rome together. The strongest argument for the Pauline +authorship lies in the undesigned coincidences between Ephesians and +Romans. In both we notice the same courtesy of manner and sensitive +frankness, the same setting forth of God's method of salvation, the +same valuation of the relative position of Jews and Gentiles, and of +their union in Jesus Christ; the same thought of God's eternal and +unchanging purpose very gradually revealed, and extending in its +ultimate operation to all creation. It has been well said that the +Epistle to the Ephesians is required to give completeness to the +argument of Rom. xv. Though we do not find here the controversial +reasoning of the earlier Epistle, we have some of those characteristic +passages in which the {181} writer, carried away by emotion, leaves +statement for prayer or praise (cf. Rom. xi. 33 and Eph. iii. 20). We +have, indeed, in this Epistle evidence which points to a date later +than that of some of his Epistles. We miss the expectation of Christ's +immediate coming; the Gentiles are now quite secure in the Church; +there is proof of the growth of Christian hymns (v. 14, 19). But the +names of the ministers of the Church seem very primitive, the words +"presbyter" and _episkopos_ not being mentioned. And words such as +"worlds," "fulness," "generations," which were used in a special sense +by the Gnostics of the 2nd century, are here used in an earlier and +less technical meaning. + +It has been argued that Ephesians is a forged imitation of Colossians, +because about half of its verses have parallels in Colossians. This +argument has broken down, since it has been shown that it is equally +easy to prove that Colossians is based upon Ephesians. And there is +nothing strange in the idea that St. Paul wrote two similar letters at +the same time to Churches in similar difficulties. The two Epistles +resemble one another just as two letters written by one man to two +different friends during the same week. The phrase "holy apostles" +(iii. 5) is also said to be a formula which St. Paul would not have +employed. But the word "holy" is used in his writings almost in the +sense of "Christian;" it signifies consecration rather than personal +perfection. There would, therefore, be no vanity in the apostle +applying such a title to himself. The attempt to make the style +furnish an argument against the genuineness of the Epistle has also +failed. There are thirty-two words used only in this Epistle, but +there are also eighteen which are found in Pauline Epistles and not +elsewhere in the New Testament. The assumption of some sceptical +writers that an apostle must have been too unintelligent to enrich his +vocabulary, scarcely deserves serious examination. No one would think +of applying the same rule to a Greek classical writer, and if he +attempted to do so, he would find that Xenophon varies his language as +much as St. Paul. + +{182} + +The real reason why the authenticity of this Epistle has been attacked +is this. Ephesians teaches that the Church is a universal society, +visibly united by baptism and the ministry, embracing Jew and Gentile +on equal terms. But, according to Baur, this conception of the Church +is a product of the 2nd century. He assumed that St. Paul could not +include the twelve under the name of the "holy apostles," or teach a +Catholic doctrine of the Church.[1] The present school of rationalists +is inclining to admit that Ephesians is genuine. But it is hard to see +how they will be able to do this without also admitting that the +Epistle implies that the other "holy apostles" held, like St. Paul, +that Christ is divine. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +It is almost certainly not primarily a letter to Ephesus, but a +circular letter to several Churches in Asia Minor. + +In i. 1 we read the words "to the saints which are in Ephesus." But +the words "in Ephesus" are omitted in the two great MSS. K and B. +Origen also implies that these words were absent in some MSS., and St. +Basil definitely says so. And as the Epistle contains no salutation to +any individual, it is difficult to imagine that it was specially +addressed to Ephesus, where St. Paul's friends were numerous and dear +(see Acts xx. 17-38). In some passages St. Paul speaks as if he and +those to whom he writes knew each other only through third persons (i. +15; iii. 2). This suggests that the Epistle was written primarily to a +Church like that of Colossae which he had never visited. + +The probable solution is that it was written to the Christians of +Laodicea in the first instance. Tertullian says that Marcion had +copies with "Ad Laodicenos" as the title. Now, in this case Marcion +had nothing to gain by fraud, and we may therefore suppose that he had +honest grounds for using this title. The same title gains some support +from Col. ii. 1; iv. 13, 16. The last verse suggests that it was to be +passed on from Laodicea. Perhaps several copies of the letter were +written at {183} Laodicea, and a blank space left in them for the +insertion of the various addresses. No doubt the letter would be +forwarded to Ephesus in time. + +Laodicea, at present called Eski-Hissar (the "old fortress"), is now +utterly deserted. It was probably founded about B.C. 250 by Antiochus +II. Theos, and named after his wife Laodike. It was distant eleven +miles from Colossae. The population included some Syrians and Jews. +It rose to great wealth under the Roman power, and was so rich that +when it was destroyed by an earthquake in A.D. 60 it scorned to seek +pecuniary aid from the emperor. It was in a central position on the +great trade route from the east, and was famous for its banking +business, its manufacture of fine garments of black wool, and its +"Phrygian powder" for weak eyes. In Rev. iii. 18 there appears to be a +veiled allusion to each of these three sources of prosperity. Timothy, +Mark, and Epaphras (Col. i. 7) were instrumental in spreading +Christianity in this region. Laodicea was the leading bishopric of +Phrygia throughout the Christian period. + +Ephesus was the capital of the Roman province of Asia. With Antioch in +Syria and Alexandria in Egypt, it ranked as one of the greatest cities +of the East Mediterranean lands. Planted amid the hills near the mouth +of the river Cayster, it was excellently fitted to become a great mart, +and was the commercial centre for the whole country on the Roman side +of Mount Taurus. The substratum of the population was Asiatic, but the +progress and enterprise of the city belonged to the Greeks. There, as +in the Florence of the Medici, we find commercial astuteness joined +with intense delight in graceful culture. Some of the best work of the +greatest Greek sculptors and painters was treasured at Ephesus. A +splendid but sensuous worship centred round the gross figure of the +goddess Artemis, whose temple was one of the greatest triumphs of +ancient art. In the British Museum are preserved some fragments of the +old temple built by Croesus, King of Lydia, in B.C. 550. The vast +{184} temple which replaced this older structure was built about B.C. +350, with the help of contributions from the whole of Asia. The wealth +of the city was increased by the crowds which attended the festivals, +and many trades were mainly dependent upon the pilgrims, who required +food, victims, images, and shrines. In St. Paul's time the city +contained one temple devoted to the worship of a Roman emperor. +Ephesus was also a home of magical arts, and was famous for the +production of magical formulae known as "Ephesian letters." The actual +foundation of the Christian Church in Ephesus may be ascribed to +Priscilla and Aquila, whom St. Paul left there on his first visit (Acts +xviii. 19), On his return to Ephesus he stayed there for two years +(Acts xix. 1, 10), and the opposition of the tradesmen to a creed which +affected the vested interests of idolatry was the cause of the riot so +vigorously described by St. Luke. Even after the riot the +superstitions of the mob were a serious danger to St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. +32; xvi. 9; 2 Cor. i. 8-10). At a later period Ephesus became the +residence of St. John. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +St. Paul wrote this Epistle during his imprisonment at Rome, which +began in A.D. 59 (see iii. 1, 13; iv. 1, vi. 22). Rome is not +mentioned in the Epistle, but the connection between Ephesians, +Colossians, Philemon, and Philippians points to the high probability +that they were all written from the same place. This place is much +more likely to have been Rome than Caesarea, the only other possible +locality. Ephesians was apparently written later than Colossians, for +it shows an emphasis on new points of doctrine--the continuity of the +Church, the work of the Holy Spirit, the analogy between family life +and the Church, and the simile of the spiritual armour. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle is of the nature of a sermon, full of closely interlaced +doctrinal arguments on the greatness of that _one_ Gospel and that +_one_ Church by which all distinctions in mankind are bridged over and +salvation is made sure. The writer {185} fears that there will be some +lack of unity in the Church, and that the moral tone of his converts +will sink. He wishes for a Christianity both Catholic and deep. So he +presents his readers with the portrait of a Church predestined before +all ages, appointed to last through all ages, in which all men will be +united in holiness and love. If Galatians and Corinthians are more +vivid, Romans more rich, and Philippians more affectionate, Ephesians +gives us St. Paul's most mature and complete picture of Christianity. + +St. Paul explains how his Gentile readers came to their present +position in the Church. They are not to regard it as a matter of +chance. They were called to Christ as the result of an eternal counsel +of God. God intended from eternity to adopt them in union with His +Son. This intention was now made known, to sum up all things again in +Christ (i. 10). The apostle prays for his readers that they may +receive enlightenment, and grow in knowledge, particularly concerning +the power of God shown in the resurrection and ascension of Christ and +his consequent relation _to the Church_.[2] + +The unity of all things in the Son of God is explained in Colossians as +having been involved in His creation of them. In Ephesians St. Paul +assumes this relation, and shows that it is largely in abeyance through +_sin_. Estrangement has come between man and his God, involving man in +death and in the wrath of God (ii. 3-5). A wall of division has also +been made between Jew and Gentile (ii. 14). This division was visibly +embodied in the Jewish ordinances. But Jew and {186} Gentile alike +have now been reconciled to God, and in being reunited with God are +reunited with each other. This momentous change was effected by the +shedding of Christ's blood on the cross. The readers are to remember +that they are being built into God's own habitation, of which Christ is +the Corner-Stone (ii. 20). + +To the end that they may be filled in their degree with God's +attributes, the writer bows his knees (iii. 14) unto the Father. He +prays for their strengthening because he has a special charge over the +Gentiles. This charge involves the stewardship of a secret (iii. 3), +viz. the inclusion of the Gentiles in the promise of God. He, the +least of all saints, has been allowed to proclaim this secret, a work +which shows to the heavenly powers the wisdom of God corresponding with +His eternal purpose (iii. 10, 11). This bounty of God will ever be +praised in the Church, which is the monument of that bounty (iii. 21). + +Chapters iv.-vi. are largely practical. They set out rules of conduct. +But even here doctrine is brought in to enforce practical advice. The +readers are to "walk worthily" of their calling. To do this, they must +realize unity. The principles of unity are magnificently summed up +(iv. 4-6). Then the apostle mentions some means which God has +appointed for the maintenance of unity. Christians have various gifts +from the ascended Christ (iv. 7-8), and some are specially gifted for +ecclesiastical offices (iv. 9-13). These gifts make for the +completeness of the Church, of which Christ is the Head and the Life. +To "walk worthily" also means that everything connected with heathen +habits must be sedulously renounced. The old self must be changed for +the new. A basis for social life must be found in truthfulness, +uprightness, and kindliness (iv. 25-32). Purity must specially be +preserved, impurity being contrasted with love. Light and darkness are +then contrasted, and the sober gaiety of the Christian with heathen +folly and excess (v. 1-21). + +St. Paul passes on to speak of the Christian household--the {187} +duties of husband, wife, children, slaves. He seems to pronounce a +great benediction over family life as he compares the union of marriage +to the association of Christ with His Church. Just as in calling +Christ the Head of which the Church is the body, he suggests the entire +dependence of the Church upon Christ, so now in describing the Church +as the spouse of Christ, he suggests that this dependence must imply a +voluntary and conscious submission. The final exhortation vividly +describes the Christian's conflict with evil: to fight victoriously he +will need to be well armoured with the whole panoply of God (vi. +10-20). There is a short personal conclusion in which St. Paul +describes himself as Christ's "ambassador in chains." + + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation (i. 1, 2). + +Exposition of God's purpose in adopting the Gentiles as His sons, +chosen by the Father, redeemed by the Son, sealed by the Spirit. A +prayer for the readers (i.). + +Their new state as saved by grace through faith; reconciliation of Jews +and Gentiles in Christ (ii.). Paul was made a minister to dispense the +grace of God to the Gentiles. He prays for their spiritual progress +(iii.). + +The unity of Christians in the Church combined with diversity of gifts +and offices, a warning against heathen vices, and advice as to duty +towards one's neighbour (iv.). Christian love, heathen uncleanness, +light and darkness, walking circumspectly, sobriety and song (v. 1-21). + +The union of husbands and wives like that of Christ and His Church (v. +22, 23). Duties of children and parents, servants and masters (vi. +1-9). + +Wrestling against evil powers with the whole armour of God (vi. 10-18). + +Personal conclusion and benediction (vi. 19-24). + + + +[1] See Baur's _Paul_, vol. ii. p. 177 (English translation). + +[2] Eph. i. 23. The Church is said to be "the fulness of Him that +filleth all in all." The word "fulness" is derived from philosophy, +and means that the Church is, or rather is the realization of, the sum +of the sacred attributes of Christ, who fills the whole universe with +all kinds of gifts. Some commentators translate "fulness" as if it +meant the receptacle of Christ's attributes, and others as if it meant +the completion of Christ. But the word is used in a philosophical and +not in a literal sense. See Lightfoot, _Colossians_, p. 259. + + + + +{188} + +CHAPTER XVI + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The genuineness of this Epistle is now admitted by critics of very +different schools of thought, including some extreme rationalists. +About A.D. 110 St. Polycarp, in his letter to the Philippians, speaks +of the letters which they had received from "the blessed and glorious +Paul." Although he seems to refer to a number of letters, we may be +sure that this letter was among that number. Otherwise it would not +have been so universally regarded as genuine during the 2nd century. +It is in Marcion's canon, in the _Muratorian Fragment_, the Peshitta +Syriac and Old Latin versions. It is also quoted in the letter of the +Churches of Lyons and Vienne, in the Epistle of Diognetus, and by +Irenaeus and Clement of Alexandria. It was rejected by Baur and others +on various grounds. It was urged (1) that the doctrine of Christ's +self-surrender or "self-emptying" in Phil. ii. 7 is derived from the +Valentinian Gnostics of the 2nd century, who taught that the Spirit +"Sophia" fell from the "fulness" of divine spirits in heaven to the +"emptiness" of the lower world. This objection is too fantastic to +deserve serious refutation. It is, in fact, little more than a play +upon words. It was urged (2) that in Phil. ii. 7 the manhood of Christ +is said to have come into existence at the incarnation, whereas in 1 +Cor. xv. 47-49 it is said to have existed in heaven before the +incarnation. This idea rests on a false interpretation; in 1 Cor. xv. +Christ is called "of heaven" {189} because His manhood became heavenly +at His ascension. It was urged (3) that in Phil. iii. 6 the writer +says that he had been, "as touching the righteousness which is in the +Law, found blameless," whereas St. Paul in Rom. vii. speaks of his +revolt against the Law. But it seems that in Phil. iii. St. Paul is +laying stress rather on his external privileges and external +conformity, while in Rom. vii. he speaks of what is inward and secret. +It was urged (4) that the mention of "bishops" (or rather _episkopoi_) +and "deacons" in Phil. i. 1 shows that the Epistle was not written in +the apostolic age. But there is nothing to make it impossible that +such offices did exist at that period, and there is much evidence in +favour of them. Christians who are attached to the historical form of +Church government will now note with interest that, since the +genuineness of this Epistle has been practically demonstrated, some +writers have suggested that these words do not refer to special +ecclesiastical offices![1] + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +Philippi was named after Philip, King of Macedon, in the 4th century +B.C. It was in Eastern Macedonia, on a steep hill at the edge of a +plain; its seaport, Neapolis, was about eight miles distant. It was on +the Egnatian road, the great high-road which connected the Aegean and +the Adriatic seas, and therefore connected Asia with Europe. It was +made into a Roman colony, with the title _Colonia Augusta Julia +Philippensium_, after the victory of Antony and Octavian over Brutus +and Cassius. Its new name was, therefore, a memorial of the murdered +but avenged Julius Caesar. St. Paul brought Christianity to Philippi +early in A.D. 50, during his second missionary journey. St. Paul's +first visit here is described in Acts xvi. 12-40, and it has a special +interest as the story of the apostle's first preaching in a European +town. The Jews had no synagogue, only a spot by the river-side in the +suburbs, where a few met together on the sabbath. His first convert +was Lydia of Thyatira, who was a seller of purple-dyed {190} goods; her +house became the centre of the Philippian Church. The imprisonment of +St. Paul and St. Silas in consequence of St. Paul's exorcising a +heathen slave-girl who professed to be inspired, is one of the most +dramatic incidents in Acts. When St. Paul was released he left the +town, but returned there, in all probability, in A.D. 55, on his third +journey while travelling to Corinth. In A.D. 56 he was there once +more, and the last Easter before his imprisonment was spent with these +beloved converts (Acts xx. 6). + +The Christians of Philippi were pre-eminent in the affections of St. +Paul. He calls them, like the Thessalonians, his "joy and crown" (iv. +1), and they alone of his children had the privilege of ministering to +his personal necessities. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +It may be regarded as almost certain that St. Paul wrote this Epistle +in Rome. He was a prisoner, as we see in Phil. i. 7, 13, 14, 17. He +sends greeting from those of Caesar's household (iv. 22). The first +and last chapters imply that he is in the midst of an active Church, +and that he is the centre to which messengers come and from which they +go. This accords with the apostle's treatment at Rome. One phrase, +however, has been thought to suggest Caesarea rather than Rome. It is +"the whole praetorium" (i. 13). This might mean the praetorium or +palace of Herod Agrippa II. at Caesarea, but it is possible that it has +quite a different meaning. It may either be the imperial guard or the +supreme imperial court before which St. Paul had to be judged. The +latter interpretation is that suggested by the great historian Mommsen, +and seems to be the most satisfactory explanation. + +The meaning of the phrase has an important bearing upon the date of the +Epistle. If it was not written at Caesarea, it must have been written +at Rome between A.D. 59 and A.D. 61. But the critics who are agreed +that it was composed at Rome, are divided as to the place which it +occupies among the Epistles which St. Paul wrote during his +imprisonment. Some {191} place it first, because the vigorous style, +and many of the phrases, suggest that it was written not very long +after Romans. Others, with greater probability, place it last among +the Epistles of the captivity. For even if it was written first among +those Epistles, it was written more than three years after Romans. And +the Epistle contains several indications of being written late in the +captivity. If "praetorium" means the imperial guard, some time would +have to elapse before such a large body of men could know much about +St. Paul; and if it means the imperial court, the verse implies that he +had already appeared before his judges. Phil. ii. 24 shows that he was +expecting a speedy decision on his case. Epaphroditus, probably not +the Colossian Epaphras who was with St. Paul at Rome (Col. iv. 12), had +come as a delegate from the Philippians, bringing their alms to the +apostle (ii. 25; iv. 18). After his arrival in Rome he was ill and +homesick, and now he is returning to Philippi bearing this letter of +thanks. This all seems to imply that Philippians was written a +considerable time after the apostle's imprisonment began, and we can +therefore reasonably place it after Colossians and Ephesians, and date +it early in A.D. 61. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +With the exception of 2 Corinthians, this is the most personal and +intimate of St. Paul's writings. In both he lays bare his heart. But +the tone of the two Epistles is absolutely different. In 2 Corinthians +he writes as a man who has been bitterly injured; he asserts his claims +to fickle believers whose ears have been charmed by his unscrupulous +opponents. In Philippians we chiefly observe a note of frank and +loving confidence; buffeted by the world, the apostle finds refreshment +in the affection of his friends at Philippi. + +After a salutation to all the "saints" at Philippi, including +especially the _episkopoi_ and deacons, the apostle speaks of the joy +which he feels in praying for them, and begs of God that their love may +abound, and that they may approve the things {192} that are excellent, +being filled with the fruits of righteousness (i. 1-11). + +Then St. Paul tells how his captivity has been a means of spreading the +gospel in the praetorium and elsewhere. Even the malicious activity of +his opponents has been a means of proclaiming Christ, and with true +grandeur of soul the apostle rejoices in the fact. So far as he is +concerned, death would be a more attractive prospect than life, for +death would mean admission into the presence of Christ, but for the +sake of the Philippians he is glad to live. With wonderful +cheerfulness he says that he is glad if his blood is to be offered like +a libation poured over the living sacrifice of the souls and bodies +which the Philippians offer to God (ii. 17). Before he speaks of this +libation of his blood he makes a tender appeal to his converts to +imitate the lowliness of Jesus Christ. He puts into the language of +theology the story of the incarnation which his friend St. Luke draws +with an artist's pen in the first two chapters of his Gospel. He +speaks to them of "the mind" of Christ Jesus, whose life on earth was +self-sacrifice in detail. Christ had before the incarnation the "form" +or essential attributes of God, but He did not set any store on His +equality with God, as though it were a prize,[2] but stripped Himself +in self-surrender, and took the "form" or nature of a bond-servant. He +looked like men as they actually are, and if men recognized His outward +"fashion," they would only have taken Him for a man. And then He made +Himself obedient to God up to His very death, and that the death of the +cross. This was followed by His exaltation, and worship is now paid to +Him in His glorified humanity (ii. 1-11). + +In ii. 19 St. Paul returns to personal matters concerning Timothy and +Epaphroditus; then he seems on the point of concluding the Epistle +(iii. 1). But he suddenly breaks into {193} an abrupt and passionate +warning against the Judaizers. The passage almost looks as if it were +a page from the Epistle to the Galatians. The Judaizers are called +"dogs," and as their circumcision was no longer the sign of a covenant +with God, the apostle calls it a mere outward mutilation of the flesh +(iii. 2). It is unlikely that Jewish influences were potent at +Philippi. The explanation of this passage appears to be that the +apostle, before completing his letter, learnt of some new and +successful plot of the Judaizers at Rome or elsewhere. Nervously +dreading lest they should invade his beloved Philippian Church, he +speaks with great severity of these conspirators. The conclusion of +the chapter is apparently directed against the licence of certain +Gentile converts. These seem to have been "enemies of the cross of +Christ" in the looseness of their lives rather than in the corruptness +of their creed. It is difficult in this case, as in that of the +Judaizers, to know whether these errors already existed at Philippi or +not. The passage concludes with an exhortation to steadfastness (iii. +2-iv. 1). + +Two women, Euodia and Syntyche, are exhorted to be "of the same mind." +A true yokefellow of the apostle, possibly Epaphroditus, and a certain +Clement, possibly the Clement who was afterwards Bishop of Rome, are +exhorted to try to bring about their reconciliation. All are exhorted +to rejoice in the Lord, and are told that the peace of God, which +passeth understanding, shall stand sentinel over their hearts and +thoughts. Before returning again to personal matters and thanking the +Philippians for their gifts, St. Paul urges them to follow whatsoever +is true and lovely. His language here seems to consecrate all that was +permanently valuable in the sayings of the Greek philosophers. It +recalls to us the words of the ancient Church historian, Socrates: "The +beautiful, wherever it may be, is the property of truth." + +{194} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving, prayer (i. 1-11). + +The position of affairs at Rome. His imprisonment has stimulated the +preaching of the gospel; his own feelings are divided between the +desire for death and a willingness to live for their sakes; an +exhortation to boldness (i. 12-30). + +An exhortation to imitate the humility of Christ, who took the form of +man and was willing to die, and was after this abasement exalted above +every created being (ii. 1-11). + +An exhortation to obedience, quietness, purity, mission and +commendation of Timothy and Epaphroditus; farewell (ii. 12-iii. 1). + +Strong warning against Judaism, enforced by his own example; against +claim to perfection, also enforced by his own example; against +Antinomian licence as unworthy of "citizens of heaven", exhortation to +steadfastness (iii. 2-iv. 1). + +Advice to Euodia, Syntyche, and others; exhortation to think of all +things true and lovely (iv. 2-9). + +The apostle expresses his joy at the spirit shown by the offerings sent +to him from Philippi. Doxology. Salutation (iv. 10-23). + + + +[1] So E. Haupt, _Die Gefangenschaftsbriefe_, p. 3. + +[2] The Greek is ordinarily translated as "a prize to be grasped," but +it seems quite possible to translate the passage, "He considered not +equality with God to involve a process of grasping." + + + + +{195} + +CHAPTER XVII + +THE PASTORAL EPISTLES + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +1 and 2 Timothy and Titus form the fourth and last group of St. Paul's +Epistles, and are known as the Pastoral Epistles,[1] because they deal +so largely with the duties and qualifications of the men entrusted with +the pastoral care of the Church. St. Paul here teaches the teachers. + +Their genuineness is more frequently denied than that of any other of +St. Paul's Epistles, and this attack upon their genuineness has been +mostly based upon the character of their teaching about the +office-bearers of the Church. Attempts have sometimes been made to +separate some fragments supposed to be genuine from the remaining +portions. All such attempts have failed. These Epistles must either +be rejected entirely or accepted entirely. Otherwise we become +involved in a hopeless tangle of conjectures. + +The _external evidence_ is excellent. They are found in the Syriac and +Old Latin versions, and in the _Muratorian Fragment_. They are all +quoted by Irenaeus, and also by Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian. +Their authenticity was therefore regarded as a certain fact in the +latter part of the 2nd century, and early in the 4th century Eusebius +was unaware that any doubts concerning them existed in the Church. +Moreover, St. Polycarp, A.D. 110, quotes both 1 and 2 Timothy. The +{196} combined evidence of these writers forms a very substantial +argument. Against it we sometimes find urged the fact that the heretic +Marcion rejected them. Such an objection borders on frivolity. +Marcion held a definite doctrinal heresy, and rejected everything which +he could not make to coincide with his own belief. The value which is +set on the Old Testament (_e.g._ 2 Tim. iii. 16), the assertion of a +real incarnation (_e.g._ 1 Tim. ii. 5), and the sustained opposition to +a false spiritualism, which these Epistles exhibit, must have been +intensely distasteful to Marcion. We have therefore no reason for +believing that he would hesitate to reject them, while knowing them to +be genuine, any more than he hesitated to reject all the Gospels except +Luke. + +The _internal evidence_ is called in question for the following reasons. + +1. _Historical difficulties._--We cannot place the journey referred to +in 1 Tim. i. 3 during the three years' stay at Ephesus mentioned in +Acts. The visit to Miletus in 2 Tim. iv. 20 cannot have taken place on +the journey to Jerusalem in Acts xx., because Trophimus was with the +apostle when he reached that city (Acts xxi. 29). Again, in 2 Tim. iv. +20 Erastus "abode at Corinth." But he had not been to Corinth for a +long time before the journey to Rome recorded in Acts. In Tit. i. 5 we +see Titus left by St. Paul at Crete; he is to join the apostle in +Nicopolis (iii. 12). But Acts allows no room for this, and the +reference to Apollos (iii. 13) implies a later period than St. Paul's +stay at Corinth (Acts xviii.). + +_Answer._--All three Epistles may quite well be later than the history +related in Acts. There is no reason for denying that St. Paul was set +free after his trial at Rome, and arrested again at a later date. +Assuming that this liberation did take place, all historical +difficulties vanish. There are several points in favour of this +liberation. First, the attitude of the Roman government towards +Christianity was fairly tolerant until Nero began his persecution in +A.D. 64, and the state of the law would {197} have allowed St. Paul's +acquittal. Secondly, it was believed in the early Church that St. Paul +was set free. The Muratorian Fragment says that he went to Spain, and +St. Clement of Rome, writing from Rome about A.D. 95, says that he went +"to the boundary of the west," which seems to point to Spain. Thirdly, +the chronology implied in the ancient list of the bishops of Rome will +not allow us to put St. Paul's martyrdom earlier than A.D. 64. +Fourthly, the apostle himself expected to be set free (Phil. ii. 24; +Philem. 22). There is therefore no historical reason for denying that +St. Paul was set free from the imprisonment in which Acts leaves him. + +2. _References to heresies._--It has been said that these Epistles +contain references to heresies later than the apostolic age, such as +the Gnosticism of the 2nd century. More especially, it is said that 1 +Tim. vi. 20, which speaks of "oppositions of gnosis falsely so called," +refers to a work by Marcion called the "Oppositions" (Antitheses), in +which he tried to demonstrate that the Old Testament was antagonistic +to the New. + +_Answer._--The heresies here rebuked are not so definitely described +that we can determine their precise character. This fact is in favour +of the idea that the heresies belong to the 1st century rather than to +the 2nd. Stress has been laid upon statements which seem to imply +Gnostic heresy, and heresy of a "Docetic" character, _i.e._ teaching a +denial of the reality of our Lord's human nature. But there is +certainly nothing which suggests that the error here rebuked was as +developed as the heresy rebuked by St. Ignatius, or even that denounced +by St. John. It is most unlikely that the word "oppositions" can refer +to a book bearing that title. The passage 1 Tim. vi. 20 does not +suggest this. And if Marcion is really quoted in 1 Tim., how could +Polycarp have quoted 1 Tim., as he does, before Marcion's book was +written? Something of a Gnostic tendency is betokened by the scorn of +material life and the human body shown in 1 Tim. iv. 3, 8 and 2 Tim. +ii. 18. But the error is mainly Jewish. The false {198} teachers +professed to be "teachers of the Law" (1 Tim. i. 7), which was exactly +the title claimed by the Jewish rabbis (see Luke v. 17). The general +character of their teaching was "vain talking" (1 Tim. i. 6; cf. Tit. +i. 10; iii. 9). It consists of "profane babblings" (1 Tim. vi. 20; 2 +Tim. ii. 16). It is further characterized as "foolish questionings, +and genealogies, and strifes, and fightings about the law . . . +unprofitable and vain" (Tit. iii. 9). It is summed up in the phrases +"old wives' fables" (1 Tim. iv. 7), "Jewish fables" (Tit. i. 14). All +this shows that the error was not a definite Gnostic heresy with a +fundamentally false view of God. It was something intrinsically +ridiculous. Therefore the "endless genealogies" (1 Tim. i. 4) can +hardly be Gnostic genealogies of the semi-divine beings who took part +in the creation. They are Jewish tales about the heroes of the Old +Testament. The error is, in fact, primitive, and does not belong to +the 2nd century. + +3. _Church organization._--It is said that these Epistles lay down the +rules for an organization of the Church which is later than the +apostolic age, and resembles the Episcopal system, such as we find it +in the 2nd century. Titus and Timothy act as delegates of the apostle, +and as the highest officials of the ministry, and they appoint +presbyters and deacons. We thus find a threefold ministry which +derives its sacred authority through the apostolate. The apostle lays +his hands upon his delegate (2 Tim. i. 6), and this delegate lays his +hands upon others (1 Tim. v. 22). + +_Answer._--It is perfectly true that there is a threefold ministry +mentioned in these Epistles. But there is no sufficient reason for +denying that such a ministry is of apostolic origin. It seems quite +certain that at Jerusalem the presbyters and deacons were under the +authority of St. James, and after his death under that of Symeon. The +same form of government can also be traced back in other places to +apostolic times. Moreover, the organization which is mentioned in Acts +is fundamentally the same as that in these Epistles. In Acts we {199} +find the apostles first appointing deacons and then presbyters. All +the additional evidence which has lately been discovered to support the +genuineness of Acts therefore favours the genuineness of these +Epistles. Finally, we must notice that the titles of the ministry in +these Epistles do not correspond with the titles used in the 2nd +century. The government is substantially "Episcopal," but the title +"episkopos" was in the 2nd century only applied to the chief dignitary +who ruled over the "presbyters." But here the title "episkopos" is +applied to the presbyters themselves as the overseers of the +congregation. We find the same thing in the letter of St. Clement, +A.D. 95. St. Clement, although Bishop of Rome, still gives the title +of "episkopos" to the presbyters. This inconvenient practice was given +up soon after that date, for we find that St. Ignatius, about A.D. 110, +applies the title "episkopos" only to the highest ministers of the +Church. We conclude, therefore, that while the organization of the +Church described in the Pastoral Epistles supports the belief that the +threefold ministry, which we now call Episcopal organization, is of +apostolic origin, it does not prove that these Epistles are forgeries. +And it is natural that St. Paul, knowing that his death must before +long come to pass, should devote a large measure of attention to +questions of Church government and discipline. The history of the +Church in the 2nd and 3rd centuries proves to us that the organization +of the Church was almost as important as the inspiration of the Church. + +4. _Language._--This is an important difficulty. There are in these +Epistles many words and phrases which do not occur in the other +Epistles of St. Paul. We find different Greek words used for "Lord" +and for the second "advent," and a fondness for the words "wholesome," +"godliness," and "faithful saying." The new element is most prominent +in 1 Tim. and Titus. + +_Answer._--Private letters to individuals and friends in reference to +one particular subject are not likely to resemble public letters which +were written in reference to other subjects. It {200} would therefore +be unreasonable to expect that the style of the Pastoral Epistles +should be cast in the same mould as that of the other Epistles of St. +Paul. Nevertheless, the objection would have considerable weight, if +St. Paul's aptitude for varying his vocabulary could not be shown. But +it can be shown; for his other Epistles are marked by an astonishing +variation in the Greek. Beneath this diversity there exists a unity. +The Pastoral Epistles have many Pauline phrases,[2] many graphic +touches, many forcible and original statements, and glow with that +personal devotion to Christ combined with a practical capacity for +guiding Christians which St. Paul possessed in so singular a degree. +If the Pastoral Epistles are spurious, or if they are composite +productions written by a forger who inserted some notes of St. Paul in +his own effusions, it becomes almost impossible to account for the fact +that 2 Tim. differs delicately both in language and subject from 1 Tim. +and Titus. In view of this fact we can admire the sagacity of a recent +opponent of their authenticity who deprecates "the possibility of +extricating the Pauline from the traditional and editorial material"! +[3] + + +THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +Reasons have already been given for rejecting the arguments which have +been alleged against the Pauline authorship of this Epistle. We may +add that it is unlikely that a forger would have inserted the word +"mercy" (i. 2) in the usual Pauline greeting "grace and peace." The +reference to Timothy's "youth" (iv. 12; cf. 2 Tim. ii. 22) has seemed +strange to many. But although {201} St. Paul had been acquainted with +Timothy for about twelve years, Timothy must have been greatly the +junior of St. Paul. Even if Timothy was as old as thirty-five, the +word "youth" would be quite natural from the pen of an old man writing +to a pupil, whom he had known as a very young man, and whom he was now +putting in authority over men old enough to be his own father. We can +attribute this Epistle to St. Paul without hesitation. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +Timothy was one of the apostle's own converts, his "child in faith." +We learn from Acts xvi. 1 that he was the son of a Greek-speaking +Gentile father and a Jewish mother. He had received a strictly +religious Jewish training from his mother Eunice and his grandmother +Lois (2 Tim. i. 1-5; iii. 14, 15). He was converted by St. Paul on his +first missionary journey, at Lystra or Derbe. On St. Paul's second +visit to that district, Timothy was so well reported of that he was +thought worthy of being associated with the apostle in his work. +Before employing him as a colleague, St. Paul had him circumcised, that +he might be able to work among Jews as well as Gentiles (Acts xvi. 3). +Some Christian prophets pointed him out as destined for his sacred +office (1 Tim. i. 18). He was ordained by the laying on of the hands +of St. Paul himself and the presbyters of the Church (1 Tim. iv. 14; 2 +Tim. i. 6). He was frequently associated with the apostle in +travelling and in the writing of Epistles. His name occurs as sending +a salutation in Rom. xvi. 21, and as the fellow-sender of six of the +apostle's letters. He was with the apostle during his first +imprisonment at Rome (see Phil., Col., and Philemon). From this +Epistle we learn that after the apostle's release he was left in charge +of the important Church at Ephesus. While he was in this position, the +two Epistles which bear his name were written to him. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +It is impossible to ascertain the precise direction of St. Paul's +journeys after his release, and it is wisest to refrain from mere +conjecture. Before writing this letter he had been recently {202} at +Ephesus and had been called away to Macedonia (i. 3). He intended to +return before long, but had been unexpectedly delayed (iii. 14, 15). +This delay rendered it necessary for him to send directions to Timothy. +The precise date cannot be exactly fixed. If St. Paul's martyrdom was +as early as A.D. 64, and his release as early as A.D. 61, we may +reasonably put this letter in A.D. 63. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The letter is personal, but it is also official. It is intended to +guide Timothy in his work of apostolic delegate. In speaking to the +presbyters of Ephesus at Miletus (Acts xx. 29, 30), St. Paul had +already expressed fears about the future of the Church, and these fears +now seem to have been partly realized. Ephesus was a meeting-place of +east and west, a place where religious speculations and religious +divisions were likely to increase, and where wise supervision of the +Christian Church was essential. The contents of the Epistle therefore +mainly consist of warnings against Judaism and false knowledge, and +directions as to the duties of various classes of Christians, and +especially the clergy. + + + +ANALYSIS + +The danger of Jewish and Gnostic heresy (i.). + +The order of common prayer (ii.). + +The qualifications of _episkopoi_ (translated "bishops" in the English +versions) and deacons (iii.). + +Condemnation of Gnostic asceticism and the duty of Timothy towards +heresy (iv.). + +Counsels as to the treatment of presbyters (translated "elders" in the +English versions) and widows (v.). + +Warnings against disobedience towards masters, vain disputations, +covetousness, and a wrong use of wealth--concluding with a direct +appeal to Timothy (vi.). + +{203} + +THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TITUS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +This is exactly the kind of letter which we should expect to be written +by a writer of strong individuality addressing a disciple entrusted +with the duty of ruling a Church threatened by the same troubles as the +Church which was under the supervision of Timothy. It is attributed to +St. Paul by Irenaeus, and is amply supported by other early writers. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"To Titus, my true child after a common faith" (i. 4). Titus was +converted by St. Paul (i. 4), and was an uncircumcised Gentile (Gal. +ii. 3). He must have been converted at an early period in the +apostle's career, for he was with Paul and Barnabas on their visit from +Antioch to Jerusalem in A.D. 49. He was therefore present during the +great crisis when the freedom of the Gentiles from the ceremonial part +of the Jewish law was vindicated. It is suggested by Gal. ii. that +Titus was personally known to the Galatians, and possibly he was +himself a Galatian. Titus was prominent at another important crisis. +When the Church at Corinth was involved in strife, Titus was sent +thither. His efforts were attended with success, and he was able to +report good news on returning to St. Paul in Macedonia (2 Cor. vii. 6, +7, 13-15). He carried the Second Epistle to the Corinthians to +Corinth. We hear no more of him until the period when this Epistle was +written. After St. Paul's release from his first imprisonment, Titus +was with him in Crete, and was left by the apostle to direct the +affairs of the Church in that island (Tit. i. 5). It is plain that the +tact and wisdom which he had shown at Corinth had not failed him in the +interval, and that St. Paul still regarded him as a worthy delegate and +a true evangelist of the gospel of peace. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The similarity to 1 Timothy makes it almost certain that Titus was +written about the same time, and before 2 Timothy. {204} The apostle +is expecting to winter at Nicopolis, probably the Nicopolis in Epirus. +The letter was therefore possibly written from Greece. It seems from +iii. 13 that Zenas, a former teacher of the Jewish law, and Apollos, +had occasion to travel by Crete, and St. Paul takes the opportunity to +send a letter with them to Titus. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The greeting at the beginning of the Epistle and the character of its +general contents show that this letter is official as well as private. +Possibly the gospel was first brought to Crete by those Jews or +proselytes from Crete who saw the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at +Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 11.) Fully thirty years had +passed since then, but the Church had not hitherto been sufficiently +organized to be independent of the apostle. Now, however, the +apostolic delegate will be able to ordain the presbyters required in +every city. The manner in which the "episkopoi" are mentioned +immediately afterwards (i. 5, 7) strongly favours the idea that the +name "episkopos" is here used as a title of the presbyters, as in Acts +xx. They form the order under the apostle's delegate. Useless +speculations of a Jewish character had invaded the Church (i. 10-14; +iii. 9). The teachers of these "fables" were influenced by love of +"filthy lucre." St. Paul quotes the saying that the Cretans are +"liars, evil beasts, idle gluttons," and attributes it to "one of +themselves, a prophet of their own." The saying is by the poet +Epimenides, c. B.C. 600. He was a native of Cnossus in Crete, who was +regarded as a seer, and his reputation for second-sight is testified by +Plato giving him the epithet "divine." St. Paul seems convinced that +the Cretan character was as prone to sensuality as in the days of +Epimenides, and it is immediately after alluding to their dangers that +he utters the memorable words, "unto the pure all things are pure." +The apostle's exhortation to "maintain good works" (iii. 8) is one of +the verses which have been absurdly alleged to be out of harmony with +{205} St. Paul's insistence upon the importance of justification by +faith. There is a definite allusion to baptismal regeneration in iii. +5. + + +ANALYSIS + +Titus to ordain elders; the requisite character of "episkopoi", +Judaizing talkers to be checked (i.). + +Duties of aged men and women; young women and men; servants; the grace +of God and the hope inspired by it (ii.). + +Duty towards rulers and all men; the kindness of God; foolish +discussions to be avoided; how to deal with a heretic; personal notes +(iii.). + + + +THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO TIMOTHY + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +It is generally considered that the authenticity of this Epistle stands +or falls with that of the First Epistle. But it bears its own peculiar +marks of genuineness. One thoroughly Pauline feature is _thanksgiving_ +at the beginning, a feature which is found in eight of his other +Epistles, but not in the two other Pastoral Epistles. A forger might +have had the critical insight which would lead him to compose this +thanksgiving. But it is highly improbable that a forger would have put +twenty-three proper names into the Epistle without tamely copying names +which occur elsewhere, or without betraying any wish to glorify some +saint who became popular after the death of the apostle. Neither of +these two suspicious tokens can be detected here. For instance, Demas, +concerning whom nothing that is discreditable is narrated elsewhere, is +here rebuked with a pathetic regret (iv. 10; cf. Col. iv. 14); while +Linus, afterwards a famous bishop and martyr of Rome, is mentioned +without any honourable distinction at all. Even if the Linus of this +Epistle is not the bishop of that name {206} the argument still holds +good. For a forger, if he inserted the name of any Linus, would have +been almost certain to mention _the_ Linus and no other. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"To Timothy, my beloved child" (i. 2). + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +It was written from Rome, where St. Paul is again a prisoner, the +reason of his imprisonment being the witness that he has borne to +Christ (i. 8, 12, 17). His imprisonment had already lasted some time, +for it was known at Ephesus. The apostle had apparently requested two +of his friends, Phygellus and Hermogenes, to come to him at Rome, but +they had declined. The Ephesian Onesiphorus had acted otherwise, and +when in Rome had sought him out. St. Paul anticipates death. His case +has already had a first hearing, when no witness appeared in his +defence (iv. 16). He is now ready to be offered up. But he does not +anticipate an immediate martyrdom, as he urges Timothy to come to Rome +before winter. The date is therefore probably some weeks or months +before St. Paul's martyrdom. The year is either A.D. 64 or very soon +afterwards. + +[Sidenote Character and Contents.] + +This Epistle is the apostle's farewell pastoral charge. He looks +forward to his fate with courage and confidence. He has fought a good +fight, and is sure of the crown of righteousness which the Lord will +give him. But he sees that a dark future is in store for the Church. +Some professing Christians have already deserted him, others have +perverted the faith. Among the latter are Hymenseus and Philetus, who +assert that the resurrection is past already. It is probable that they +were influenced by some Gnostic dislike of the human body, and taught +that the only resurrection possible for a Christian was the spiritual +resurrection of becoming acquainted with their own Gnostic doctrine. +Such a heresy is described by Irenaeus. St. Paul warns Timothy that +there are "grievous times" to come (iii. 1). Scripture will be a means +of security against the mischief-makers. {207} The various +exhortations given to Timothy are of great force and beauty; he is to +endure hardship like a good soldier, and is charged before God to +preach and rebuke with long-suffering. The solemnity of these words is +equalled by the pungent sarcasm with which the writer alludes to the +schismatics who "lead captive silly women" or will "heap to themselves +teachers, having itching ears." + +We may notice that ii. 11-13 seems to contain part of a Christian hymn, +that iii. 8 contains a reference to a Jewish story not found in the Old +Testament, and that i. 18 is perhaps a prayer for the dead. The Second +Book of Maccabees xii. 44 shows that in the century before the +Christian era the Jews were wont to pray for the departed. + + +ANALYSIS + +Exhortation to energy, the failure of friends, the fidelity of +Onesiphorus (i.). + +Exhortation to endurance as Christ's soldier, profane discussions to be +shunned; the error of Hymenseus and Philetus; varieties of character +like varieties of vessels; the way to become a vessel of honour (ii.). + +Coming corruption, the creeping mischief-makers; Timothy is reminded of +St. Paul's manner of life and of the value of Scripture (iii.). + +Exhortation to fidelity in ministerial work; the apostle's course +drawing to an end, Timothy urged to come; personal notes (iv.). + + + +[1] This title seems to have been first applied to them in 1810 by +Wegscheider. + +[2] Cf. "according to my gospel" (2 Tim. ii. 8; Rom. ii. 16); "the +gospel of the glory" (1 Tim. i. 11; 2 Cor. iv. 4). The Greek phrase +for "give occasion to" (1 Tim. v. 14) is found in 2 Cor. v. 12, and +nowhere in the New Testament except in St. Paul. + +[3] B. W. Bacon, _Introduction to the New Testament_, p. 140. + + + + +{208} + +CHAPTER XVIII + +THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The question of the authorship of this Epistle is one of the most +fascinating problems raised by the criticism of the New Testament. It +does not in the least involve any charge of forgery, such as is +involved in a consideration of St. John's Gospel or of St. Paul's +Epistle to the Ephesians. Nor does it involve the fact of an author +absorbing the work of a previous writer, such as we find in the case of +St. Luke. The work is one complete and original composition of great +finish and perfection, and yet this perfect work contains hardly a hint +as to its author. The title which is placed above it in our Bibles +deserves serious consideration, as it represents an opinion which was +held in many parts of Christendom in the 4th century, and in some parts +of Christendom even in the 2nd century. But it by no means represents +the universal judgment of the Church, and is contradicted by good +evidence, both external and internal. A remarkable divergence of +opinion on the subject existed between the Churches of the east and +those of the west. + +Alexandria appears to have been the first centre of the belief that +this Epistle was written by St. Paul. We find that about A.D. 170, +Pantaenus, the head of the catechetical school at Alexandria, +attributed it to St. Paul. His successor Clement agrees with this, but +states that it was written in Hebrew and translated by St. Luke into +Greek--a statement which implies that scholars were conscious that the +style of Hebrews is not {209} the style ordinarily used by St. Paul. +In A.D. 240, Origen, the successor of Clement, defends the Pauline +authorship--a defence which shows that the authorship was disputed. In +A.D. 245 Origen had learnt to doubt the validity of his former defence, +and states that the writer was a disciple of Paul, but "who wrote the +Epistle God only knows." In A.D. 269 the famous heretic Paul of +Samosata quoted Hebrews as the work of St. Paul in a letter read at the +Synod of Antioch which deposed him from his bishopric. Early in the +next century Eusebius quotes the Epistle as by St. Paul, but he shows +the same perplexity as Clement of Alexandria, for he thinks that it was +translated from the Hebrew, possibly by Clement of Rome. After the +time of Eusebius the Greek Fathers all ascribe it to St. Paul. We can +therefore sum up the evidence of the Greek Churches by saying that +though it mostly favours one theory, it is not so cogent as to remove +all our suspicions. + +Moreover, the complete absence of references to this Epistle in the +extant writings of Irenaeus[1] almost compels us to ask if the Greek +Churches of Southern Gaul and Asia Minor regarded this Epistle as +Pauline. Irenaeus might naturally omit to quote a short and +comparatively unimportant Epistle, but his omission of a long Epistle, +well adapted to his arguments, inclines us to place him in a rank +opposite to his contemporary, Clement of Alexandria. A Greek writer of +the 6th century actually says that Irenaeus, in a passage now lost, +denied that St. Paul wrote the Epistle.[2] + +The Latin Churches of the west seem to have been for three centuries +under the conviction that this Epistle was not by St. Paul. It is +quoted by Clement of Rome, A.D. 95, a fact which {210} alone is +sufficient to prove its early date and its sacred character. But +Clement makes no statement as to its authorship. Caius of Rome, A.D. +200, excludes it from the list of St. Paul's Epistles, and the same +hesitation with regard to it existed in the great Latin-speaking Church +of Carthage. St. Cyprian, A.D. 250, does not include Hebrews among St. +Paul's Epistles. No Latin Father attributes it to St. Paul before +Hilary of Poictiers in A.D. 368, and Hilary was in close contact with +the East. At the end of the 4th century St. Jerome shows distinct +hesitation in attributing it to St. Paul, and it was not commonly +attributed to him in the west until the time of St. Augustine, who died +in 432. + +Internal evidence agrees with the external evidence in making it very +difficult for us to believe that St. Paul wrote Hebrews. + +(1) The Greek is more elegant than that of St. Paul's Epistles. The +styles are widely different. That of St. Paul is abrupt and vehement +like a mountain-torrent, that of Hebrews is calm and smooth like a +river running through a meadow. + +(2) The quotations are very unlike St. Paul's. They are all from the +Greek version of the Old Testament, with the exception of that in x. +30, which occurs in the same form in Rom. xii. 19. It had probably +taken this shape in popular use. The quotations are introduced by +phrases such as "God saith," or "the Holy Spirit saith." But St. Paul +often shows a knowledge of the Hebrew when he makes quotations, and he +uses such phrases as "it is written," or "the Scripture saith," or +"Moses saith." + +(3) There is no salutation such as is usual in St. Paul's Epistles. + +(4) In Hebrews the incarnate Son is called "Jesus," or "Christ," or +"the Lord." In St. Paul's Epistles we find fuller titles employed, +such as "our Lord Jesus Christ." + +(5) The theological differences are important. The teaching of the +author harmonizes with that of St. Paul, but throughout the Epistle we +feel that the truths of Christianity are being expounded to us by one +whose personal history is different {211} from that of St. Paul. The +author starts from the fact of the perfection of Christ's sacrifice, +and in his doctrine about the Law he looks at it from that fact. St. +Paul, on the other hand, starts from the doctrine of justification by +faith, and looks at the Law from the point of that doctrine. Again, +the author takes a general view of faith as heroic belief in unseen +facts; while St. Paul, though he sometimes does the same, prefers to +use the word "faith" in the sense of devoted, personal, adhesion to +Christ. + +(6) In ii. 3, 4 the author seems to imply that he had not personally +seen the Lord. + +Many conjectures have been made as to the real author. Few of these +conjectures deserve serious consideration. Luther suggested Apollos, +and the suggestion has been accepted by many writers. In favour of it +are: (1) he was a friend of St. Paul; (2) he was "mighty in the +Scriptures," and Hebrews deals with the Old Testament in a masterly +way; (3) he was an Alexandrian Jew, and Hebrews was plainly written by +a Jew, and apparently by one acquainted with Philo and other +Alexandrian authors.[3] Against this theory is the complete absence of +traditional support, and the fact that Apollos was taught by Aquila and +Priscilla, whereas the author of Hebrews implies that he was taught by +a personal disciple of Christ. On the whole, _St. Barnabas_ seems to +have the best claim. Tertullian not only speaks of it as the work of +Barnabas, but also shows by his words that the Church of North Africa +regarded it as his work.[4] He is not, therefore, making a conjecture, +but assuming a tradition. His evidence is the more valuable, because +the Church of North Africa was important and was in close contact with +Rome, where the Epistle was venerated at least as early as A.D. 95. In +favour {212} of the tradition we can note: (1) St. Barnabas was an +influential companion of St. Paul; (2) he was a Levite, and would be +interested in Levitical worship; (3) he was a native of Cyprus, which +was in close communication with Alexandria; (4) he had been in the +regions to which the Epistle was probably addressed. + +Against the theory that St. Barnabas was the author, it is said that +the author makes surprising errors with regard to the Temple ritual, +which St. Barnabas was not likely to do. The so-called "errors" are: +(a) the high priest sacrificing _daily_ (vii. 27; x. 11)--but the high +priest was free to do this; (b) the pot of manna and Aaron's rod placed +_in the ark_ (ix. 4), though not so described in 1 Kings viii. 9--but +in the tabernacle they were at least close to the ark (Exod. xvi. 34; +Numb. xvii. 10); (c) the altar of incense is said to belong to the +_holiest place_ (ix. 4)--but it did belong to it in the sense of +sanctifying the approach to it, though it was placed outside it: see 1 +Kings vi. 22. No one can reasonably say that these statements are of +such a nature as to prove that the Epistle was not written by a Levite. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +The title says "To the Hebrews." The character of the Epistle suggests +this. It was plainly written for Jewish Christians, and apparently for +some particular community of them (v. 11, 12; vi. 9, 10; x. 32-34; +xiii. 1, 7, 19, 23). Which community, it is difficult to say. The +Jewish Christians of Rome have been suggested, and in support of this +the reference to Italian Christians (xiii. 24) has been quoted. It is +a strange fact that this theory about the destination of the Epistle is +favoured by some critics who assign it to a late date. For if it was +really written to Rome, the date must be early. It is almost +inconceivable that the author should have said, "Ye have not yet +resisted unto blood," to the Christians of _Rome_ after the persecution +of A.D. 64-65. Some town in Syria or Palestine is more likely than +Rome, and Antioch seems a probable destination for the Epistle. The +community must have been {213} familiar with Greek, and at the same +time must have been under strong temptations to relapse into Judaism. +They had for the sake of Christ left the warm social life of Judaism. +They felt isolated and depressed. The splendour of the temple worship +and the zeal of Jewish patriotism were luring them back to their old +religion. They felt that they had perhaps deserted a magnificent +reality for a shadowy hope. Such circumstances fit with the theory +that the community dwelt in Palestine or Syria, and the same theory is +supported by the fact that these Christians had been converted long ago +(v. 12), and had heard the apostles (ii. 3). + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +Probably from Italy, as shown by xiii. 24. The date may be put about +A.D. 66. A generation of Christians had passed away (xiii. 2). The +doom of Jerusalem was approaching (x. 25; viii. 13; xiii. 13). The +frequent reference to the Levitical worship, as exerting an attractive +force, must imply that the temple was still standing. The Epistle must +therefore be earlier than 70. + +It is true that the references to the Levitical worship are sometimes +more appropriate to the ancient tabernacle than to the temple, and this +fact is urged by those who maintain that the temple was already +destroyed when the Epistle was written. But this is no answer to the +fact that the Jewish worship is throughout assumed to be in existence. +The author is not opposing the propaganda of Jewish rabbis or the +attractions of synagogues which were connected with the temple by +tradition only. He is opposing a great living system with its +priesthood and its ritual. And in order to criticize Judaism he deals +with the _tabernacle_, concerning which the Old Testament gave definite +directions. This was a more effective method than discussing the +temple which superseded the tabernacle. + +[Sidenote: Character and contents.] + +Hebrews is marked by a complete unity of argument. Though the thread +of the argument is sometimes dropped for the sake of practical +exhortation, it is soon resumed and logically carried on. + +{214} + +Christ as the Son of God is a manifestation of God superior to all +other manifestations. He is far above the prophets, and above the +angels, who neither created the material world nor have the "world to +come" subject unto them. He towers above Moses, who was only a servant +and a stone in the house of God, for He is the Son, and built the +house. He is above Joshua; for He has won a rest for the people of +God, of which the rest of Canaan was a mere type. Neither under Joshua +nor under David did the people of God reach the ideal sabbath rest +which God has promised (i.-iv. 13). + +Christ as High Priest is above the Aaronic priesthood, for He is "after +the order of Melchizedek" (Ps. ex. 4) (iv. 14-v. 10). Then the writer, +before giving the full interpretation of Christ's high priesthood, +makes a digression to urge the need of greater spiritual insight on the +part of his readers (v. 11-vi. 12). They can be sure of God's blessing +if they have faith and patience (vi. 13-20). The unique position of +Melchizedek is then expounded. In Gen. xiv. nothing is said of +Melchizedek's descent or of his death. Thus he stands forth in +contrast to the Levitical priests whose descent is described, and who +die and are succeeded by others. He was also superior to those +priests, because Levi, in the person of his father Abraham, paid tithes +to Melchizedek. Since Melchizedek's priesthood is superior to that of +the Levitical priests, much more is that of Christ, of whom +Melchizedek, great as he was, is only a type. Then the author shows +that the rise of a new priesthood must imply the birth of a new +religious system. Christ "hath His priesthood unchangeable," but needs +not to repeat His sacrifice (vii.). + +Then the author shows that the new liturgy and the new sanctuary of the +Christian Church are superior to the liturgy and the sanctuary of +Judaism. Though Christ's blood was shed only once, He retains the +character of Priest (viii. 3); He hath "somewhat to offer," viz. +Himself in His sacred manhood in heaven. He thus acts as a Mediator of +the new covenant {215} promised in the Old Testament (viii. 6-13). The +tabernacle was only a temporary parable; Christ acts as High Priest in +the holy of holies, the actual presence of God typified by the +tabernacle; He has consecrated the new covenant between man and God by +His own blood (ix.). The repetition of the Levitical sacrifices proves +their impotence. But that of Christ is adequate. It is an offering of +inherent value, being the offering of the will of Christ, instead of +the offering of unconscious beasts. And we need no other atonement, +for His unique offering has a perpetual value (x. 1-18). + +The writer then proceeds to insist upon the appropriation and +application of the truths which he has expounded. It is our privilege +to have full confidence, and our duty to assemble for worship: apostasy +is most serious (x. 19-39). The writer next describes the nature of +faith, which is a faculty which makes the future as if it were present, +and the unseen as if it were visible. It is illustrated by a +magnificent roll-call of heroes from Abel to the Incarnation. These +heroes, who saw both worlds, and realized how petty the material world +is compared with the spiritual, had real insight (xi.). Emulate their +example, enduring persecution, knowing that our Mount Zion is superior +to Sinai, and our coming to church a reunion with angels and saints +(xii.). + +The Epistle closes with a practical exhortation concerning brotherly +love, hospitality, prisoners, marriage, and contentment. The ministers +who had formerly had rule over the readers are to be remembered. We +are not to be unsettled by strange teachings. "We have an altar" of +which the Jewish priests may not partake. Our sin offering, Jesus, is +given to us as food. We must go to Him outside the camp of Judaism. +After an injunction to obey the clergy and a request for prayers, the +Epistle concludes. Just before the end it is stated that "our brother +Timothy hath been set at liberty" (xiii.). + +The whole Epistle is peculiarly dignified, eloquent, and {216} +persuasive, and its elegant Greek and delicate Alexandrian philosophy +make it a literary treasure. + +We may conclude with some further remarks on the writer's doctrine of +Christ's Person and of the Jewish Law. + +Knowing that these Christians were in danger of drifting away from +Christ, the writer calls their special attention to His Person, in +order that they may carefully consider who He is before deciding to +part from Him. The doctrine corresponds most exactly with that which +we find in Colossians and in John. It is declared in the most positive +manner that Christ is essentially divine. He reflects His Father's +glory, is the expression of His essence, and the Sustainer of the +universe (i. 3). He is the God whose throne is eternal, and the Lord +who made the earth (i. 8, 10). Yet He became "a little lower than the +angels" (ii. 9), and, though entirely sinless, He was so truly human as +to become the pattern of obedience (x. 7), humility (v. 5), reverent +piety (v. 7), and fidelity (iii. 2). By the discipline of suffering He +was made perfect for His redeeming work (v. 8, 9). It is made evident +that this process of perfection did not consist in the diminution of +sin, but in the development of goodness. Nowhere do we find a more +profound view of suffering and virtue, or a more pathetic delineation +of the character of Jesus. + +It has already been hinted that the author regards the Jewish Law +differently from St. Paul. The latter had lived under the goad of a +Pharisaic interpretation of the Law of Moses, which laid down so many +regulations as to what ought to be done, and gave so little assistance +towards doing it, that escape from such a system was like an escape +from penal servitude. When he speaks of the Law, he regards it +primarily as a system of stern moral requirements. But the author of +Hebrews regards the Law as primarily a system of worship. He implies +that it was in some sense a "good tidings" (iv. 2). He teaches that +the Law was a "shadow" of those real "good things" which constitute the +world of truth in heaven, while the Gospel is the {217} "image" or +adequate representation of those holy realities. The Law is therefore +a rough unsubstantial outline of truth, while the Gospel is exact and +solid. Both writers regard the Law as divine in origin, and both +regard it as insufficient and rudimentary (vii. 16; cf. Gal. iv. 3, 9). +But St. Paul thinks of the Law as weak "through the flesh," _unable to +overcome_ the resistance which it encounters from man's lower +instincts, while the author of Hebrews thinks of it as _unable to +cleanse and make perfect_ the human conscience. + + +ANALYSIS + +The subject of the Epistle: CHRISTIANITY AS THE FINAL RELIGION. The +contrast of the Old Revelation and the New in method, time, and +messengers; the divine personality and incarnation of the Son (i. 1-4). + +A. The superiority of the Son, the Mediator of the New Revelation, to +the angels, and to the human founders of the Jewish polity: i. 5-iv. 13. + +a. Scripture shows the Son to be above the angels (i. 5-14). + +b. The danger of rejecting the Son's revelation (ii. 1-4). + +c. The Son of Man through suffering fulfils the high destiny of mankind +(ii. 5-18). + +d. The dignity of Jesus is far above that of Moses, He is the Maker and +Son, Moses represents the house in which he is a servant (iii. 1-6). + +e. Faith is necessary if we would enter the promised land of rest (iii. +7-19). + +f. Encouragement as well as warning can be based on the failure of the +Israelites. Under Joshua they did not reach their rest. The promise +of it remains for us (iv. 1-13). + +{218} + +B. The high-priesthood of Christ, superior to that of Aaron's line, +universal and royal: iv. 14-vii. 28. + +a. Transition to the doctrine of Christ's high priesthood (iv. 14-16). + +b. The characteristics of a high priest, human sympathy and divine +appointment, fulfilled in Christ (v. 1-10). + +c. A digression to urge the readers to advance; the writer's hope for +the Hebrews, God's blessing is assured (v. 11-vi. 20). + +d. The characteristics of Christ, as perfect and universal High Priest, +shadowed forth by Melchizedek (vii.). + +C. The liturgy and sanctuary of Christ superior to those of Judaism: +viii. i-x. 18. + +a. Christ offers sacrifice in heaven (viii. 1-6). + +b. Thus He maintains the New Covenant between God and man promised in +the Old Testament (viii. 7-13). + +c. The sanctuary and priests of the Old Covenant (ix. 1-10). + +d. Fuller explanation of the atoning work of Christ under the New +Covenant (ix. 11-28). + +e. The inadequacy of the old sacrifices, the abiding efficacy of +Christ's one sacrifice (x. 1-18). + +D. The appropriation and application of the above truths: x. 19-xiii. +25. + +a. The privilege of entering the holy place with confidence, the duty +of public worship (x. 19-39). + +b. The past triumphs of heroes of the faith (xi.). + +c. Exhortation to energy, endurance, fidelity to our Mount Zion and its +divine utterances (xii.). + +d. Detailed instructions (xiii.). + + + +[1] Eusebius, _H. E._ v. 26, says that Irenaeus "mentions the Epistle +to the Hebrews and the so-called Wisdom of Solomon, comparing certain +expressions from them." Eusebius does not say that Irenaeus attributed +it to St. Paul. We can compare words in Heb. i. 1 with Wisd. vii. 22; +Heb. i. 3 with Wisd. xvi. 21; Heb. xii. 17 with Wisd. xii. 10; Heb. +xiii. 7 with Wisd. ii. 17. + +[2] Stephen Gobar, in a passage preserved by Photius, Cod. 232. + +[3] The word "effulgence" (Heb. i. 3) is a favourite word with Philo. +The interpretation of "King of Salem" as "King of peace" (Heb. vii. 2) +occurs in Philo, and Heb. xiii. 5 has a quotation from Josh. i. 5 +exactly resembling in form a quotation in Philo, _De conf. ling._, 33. + +[4] _De Pudic_, 20. + + + + +{129} + +CHAPTER XIX + +THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES + +The New Testament contains seven letters known as "Catholic," viz. that +of James, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and that of Jude. These +letters were added to the Canon of the New Testament later than the +rest of its contents. In ancient manuscripts, versions, and catalogues +their position in the New Testament varies, and for a long time they +were often placed between Acts and St. Paul's Epistles. 1 Peter and 1 +John were the first to be universally received. About A.D. 300 all +seven were known and received in the Greek Churches, but nearly as late +as A.D. 350 the Syrian Church was unacquainted with any of them except +James. After this the Syrian Church adopted 1 Peter and 1 John, and +finally the whole seven. This fact with regard to the Syrian Church is +of peculiar importance. It shows us that we must take care not to +argue that an Epistle is probably a forgery because an important +Christian community was unacquainted with it at a comparatively late +date. For the evidence for the genuineness of 1 Peter and 1 John is +even stronger than the evidence for the genuineness of James. Yet at a +time when the best Greek critics were entirely satisfied as to the +genuineness of 1 Peter and 1 John, the Syrians did not recognize them. +The only reasonable explanation of this is the simplest explanation, +namely, that some Epistles were translated at a later date than others. +Among Syrian writers we find two distinct tendencies. Writers who were +entirely at home with Greek literature, and in communion with the +orthodox Greek Church, like St. Ephraim or St. John of Damascus, used +the same Catholic {220} Epistles as the Christians of Alexandria or +Jerusalem. On the other hand, Christians who were cut off by schism +from the main body of Christendom continued for centuries to use +exactly the same Canon of Scripture as that which had been employed by +their ancestors before the schism. Thus Ebed Jesu, Metropolitan of +Nisibis, and the last prelate of the Nestorian sect who wrote important +works in Syriac, died in A.D. 1318. But we find that he only uses the +three Catholic Epistles contained in the Peshitta Syriac version of the +New Testament, probably completed soon after A.D. 400. + +If we pass from the extreme east to the extreme west of ancient +Christendom, we find ourselves confronted with similar but not +identical facts. We find that a superior degree of authority was +allowed to belong to 1 Peter and 1 John. There can be no doubt that in +all the great centres of Christian life outside Syria these two +Epistles were in the Canon by the year 200. The _Muratorian Fragment_, +written in Italy about A.D. 180, mentions two Epistles of St. John and +that of St. Jude. It contains no mention of 1 Peter, but there are +grounds for believing that there was a reference to it in the lost +portion which was devoted to Mark. It contains no mention of James, +though that Epistle seems to be quoted in the _Shepherd_ of Hermas, +written at Rome about A.D. 140. It was long before James was +universally regarded as part of the Canon. It is quoted as Scripture +by Origen of Alexandria early in the 3rd century, but a hundred years +later Eusebius says that it was disputed by a minority. It is accepted +by Eusebius himself. The very private character of 2 and 3 John +accounts for the slowness with which they won acceptance as part of the +word of God, yet 2 John is backed by the high authority of Irenaeus, +and both Epistles are obviously the work of the same author. The +Second Epistle which bears the name of St. Peter is connected with +peculiar difficulties, and possesses less evidence in its favour than +any of the other Catholic Epistles. + +We cannot do better than quote the admirable words in {221} which Dr. +Sanday has sketched the adventures of such books. "An Epistle lodged +in the archives of a great and cultured Church like the Church of Rome +would be one thing, and an Epistle straying about among the smaller +communities of Bithynia or Pontus would be another; while an Epistle +written to an individual like the Gaius of 3 St. John would have worse +chances still. There were busy, careless, neglectful, and unmethodical +people in those days as well as now; and we can easily imagine one of +these precious rolls found with glad surprise, covered with dust in +some forgotten hiding-place, and brought out to the view of a +generation which had learnt to be more careful of its treasures. But +even then, once off the main roads, circulation was not rapid; an +obscure provincial Church might take some time in making its voice +heard, and the authorities at headquarters might receive the reported +discovery with suspicion. They might, or they might not, as it +happened." [1] + +But by degrees the customs of the different Churches were levelled. +Before the end of the 4th century all the Catholic Epistles were +accepted as canonical in Europe, and in a large part of the Christian +world which lay beyond Europe. This leads us to inquire why these +Epistles bear the name of Catholic. The answer seems to be that the +name Catholic or General was given to the more important of the seven, +because they were addressed to the Church Universal, or to groups of +Churches, and not to individuals or to single Churches. The words +Catholic Epistles therefore signify Circular or Encyclical Letters. +Origen gives the name of Catholic to 1 Peter, 1 John, and Jude. By the +4th century the name was applied to all the seven. There can be little +doubt that 2 and 3 John are not Catholic in the sense of being Circular +or Encyclical. But they were numbered with the others for the sake of +convenience, being naturally associated with the first and more +important letter by St. John. + +{222} + +The following table gives an idea of the gradual incorporation of the +Catholic Epistles into the Canon. An * denotes a direct quotation or +the expression of almost no doubt; a ? notes that the writer is aware +of decided doubts, a () marks an uncertain reference. + + 1 2 + J P P 1 2 3 + a e e J J J J + m t t o o o u + e e e h h h d + s r r n n n e + + I. COUNCILS-- + Laodicea, A.D. 363 . . . . . . . * * * * * * * + Rome, A.D. 382 . . . . . . . . . * * * * * * * + Carthage, A.D. 397 . . . . . . . * * * * * * * + + II. EASTERN LISTS-- + (a) _Syria._ + Ephraim, A.D. 370 . . . . . * * * * * * * + Chrysostom, A.D. 400 . . . . * * * + Peshitta version, ? A.D. 410 * * * + Junilius, A.D. 550 . . . . . ? * ? * ? ? ? + John of Damascus, A.D. 750 * * * * * * * + Ebed Jesu, A.D. 1300 . . . . * * * + (b) _Palestine._ + Eusebius, A.D. 330 . . . . . ? * ? * ? ? ? + Cyril, A.D. 348 . . . . . . * * * * * * * + (c) _Alexandria._ + Clement, A.D. 190 . . . . . * * * * + Origen, A.D. 220 . . . . . . * * ? * ? ? * + Athanasius, A.D. 367 . . . . * * * * * * * + (d) _Asia Minor._ + Polycarp, A.D. 110 . . . . . * * + Amphilochius, A.D. 380 . . . * * ? * ? ? ? + Gregory Nazianzen, A.D. 380 * * * * * * * + + III. WESTERN LISTS-- + (a) _Italy._ + Muratorian, A.D. 180 . . . . * * * + Hippolytus, A.D. 220 . . . . * ( ) * + (b) _Gaul._ + Irenaeus, A.D. 180 . . . . . * * * + (c) _Roman Africa._ + Tertullian, A.D. 200 . . . . * * * + + + +[1] _Inspiration_, p. 368. + + + + +{223} + +CHAPTER XX + +THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES + +[Sidenote: The Author] + +In the 4th century this Epistle was reckoned among the authentic +documents of the apostolic period. It does not seem to have been +universally known in the Church at an earlier period. It is not in the +_Muratorian Fragment_. But it is plainly quoted by Irenaeus, though he +does not mention the author's name. The same is true with regard to +the _Shepherd_ of Hermas, which was written at Rome about A.D. 140. +Justin Martyr quotes the words "the devils shudder" (James ii. 19, +_Trypho_, 49). Polycarp seems to quote James i. 27, and 1 Peter seems +to show traces of its influence. The first writer who both quotes it +and mentions the author is Origen. + +It opens with the name of "James, a servant of God and of the Lord +Jesus Christ." There can be no reasonable doubt that this is James +"the Lord's brother." James the son of Zebedee was killed as early as +A.D. 44, before which date it is unlikely that the Epistle was written. +We have no reason to attribute the Epistle to the Apostle James "the +Little." He does not seem to have been of sufficient prominence to +write an authoritative letter "to the twelve tribes which are of the +Dispersion." But such an action would have been exceedingly natural on +the part of a saint who was bishop of "the mother of Churches," +Jerusalem itself. It will be convenient to postpone the consideration +of such evidence as we possess for the foregoing conclusion until we +have discussed the exact relation of St. James to our Lord. + +{224} + +Three important theories must be mentioned as offering a solution of +the difficult problem as to this relationship-- + +(a) That James, Joses, Simon, and Jude, mentioned in the Gospels as the +"brethren" of our Lord, were His first cousins on His mother's side. + +(b) That they were the children of Joseph and Mary. + +(c) That they were the children of Joseph by a former wife. + +The theory of St. Jerome (a) may be perhaps discarded without any +further comment than that St. Jerome apparently invented it, that he +claimed no traditional sanction for it, he did not hold it consistently +himself in his later writings, and it is very difficult to reconcile it +with Scripture. The theory of Helvidius (b), which called forth St. +Jerome's attempted refutation, answers some verbal requirements of the +Gospel narrative, and has found some skilful modern advocates. But +with the possible exception of Tertullian, no Christian seems to have +held it before Helvidius, and the theory that Mary had other children +besides Jesus gave a profound shock to Christian sentiment. No +argument can be brought against (c), the theory defended, though not +originated, by St. Epiphanius, that the brethren of our Lord were +children of St. Joseph by a former wife. It is in keeping with the +strong tradition which maintained the perpetual virginity of the +Blessed Virgin; it helps to explain the attitude of unbelief recorded +in the Gospels of Christ's brethren, and at the same time requires no +distortion of the literalness of the passages in which they are +mentioned. There is hardly sufficient evidence to show that first +cousins were ever called "brethren." But it would have been quite +natural for those who called St. Joseph "the father of Jesus" to call +St. Joseph's sons "the brothers of Jesus." And again, the supposition +that the Blessed Virgin had no other son, seems strongly supported by +the fact that at the crucifixion our Lord commended her to His beloved +disciple, and not to one of St. Joseph's family. + +{225} + +This theory of St. Epiphanius is much older than the 4th century. It +is sometimes urged against it that Origen derived it from the +Apocryphal Gospels of the 2nd century, and that its popularity in the +Church was owing to Origen's influence. But though the Apocryphal +Gospels often contained fictions, we cannot argue that everything in +them is fictitious. The tradition agrees with the words of Scripture, +and gains support from some fragments of Hegesippus, a cultured +Palestinian Christian, born about A.D. 100. He states directly that +Symeon, the second bishop of Jerusalem, was the _cousin_ of our Lord, +because son of Clopas who was the brother of Joseph. He also calls +James "the brother of the Lord," and in another passage speaks of Jude +as "called brother" of the Lord. He therefore plainly distinguishes +the cousins from the so-called "brethren." We then get the following +genealogy:-- + + Jacob + | + +--------------------+--------------------+ + | | + Joseph == Mary Clopas (or Alphaeus) + | | | + | | +------+------+ + +-- James JESUS | | | + +-- Joses James Joses Symeon + +-- Jude (the Little) + +-- Simon + +-- Sisters + + +We conclude, therefore, that St. James was the son of St. Joseph. + +The writer of the Epistle frequently colours his sentences with words +from the Old Testament, and assumes a knowledge of it among his +readers. He makes no allusion to the Gentiles. He writes in a tone of +authority and without any self-advertisement. He briefly uses for +illustration certain natural phenomena which would be familiar to the +people of Palestine, such as allusions to "the early and latter rain" +(v. 7), the effect on vegetation of the burning wind (i. 11), the +existence of salt or bitter springs (iii. 11), the cultivation {226} of +figs and olives (iii. 12), and the neighbourhood of the sea (i. 6; iii. +4). From such a cursory view of the character of this Epistle, it +would seem reasonable to admit that it was written by a Palestinian +Jewish Christian for the edification of Christians of the same race and +locality. + +We get the same impression when we study what is said by the writer +about the readers. He speaks as though they had been under a law of +bondage, but are now under a law of liberty (i. 25; ii. 12). They are +in touch with men who are unbelievers, who blaspheme Christ and +persecute Christians (ii. 6, 7). The believers are mostly poor (ii. +5); the few rich who are Christians are in danger of falling away +through covetousness and pride (iv. 3-6, 13-16). The rich appear as +oppressors, who luxuriously "nourish their hearts in a day of +slaughter," and had even "killed the righteous" (v. 5, 6). The Church +is ruled by "elders" (v. 14) like the Jewish synagogues, and the +Christian "synagogue" is occasionally frequented by rich strangers (ii. +2). All this is well suited to the conditions of Christian life in +Palestine. And it is difficult to find any locality equally +appropriate. Even as late as the first part of the 2nd century rich +Gentiles were reluctant to persecute Christians, and to describe them +as blaspheming the name of Christ at any time within or near the +apostolic age would be almost impossible. They regarded Christianity +with good-natured contempt, not with blasphemous hostility. We have +only to read Acts to see that among the Gentiles it was the poor and +ignorant rather than the rich who began the persecution of the +Christians. On the other hand, if we turn to the Jews, we find that +the rich were the leaders of persecution. It was the wealthy Sadducee +party in union with the influential Pharisees which harried the Church. +The Gospels and Acts give repeated evidence on this point, and the +evidence of the Jewish historian Josephus supplies the keystone of that +evidence. + +Against the Palestinian origin of the Epistle it is urged that {227} +the Greek is too correct and rhetorical. The style is vivacious and +forcible. It contains many rather unusual Greek words, including six +which are neither in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament nor in +the rest of the New Testament, a long list of words which are found in +the Septuagint and not in the New Testament, and seven rare classical +or late Greek words. The whole question of the style of the Epistle +requires the most delicate handling. But the style is distinctly +unfavourable to the theory that the Epistle was written at a late date +in a centre of Gentile Christianity. The Greek is neither the flowing +Greek of a Greek, nor the rough provincial Greek which St. Paul spoke +and wrote. It is slow and careful, with short sentences linked by +repetitions. One epithet is piled effectively on another (_e.g._ iii. +15, 17), and abstract statements are avoided. Galilee was studded with +Greek towns, and in Jerusalem Greek was well known. The Epistle might +well have been written by a Jew of Palestine who had made a good use of +his opportunities. And the introduction of some rare words in the +midst of a simple moral exhortation is by no means a proof of complete +mastery over Greek. It points, not to a mastery over the language, but +to a painstaking familiarity with it. + +These facts seem compatible with the few details which we know about +St. James. Their full significance can only be appreciated when we +know the difficulties which have beset the commentators who assign to +the Epistle a date outside his lifetime. + +Before considering the question of the date more minutely, we may +collect together some points of interest connected with St. James. + +St. James, like the other "brethren" of our Lord, watched the +development of our Lord's career, but was unconvinced of the truth of +His mission. After the Resurrection, our Lord, St. Paul tells us, "was +seen of James." Perhaps this was the turning-point of his life, he, +like St. Thomas, "saw and {228} believed." The Gospel according to the +Hebrews, one of the oldest of the Apocryphal Gospels, says that our +Lord, after His Resurrection, "went to James and appeared to him--for +James had sworn that he would not eat bread from that hour in which he +drank the cup of the Lord, until he saw Him rising from the dead;--and +again after a little while. 'Bring hither, saith the Lord, a table and +bread.'" . . . "He brought bread, and blessed and brake it, and gave it +to James the Just, and said unto him, 'My brother, eat thy bread, for +the Son of man hath risen from the dead.'" There are other versions of +the story which make the vow to be taken after the death of Christ. In +spite of some absurdities in this Apocryphal Gospel, it is possible +that the legend is true, and that the sublime death of the Redeemer +began to effect the repentance of His brother. However this may be, +before Pentecost, A.D. 29, we find him joined to the Christian +community at Jerusalem, where he afterwards attained a foremost +position. In Gal. i. we find that St. Paul visited St. James and St. +Peter at Jerusalem. In Acts xii. 17 St. Peter, on escaping from prison +in A.D. 44, desires that news of his escape should be taken to St. +James. In Gal. ii. St. Paul speaks of "James and Cephas and John" as +pillars of the Church at Jerusalem. From Acts xv. we find that at this +time, A.D. 49, St. James acted as president of the Council which +determined how far the Gentile Christians need conform to the customs +of the Jews. It is remarkable that the speech of St. James in Acts xv. +and the circular despatched from the Council show several coincidences +of style with the Epistle. If these coincidences are due to forgery, +the forger has certainly used consummate self-restraint and skill. + +Again, when St. Paul paid his last visit to Jerusalem, in A.D. 56, and +the Jews accused him of advocating the abandonment of the Law of Moses +and "the customs," it is St. James and his presbyters who advise him to +go up to the Temple and purify himself with four Nazirites, and so +reassure the "myriads" of Christian Jews who were zealous for the Law. +{229} Once more we cannot help observing how well this anxiety of St. +James agrees with the very cautious tone of the Epistle with regard to +distinctively Christian doctrine. + +The end of St. James is recorded by Hegesippus and by Josephus. +Hegesippus represents him living as a strict Nazirite, always +frequenting the Temple, with knees as hard as a camel's because of his +perpetual prayers.[1] He tells us that St. James was thrown from a +pinnacle of the Temple, stoned, and clubbed to death at the order of +the scribes and Pharisees for asserting that Jesus was on the right +hand of God. From Josephus we learn that his martyrdom took place when +a vacancy in the procuratorship caused by the death of Festus (in A.D. +62) gave the Sadducees the opportunity which they desired. He was +dragged before the Sanhedrim, condemned and stoned. Josephus also +gives us to understand that the more moderate Jews were not in sympathy +with such a thoroughly unconstitutional proceeding, and that Agrippa +deprived Ananus, the high priest, of his office for invading the rights +of the civil power. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"The twelve tribes of the Dispersion." We might suppose that the +writer had in his mind all the Jews who were dispersed throughout the +world, but came to Jerusalem to offer sacrifice when they were able, +and who were all bound by the religious obligation to pay the yearly +tribute to the temple. There had been several dispersions in the +history of the chosen people, to Assyria under Shalmaneser, to Babylon +and Egypt in the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and to Rome under Pompeius. +But ch. ii. 1 shows that the Epistle was written to men who +acknowledged Jesus as Lord. It is therefore natural to think that it +was written only to men who were both Christians and of Jewish origin. +But there is another interpretation of the phrase "the twelve tribes." +Some think that it is merely a symbolical name for the Christian Church +composed both of Jews and Gentiles, and {230} forming the new and +spiritual Israel. Strong arguments have been brought forward in favour +of each of these views, but the former seems to be the sounder. The +argument that the Jews at this period could not have been called +"twelve" tribes when only two had returned from the captivity, is +disproved by the fact that the phrase is unquestionably used in this +meaning in Acts xxvi. 7. We must frankly admit that St. Paul speaks of +the Gentile Christians as forming part of the new Israel of God, but he +never alludes to them as part of twelve tribes. In Rev. vii. the +twelve tribes still mean Christian Jews in contrast with the "great +multitude" of redeemed Gentiles. Justin Martyr speaks of "your twelve +tribes" in addressing Trypho[2] the Jew, and several instances are to +be found in early Christian literature where the words are used in this +literal sense. + +We may therefore rest content with this literal meaning. But we must +maintain it with reserve in view of the fact that St. Peter applies the +word "dispersion" to the new and ideal Israel. And we must beware of +arguing that the word "synagogue" (ii. 2) proves that the readers were +necessarily Jews. The word "synagogue" was for a long time +occasionally applied to the Gentile Christian congregations, as we find +in the _Shepherd_ of Hermas[3] (A.D. 140) and Theophilus[4] (A.D. 180). + +[Sidenote: When and where written.] + +We have already seen that Palestine is the most likely place, and as +St. James lived at Jerusalem, the Epistle was probably written there. +The date has always been a hopeless problem to those who reject the +authenticity of the Epistle. That it was written by a heretic in +Palestine about A.D. 70, or by a Catholic at Rome about A.D. 90, or +that it represents a "Catholicized Paulinism" of A.D. 140, or that it +is a patchwork of homilies written soon after A.D. 120, are guesses +which have been made but not substantiated. The fact that it was +written before A.D. 62 is {231} self-evident if we admit that it was +written by St. James. But it is also corroborated by the fact that 1 +Peter, written about A.D. 64, seems to show a knowledge of this +Epistle. Far more complicated is the question as to whether St. James +shows any knowledge of St. Paul's Epistles. He insists so pointedly on +the need of being justified _by works_ that some writers have thought +that he is attacking St. Paul's doctrine of justification _by faith_. +The idea must be dismissed. Such a masterly writer would not have +attacked what an apostle did not really hold. St. James, in attacking +a theory of justification by faith, is condemning a faith which means +only orthodox intellectual assent. St. Paul, in defending his doctrine +of justification by faith, is upholding a faith which implies energetic +and loving service. The two doctrines simply supplement one another. +When Luther called the Epistle to the Galatians his "wife" and called +the Epistle of St. James an "Epistle of straw," he simply showed that +he understood neither. St. James is not only not criticizing St. Paul; +he is perhaps not even criticizing a popular perversion of St. Paul's +doctrine. The question of the justification of Abraham was a favourite +subject of discussion among the Jews, and the teaching of our Lord had +shown the superiority of a living faith over dead works. There is no +difficulty in supposing that some Jewish believers were confused with +regard to these great matters before they had read a word of St. Paul's +letters. And to such men the Epistle of St. James might be of the +highest value. + +In spite of this, there often seems to be a verbal connection between +this Epistle and those of St. Paul. The connection is admitted by +critics of the most different schools. Moreover, some are of opinion +that there is a connection between James and the Epistle to the +Hebrews, ch. xi. These connections have been exaggerated, but they are +hard to deny. Now, if St. James had borrowed from any of these +Epistles, it would be very difficult for us to account for the extreme +simplicity of his {232} doctrine. On the other hand, there is no +difficulty in the fact that they put his words in a more elaborate +setting. And as St. Paul's opponents declared that they were backed by +St. James, we may be sure that St. Paul would eagerly read anything +written by St. James. We may therefore place this Epistle earlier than +St. Paul's Epistles to Corinth and Rome, and perhaps earlier than any +of his extant Epistles. + +It is sometimes objected to this that it is "grotesque" to suppose that +St. James would have originated the practice of writing religious +Epistles. It is said that the practice must have been begun by an +apostle of supreme originality, and one who travelled widely, therefore +by St. Paul. But we have no means of deciding the question. And as +St. Paul may have written Epistles before he wrote those now extant, we +may still hold that St. Paul began the practice, and that this Epistle +is nevertheless older than the works of St. Paul which we now possess. +We can, therefore, see no good reason for denying that this Epistle is +as early as A.D. 50. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle is intensely practical, and though it is in no sense +anti-doctrinal, it does not discuss doctrine. The evils against which +it contends all concern conduct. The good which it recommends is +persistent well-doing in accordance with the new moral law of +Christianity. The sole validity of the law of love (ii. 8), the gift +of a new birth by the word of truth, making us heirs of God (i. 18; ii. +5), the mention of the author's servitude to Christ (i. 1), and the +ascription of divine power to His name (v. 14), show conclusively that +the writing is not, as some say, of Jewish origin. The tone is +austere, and the Epistle contains no word of praise for the readers. + +A strong argument in favour of the genuineness of the Epistle is +furnished by the numerous parallels which it presents to the Synoptic +Gospels. These parallels are not quotations from the Gospels, but they +show that the writer was saturated with the kind of teaching which the +Gospels record. The {233} connection with the Sermon on the Mount as +recorded by St. Matthew is particularly plain. Among the numerous +proofs of this connection we must content ourselves with noticing the +agreement as to the spiritual view of the Law (Jas. i. 25; ii. 8, 12, +13; Matt. v. 17-44), the blessings of adversity (Jas. i. 2, 13; ii. 5; +v. 7, 8; Matt. v. 3-12), the dangers of wealth (Jas. i. 10, 11; ii. 6, +7; iv. 13-16; v. 1-6; Matt. vi. 19-21, 24-34), the true nature of +prayer (Jas. i. 5-8; iv. 3; v. 13-18; Matt. vi. 6-13), the necessity of +forgiving others (Jas. ii. 13; Matt. vi. 14, 15), the tree known by its +fruits (Jas. iii. 11, 12; Matt. vii. 16-20), the prohibition of oaths +(Jas. v. 12; Matt. v. 34-37), the Judge before the door (Jas. v. 9; +Matt. xxiv. 33). Many other coincidences can be found. The "perfect +law" upheld by St. James, a law both "free" and "royal," irresistibly +reminds us of the legislation of the Messianic King in our first Gospel. + +In v. 14-16 we have a direction given with regard to the anointing of +the sick by the presbyters of the Church. This rite, perverted by the +Gnostics in the 2nd century, survived that perversion. The first full +directions for it in a Catholic document are in the prayers of Bishop +Sarapion of Thmuis in Egypt, about A.D. 350. In the Eastern Church the +oil used for this purpose may be consecrated by presbyters, contrary to +the usual practice of the West, which requires it to be consecrated by +a bishop. + +{234} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation (i. 1). + +Human trial and the wisdom which enables us to profit by it, a warning +against double-mindedness, Christianity exalts the lowly, riches are +transitory, trial brings blessing, trial due to lust is not a trial +from God but from self, God is the Source of all our good (i. 2-18). + +We must receive the divine word with humility and act upon it, kindness +and purity are the best ceremonial (i. 19-27). + +Christian behaviour towards rich and poor to be based on the royal law +of love; violation of that law is a breach of God's command, which +embraces motive as well as action (ii. 1-13). + +Intellectual faith is no substitute for godly works, Abraham and Rahab +were justified by works (ii. 13-26). + +The responsibility of teaching, the difficulty and importance of +controlling the tongue (iii. 1-12). + +Christian wisdom contrasted with the animal wisdom of faction (iii. +13-18). + +The cause of quarrelling is selfish desire, which infects even your +prayers, the adultery of a soul which indulges in worldliness and +pride, cease from finding fault, worldliness is shown in business plans +made without reference to God (iv.). + +Luxurious wealth denounced, it is the rich who have persecuted the +righteous, patience is commended (v. 1-11). + +Swear not, prayer and praise, the anointing of the sick with prayer, +mutual confession of sins and prayer, the blessing on those who convert +a sinner (v. 12-20). + + + +[1] Quoted by Eusebius, _H. E._ ii. 23. + +[2] _Trypho._ 126. + +[3] _Mand._ xi. 9. + +[4] _Ad Autol._ i. 14. + + + + +{235} + +CHAPTER XXI + +THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The author describes himself as "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (i. +1). Few books of the New Testament are so well attested as this +Epistle. + +The external evidence for its authenticity is strong, and stronger than +that for any other Catholic Epistle except 1 John. It seems to be +quoted in _Didache_, i. 4. The letter of Polycarp written about A.D. +110 shows a complete familiarity with 1 Peter. He evidently regarded +it as a letter of the highest authority. His contemporary Papias was +acquainted with it, and so far as we can determine from Eusebius, he +referred to it directly as the work of St. Peter. The Epistle of +Barnabas, the date of which is uncertain, but which is probably as old +as A.D. 98 or even older, quotes 1 Pet. ii. 5. Again, it seems certain +that the Epistle is quoted, though not by name, in the Epistle of +Clement of Rome, A.D. 95. It is quite unnecessary for us to point to +important references in writers of the latter part of the 2nd century +and onwards. An Epistle which has the triple support of Clement, +Polycarp, and Papias is, so far as external evidence is concerned, +beyond the reach of any sober criticism. + +The apostle was first called "Simon, the son of John" (according to the +correct reading in John xxi. 15, 16, 17), and was a fisherman of +Bethsaida. He was brought to Jesus by his brother Andrew, and, like +him, had been a disciple of John the Baptist. Our Lord at once +discerned his capacity, and gave {236} him the surname of Cephas +(Aramaic) or Peter (Greek), signifying a rock or stone. Peter was the +first disciple to confess the Messiahship of our Lord, and was rewarded +by the promise of the keys of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. xvi. 13-19). +With John and James he was admitted to a peculiarly close relationship +with Jesus (Mark v. 37; Matt. xvii. 1; xxvi. 37; cf. Mark iii. 16, 17). +He thrice denied that he was a disciple of Jesus on the night when +Jesus was tried and condemned. He bitterly repented, and on the third +day after the Crucifixion he, again in the company of John, hastened to +the sepulchre and found it empty. He was permitted several times to +see the risen Lord, who cancelled his threefold denial by graciously +drawing from him a threefold confession of his love, and commanded him +to feed His lambs and His sheep. Our Lord also predicted his martyrdom +(John xx. and xxi.; Luke xxiv. 33, 34; 1 Cor. xv. 5). + +In Acts St. Peter appears as the leader of the Church. At the election +of Matthias in place of Judas, at the descent of the Holy Ghost at +Pentecost, at the admission of the Gentiles in the person of Cornelius +and his family to the privileges of the new covenant, at the +emancipation of the Gentile Christians from the Jewish ceremonial law +at the Council of Jerusalem, St. Peter is foremost (Acts i. 15-26; ii. +1-42; x.; xv. 6-11). Soon after the Council St. Peter was at Antioch, +and weakly "dissembled" by disguising his belief in the truth that the +Gentile Christians were on the same spiritual level as the Jewish +Christians. He was rebuked by St. Paul (Gal. ii. 11-14). + +He does not seem to have laboured in Rome until near the end of his +life. The Roman tradition that he was bishop of that city for +twenty-five years is almost certainly a legend, based on the fact that +twenty-five years elapsed between the year when the apostles were +believed to have temporarily left Jerusalem (twelve years after the +Crucifixion) and the date of his martyrdom. There is, however, no +ground for disputing the fact that {237} he died at Rome during the +Neronian persecution. There are several reasons for thinking that he +survived St. Paul for a short period, though St. Augustine asserts that +he was martyred before St. Paul. He was crucified near the middle of +the circus of Nero, on a spot afterwards marked by a "chapel of the +crucifixion." He was buried nigh at hand. His tomb, probably in the +form of a _cella_ or open apse, is mentioned by Caius of Rome about +A.D. 200. A huge basilica was built over it by the Emperor +Constantine, and remained until it was replaced in the 16th century by +the present St. Peter's. In spite of his unique position, St. Peter in +1 Pet. v. 1 speaks of himself as a "presbyter," as St. John does in 2 +John 1 and 3 John 1 (compare also 1 Tim. iv. 14, where St. Paul reckons +himself as a member of the "presbytery"). At this period, and for many +years later, the word "presbyter" was vague enough to be applied to the +highest officers of the Church. + +The internal evidence afforded by the Epistle is in harmony with St. +Peter's experience. (1) The writer claims to have been "a witness of +the sufferings of Christ" (v. 1), and contrasts himself and his readers +in saying (i. 8), "Whom not having seen ye love." (2) He lays stress +upon the pastoral aspect of our Lord's work (ii. 25; v. 2-4), as though +writing under a sense of the special pastoral charge given to him by +our Lord. (3) His injunction, "all of you gird yourselves with +humility"--literally, "put on humility like a slave's apron"--seems to +be a reminiscence of the action of our Lord that astonished St. Peter +when "He took a towel and girded Himself" at the Last Supper. (4) +There are points of resemblance between the Epistle and the speeches +delivered by St. Peter in Acts. (5) The appeal to Old Testament +predictions of Christ's sufferings (1 Pet. i. 11; Acts iii. 18), the +reference to the stone that was rejected by the builders (1 Pet. ii. 7, +8; Acts iv. 11), the description of the cross as the "tree" (1 Pet. ii. +24; Acts v. 30), are coincidences which suggest a common authorship +while they seem too small to be designed. (6) The graphic and {238} +pictorial style of the Epistle bears resemblance to the style of Mark, +which is based on St. Peter's preaching. We may mention the word "put +to silence" (ii. 15)--literally, "muzzle"--which St. Mark (i. 25; iv. +39) applies to the subduing of an unclean spirit and the stilling of a +rough sea. + +Against the authenticity of the Epistle it is sometimes said that it is +improbable that St. Peter, whose mission was to the Jews, would address +Churches in which St. Paul had laboured, and which were largely +composed of Gentiles. But in no case could such action on the part of +St. Peter be thought incredible. And if St. Peter survived St. Paul, +as he very probably did, it would be particularly fitting for him to +write to them after St. Paul's martyrdom. Many critics have been +inclined to pronounce the Epistle spurious on the ground that it seems +to be so strongly influenced by St. Paul's teaching as to represent St. +Paul's own school of thought. We find, as in St. Paul's writings, the +phrase "in Christ" (iii. 16; v. 10, 14), and the second advent of +Christ called by the name "revelation" (i. 7, 13; iv. 13). Moreover, +there are numerous verses which can be compared with verses in St. +Paul's Epistles, particularly in Romans and Ephesians.[1] We must not +fail to notice in passing, that if this Epistle, which manifestly +belongs to the 1st century, does actually quote Ephesians, as some +affirm, the authenticity of Ephesians is thereby very strongly +corroborated. But in any case the similarity between the Epistle and +St. Paul's writings cannot be reasonably urged against its genuineness. +The once popular theory that St. Paul held a fundamentally different +conception of Christianity from that held by St. Peter has completely +broken down. There is not a shred of evidence for believing that the +semi-Christian Jews who lived in Palestine in the 2nd century +represented St. Peter's {239} type of Christianity, or that the +teaching of St. Peter excluded the deep teaching of St. Paul. He was +susceptible to external influences, and he may have caught the tone of +St. Paul while living in a community which St. Paul had so profoundly +influenced. This tone seems to mark 1 Peter. + +But a further point must be mentioned in this connection. Modern +writers have too readily adopted the habit of labelling certain +expressions and doctrines as Pauline and assuming that St. Paul +_originated_ them. No doubt the apostle of the Gentiles possessed a +mind as original as it was fertile. But it is at least reasonable to +suppose that a common creed and a common training produced similar +habits of thought in many cultivated and eager minds. St. Paul himself +frequently writes as if his readers, even those who had not seen his +face, were quite familiar with a treasury of words and ideas which he +employs. We cannot legitimately argue that he was the first and only +coiner of such words and ideas. For instance, the phrase "in Christ," +which we have quoted above, is often said to have been directly +borrowed from St. Paul. But the idea of abiding in Christ is implied +in Matt. and Mark, and expounded in John. It reaches back to the Old +Testament idea of abiding "in God" (Ps. lvi. 4; lxii. 7; Isa. xlv. 25). +It would be quite natural in any Christian who had adequately realized +the truth of the Incarnation. We can therefore repudiate without +hesitation the assertion that the writer is more affected "by the +teaching of Paul than of Jesus." The imagery employed by the writer is +of a distinctive character. It is almost entirely derived from the Old +Testament, and is narrower in its range than that of St. Paul. The +figures are drawn from birth and family life (i. 3, 14, 17, 22; ii. 2), +nomadic life (i. 1, 17; ii. 11), temple and worship (ii. 3; iii. 15), +building (ii. 4), fields and pastoral life (i. 4; v. 2, 8), military +life (i. 5; ii. 11, iv. 1), painting (ii. 21), working in metals (i. 7; +iv. 12). Some of these figures suggest that the author was a Jew by +birth, and also that he was not a mere copyist of St. Paul. + +{240} + +Again, we must notice that 1 Peter shows a dependence upon James.[2] +While we therefore grant that the author of this Epistle seems to have +made use of St. Paul's writings, we must be prepared to grant that he +also made use of a document written by one who has been frequently +declared by modern critics to have been antagonistic to St. Paul. A +tradition found as early as Origen, and in itself extremely probable, +represents St. Peter as having organized the Church at Antioch, and St. +Peter probably became acquainted with the Epistle of St. James while at +Antioch and before his arrival at Rome. In any case, the author shows +himself by no means exclusively indebted to St. Paul, and the candid +student must therefore admit that it is unreasonable to discredit this +Epistle on the ground that it represents St. Peter as preaching +"Paulinism." + +It is also asserted that the Greek is too flowing to have been written +by St. Peter, especially if Papias is right in saying that St. Peter +required the services of St. Mark as "interpreter." The style of the +Greek is, indeed, good. It contains a considerable number of classical +Greek words, though it is also saturated with the language of the +Septuagint. It is simple, correct, and impressive. But the large +extent to which Greek was spoken in Palestine, and the fact that it was +the language of Antioch, make it quite possible that St. Peter obtained +a considerable mastery over Greek. We cannot attach a quite definite +meaning to the word "interpreter." It need not imply that St. Peter +always, or even at any time in his later life, required his Aramaic to +be translated into Greek. It is not unusual for a clever modern +missionary to lecture and write in correct Chinese after a very few +years of practice, and there would be nothing strange if St. Peter soon +acquired a comparatively easy language such as Hellenistic Greek. It +is therefore quite unnecessary for {241} some half-hearted apologists +to suggest that the Epistle was mainly or entirely written for St. +Peter by his secretary, Silvanus (1 Pet. v. 12). The expression and +connection of the ideas contained in it are far too natural and easy +for us to think that two hands were concerned in its composition, and +the tone of authority used in v. 1 can only be explained on the theory +that St. Peter or a forger wrote the Epistle. The language of ch. v. +is most easily explained by the theory that Silvanus, a trusted friend +and delegate of St. Peter, carried the letter. The letter was +purposely made short (v. 12) because its lessons were to be enforced by +Silvanus. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"To the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, +Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia." Considerable difficulty is attached +to this address. At first sight it seems to mean those Christians of +Asia Minor north of the Taurus mountains who had been converted from +Judaism. But there are some verses in the Epistle which seem to imply +that the readers had been pagans. These verses are i. 14; ii. 9, 10; +iii. 6; iv. 3. They suggest that the readers had led a licentious +heathen life, and had been only recently admitted to any covenant with +God. The bearing of some of them is a little uncertain. For instance, +ii. 10 says that the converts in time past "were no people, but now are +the people of God"--the same verse that St. Paul in Rom. ix. 25 applies +to the calling of the Gentiles. This verse is thought to furnish a +strong argument for those scholars who hold that the Epistle is +addressed to Gentiles, and that "sojourners of the Dispersion" must be +taken in a figurative sense, meaning Christians who are exiled from the +heavenly Canaan. But as the verse is from Hos. i. 10, and is applied +by Hosea himself to the Jews, it is certainly _possible_ to hold that +St. Peter also applies it to Jews. In this case the word "Dispersion" +would retain its literal meaning, and the Epistle would be written to +converts from Judaism. But the reference to "idolatries" in iv. 3 +cannot be applied to Jews. And it {242} would be quite unnatural for +St. Peter to speak about the heathen thinking it "strange" that +converted _Jews_ refused to join in their idolatrous excesses. The +word "you" in i. 12 suggests that the readers belonged to a different +race from the Hebrew prophets. Finally, the phrase "elect of the +Dispersion" must be compared with "in Babylon, elect" (v. 13). Like +the name "Babylon" for Rome, the word "Dispersion" is a Jewish phrase +taken over by the Christian Church. We agree, then, with St. Jerome +and St. Augustine in holding that this Epistle was written to Gentiles. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The Epistle says, "She that is in Babylon, elect together with you, +saluteth you" (v. 13). This means the Church in Rome. The name +"Babylon" is applied to Rome in the Revelation, and from an early +period the Christians would naturally be inclined to give this name to +a city which had become, like Babylon of old, the centre of worldliness +and oppression. It is practically certain that St. Peter spent his +last days in Rome. Moreover, St. Mark was with St. Peter when this +Epistle was written (v. 13), and from 2 Tim. iv. 11 we know that St. +Mark was invited to Rome about A.D. 64. It is most improbable that +"Babylon" signifies either the Babylon near Cairo, or the great city on +the Euphrates. Three facts enable us to determine the date: (1) The +presence of Mark in Rome. (2) The fact that St. Peter appears never to +have been in Rome when Colossians was written in A.D. 60--so that the +Epistle cannot be earlier than A.D. 60. (3) The allusion in iv. 13-15 +to the fact that Christians are already punished for being named +Christians. In the period described in Acts they are not yet punished +merely for being Christians, but for specific crimes alleged against +them by their opponents. It is often asserted that this Epistle must +be later than the time of Nero, on the ground that it was after Nero's +time that the name _Christian_ ensured the legal condemnation of any +one who bore it. But this assertion is not supported by the Roman +historians Tacitus and Suetonius. Their words support the contention +{243} that the kind of persecution mentioned in this Epistle began +under Nero in A.D. 64. When the Epistle was written this persecution +had probably begun, but it had not yet assumed its most savage form.[3] +(4) St. Peter himself suffered under Nero, not later than A.D. 67. We +may therefore confidently date the Epistle about A.D. 64. + +It appears from v. 12 that in writing this Epistle St. Peter was +assisted by "Silvanus, our faithful brother," as an amanuensis. He is +probably the "Silas" (another form of the same name) mentioned in Acts +xv. 22, 32, 40, and the Silvanus in 1 Thess. i. 1; 2 Thess. i. 1, 2 +Cor. i. 19. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +This Epistle is highly practical, and though it is rich in doctrinal +elements, it endeavours to instruct the readers in conduct rather than +doctrine. The two key-words of the Epistle are _suffering_ and _hope_, +and the sufferings of Christ and the glories which crowned them furnish +St. Peter with encouragement. Though he writes in plain sympathy with +the liberal Christianity of St. Paul, his language throughout bears the +impress of the Old Testament. Christ is the "lamb" (i. 19) and the +"corner-stone" (ii. 6); Christians are the "elect race" (ii. 9) and the +"royal priesthood" (ii. 9). Without discussing the problems raised by +God's predestination of the Jews, he says that they were "appointed" +unto stumbling, and their stumbling seems to be regarded as the +punishment which God attached to their disobedience. + +The fact that in i. 2 the names of the Three Persons of the Trinity are +given in an order which does not correspond with the order of their +revelation in the history of religion, indicates that they are regarded +as coequal. We may note that in iv. 19 the Father is called "faithful +Creator," a unique expression. The teaching about the work of Christ +is full. He is often {244} simply called "Christ" without the name +"Jesus." He is called "Lord," and His special divine Sonship is +implied (i. 3). The real existence of our Lord before His birth on +earth is also implied. It has been said that i. 20 signifies that He +was only known to the Father as destined to exist in the future. This +interpretation is excluded by i. 11, which shows that His Spirit +inspired the prophets before His birth. It is still more definitely +excluded by iii. 18, 19. Here it is shown that His personality resided +neither in His flesh, nor in His human spirit clothed "in which" He +preached to the dead. This spirit was therefore taken by a personality +which existed previous to the creation of the spirit. The Atonement is +prominent. Christ's death is both an example and a redemption which +procured God's grace. He died "for the unrighteous." He carried our +sins in His body to the cross (ii. 24). The Resurrection is one of the +"glories" which followed His sufferings (i. 11). It is a unique motive +to our faith (i. 21), and the cause of the efficacy of our baptism +(iii. 21). The Ascension is the fact which guarantees to us the +present rule of Christ (iii. 22). In iv. 6 we have an important +statement with regard to the dead, which must be studied in relation to +iii. 18-20. The purpose of Christ's preaching to those who died before +the gospel came was that though judged they yet might live. Blessings +which they had not known on earth were offered to them by the dead but +living Christ. + +The practical side of the Epistle is simple but solemn. It deals with +the privileges (i. 3-ii. 10), duties (ii. 11-iv. 11), and trials (iv. +12-v. 11) of the brethren. It seems to be written with the hope that +the Christians may perhaps disarm persecution if they abstain from +vainly attempting to set every one to rights and are scrupulously loyal +to the Government (ii. 14-17). + +{245} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation (i. 1, 2). + +The joy of salvation, a joy which springs from faith; this salvation +was foretold by the prophets: the fruits of salvation, seriousness, +love towards others, growth, the privilege of being built upon Christ: +Christians are the true Israel (i. 3-ii. 10). + +The Christian brotherhood and its duties, submission to civil +magistrates, slaves must obey even unreasonable masters, wives if good +and gentle may win their husbands, husbands must reverence their wives: +kindness must be the Christian's rule, there must be no return of evil +for evil; suffering, if wrongfully endured, has its reward. Christ's +sufferings issued in blessing, in His ministerial journey to Hades and +His triumphant journey into heaven: Christ our Example, our rule is the +will of God: Christian life must be guided in view of the approaching +end of all things, each of our gifts is to be used for the good of the +whole Church (ii. 11-iv. 11). + +The trials of the brethren, trust in God in the midst of suffering, +rejoice in your participation in Christ's suffering, bear the reproach +that fell on Him, to suffer as a Christian is cause for thanksgiving, +suffering to be expected, judgment is beginning: the relation of +pastors and people, the presbyters not to act as slaves, hirelings, or +tyrants: final counsels to humility and firmness (iv. 12-v. 11). + +Commendation of the bearer, and salutations (v. 12-14). + + + +[1] Compare 1 Pet. i. 14 with Rom. xii. 2; 1 Pet. i. 21 with Rom. iv. +24; 1 Pet. ii. 5 with Rom. xii. 1; 1 Pet. ii. 6, 7 with Rom. ix. 33; 1 +Pet. ii. 10 with Rom. ix. 25, 26; 1 Pet. ii. 18 with Eph. vi. 5; 1 Pet. +iii. 1 with Eph. v. 22; 1 Pet. v. 5 with Eph. v. 21. + +[2] Compare 1 Pet. i. 1 with Jas. i. 1; 1 Pet. i. 6 f. with Jas. i. 2 +f., 12; 1 Pet. i. 23 with Jas. i. 18; 1 Pet. ii. 1 with Jas. i. 21; 1 +Pet. ii. 11 with Jas. iv. 1; 1 Pet. v. 6 with Jas. iv. 7, 10; 1 Pet. v. +9 with Jas. iv. 7; and the quotation in 1 Pet. v. 5 with Jas. iv. 6. + +[3] For the persecution and its bearing on the date of this Epistle, +see Leighton Pullan, _History of Early Christianity_, p. 105 ff. +(Service and Paton, 1898). + + + + +{246} + +CHAPTER XXII + +THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The difficulties which are connected with the authorship of this +Epistle are greater than those connected with the authorship of any +other book of the New Testament. A multitude of objections have been +raised against its genuineness, and it has been pronounced spurious by +a considerable number even of Christian writers. But while fully +admitting that the problem is complicated, we can lawfully simplify it +by at once dismissing some of the weaker objections. For instance, the +statement that 2 Peter quotes from Josephus, the celebrated Jewish +historian, who died c. A.D. 103, is utterly unproved. Again, the +often-repeated statement that the doctrine of man being made a partaker +of the divine nature (2 Pet. i. 4) is a doctrine which was not taught +until after the apostolic age, is unwarrantable, unless we repudiate +wholesale many books of the New Testament which we have every reason to +regard as apostolic. For the indwelling of the Father in Christ and in +the believer through Christ is implied by St. Paul, St. John, St. +James, and St. Peter. The writer, in laying stress upon the importance +of spiritual knowledge, is once more in agreement with St. Paul and St. +John. He plainly does not mean mere intellectual _knowledge_, and the +doctrine which he teaches is of a very simple kind. The slight +reference made to the Redemption (ii. 1) and the silence manifested as +to the Resurrection cannot be considered so crucial as some scholars +believe them to be. Readers of the First Epistle could hardly fail to +have these {247} facts printed in their very souls. They would not +require to have them repeated in a second letter. + +The language of the Epistle, especially in the verses which do not +depend upon Jude, shows several small coincidences with 1 Peter and +with the speeches of St. Peter in Acts. We may compare the phrases in +2 Pet. ii. 15 with Acts i. 18, and 2 Pet. iii. 10 with Acts ii. 19, and + + Compare 2 Pet. i. 7 with 1 Pet. i. 22, iii. 8. + " " i. 19, 20 " " i. 10-12. + " " ii. 1 " " i. 18 + " " iii. 6 " " iii. 20. + " " iii. 14 " " i. 19. + + +The writer abstains from copying the designation of the apostle +contained in 1 Peter, and does not record the words spoken from heaven +at the Transfiguration exactly as they are reported in the Gospels. In +both these points a forger would very probably have acted otherwise. + +On the whole, the words employed in 2 Peter seem indecisive with regard +to the authorship. There is sufficient variation to allow us to +believe that it was written or not written by the apostle. One of the +most remarkable words in 2 Peter is that employed in i. 16 for an +"eye-witness." It is a word used in the Greek heathen mysteries, and +some critics think that such a word would not have been used by an +orthodox writer until an age when the Church had learnt to borrow Greek +religious terms from the Gnostic heretics. It is a sufficient proof of +the weakness of this argument that the Greek verb derived from this +noun is found in 1 Pet. ii. 12. It is, however, fair to say that the +style of 2 Peter is less simple and less closely connected with the Old +Testament than that of 1 Peter. + +More serious objections are (1) the lack of external evidence in the +writers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries; (2) the internal evidence that +the Epistle is based upon Jude, and perhaps on the Apocalypse of Peter. + +{248} + +Eusebius is evidently in doubt about it. He says, "We have not indeed +received it by tradition to be in the Canon, yet as it appeared useful +to many, it was studiously read with the other Scriptures." [1] It is +not mentioned by Irenaeus, nor is it in the list given in the +_Muratorian Fragment_. But it seems to have been commented on by +Clement of Alexandria, though it is not quoted in his extant works. +Origen does mention it in his original Greek works, but in a manner +which shows that it was disputed in his time. In Rufinus' Latin +translation of Origen there are several quotations from 2 Peter, but +against this fact it is sometimes urged that Rufinus emended Origen, +and that we cannot be absolutely certain that these quotations are +genuine. The Epistle seems to have been known to Origen's great +contemporary Hippolytus (_Refut._ ix. 7; x. 20 and elsewhere). There +are, moreover, passages in still earlier writers which are perhaps +based on 2 Peter. These are in Clement of Rome, A.D. 95, Justin +Martyr, A.D. 152, and the document which is wrongly called the Second +Epistle of Clement, and is really a Roman homily of about A.D. 140. +The evidence of these passages is not positive, but if even one of them +is quoted from 2 Peter, it becomes quite impossible to assign 2 Peter +to A.D. 150-170, which is the date most favoured by those who deny its +authenticity. Nor is the omission of any mention of it in Irenaeus and +the _Muratorian Fragment_ a very destructive fact. The _Muratorian +Fragment_ is only a fragment, and does not mention 1 Peter, and there +is no passage in Irenaeus quoted from James. Yet it is certain that +those two Epistles belong to the apostolic age. The fact is that such +a very large amount of the literature of the 2nd century has been +destroyed, that it is always precarious to argue from omissions in the +books which are still extant. Therefore, although the evidence of +writers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries is certainly meagre in the case of +2 Peter, we cannot argue that comparative lack of evidence means +positively hostile evidence. A {249} notable step towards the +determination of the problem will be made if scholars eventually agree +to assign a very early date to the two great Egyptian versions of the +New Testament. Both these versions contain 2 Peter. + +As to the connection between 2 Peter and Jude, it may be regarded as +certain that either they both depend on some previous document, or that +one of them depends on the other. + + Compare Jude 6 with 2 Pet. ii. 4. + " " 7 " " ii. 6. + " " 8 " " ii. 10. + " " 10 " " ii. 12. + " " 11 " " ii. 15. + " " 12, 13 " " ii. 13, 17. + " " 16 " " ii. 18. + " " 17, 18 " " iii. 1-3. + +An examination of these passages seems to prove that 1 Peter borrows +from Jude and not Jude from 2 Peter.[2] In Jude the connection of +ideas seems more simple and direct. Various verses in 2 Peter become +more intelligible in the light thrown upon them by the corresponding +verses in Jude. Thus Jude 10 alludes to the immorality which explains +why the heretics are called "animals to be destroyed" in 2 Pet. ii. 12. +Jude 13, by calling the heretics "wandering stars," explains why +"darkness" is said to be "reserved" for them in 2 Pet. ii. 17. Between +2 Pet. ii. 17 and 18 there is no direct allusion to Enoch as in Jude +14, but some of the material taken from the Book of Enoch still remains. + +It will be observed that this connection with Jude is confined to 2 +Pet. ii. 1-iii. 7. Now, this passage must have been either inserted in +some ancient manuscript of this Epistle, or it was originally part of +the Epistle. If it has been inserted, the question of the authenticity +of the rest of the Epistle obviously remains {250} untouched. But if +it originally formed part of the Epistle, as appears to be the case, +can we regard this as a conclusive proof that St. Peter did not write +it? Surely not.[3] The fact that St. Luke inserts most of the Gospel +of St. Mark is not considered to be any argument against the +authenticity of St. Luke's work. Both in the Old Testament and the New +we are occasionally confronted by the same phenomenon. Writers repeat +what has been said by other writers when their words appear to them to +be the best possible words for enforcing a particular lesson. + +The question of the authenticity of 2 Peter has lately become still +further complicated. There has recently been discovered part of the +Apocalypse of Peter mentioned in the _Muratorian Fragment_. This +Apocalypse is usually thought to have been forged in Egypt in the first +half of the 2nd century. It presents certain points of resemblance +with 2 Peter. These points of resemblance affect the first chapter of +2 Peter as well as the second chapter. They therefore furnish an +argument against the theory that ch. ii. is a late interpolation into a +genuine Epistle, and they suggest that the Epistle is either wholly +genuine or wholly forged. But the solution of the problem is not so +easy as it seems to many scholars. If we could positively say that the +Apocalypse was written in the 2nd century, and positively say that 2 +Peter borrows from it, the question would be settled once for all. But +this is the very thing which we cannot do with confidence. Some +critics of great ability hold it certain that 2 Peter was forged by +some one who borrowed from the Apocalypse. Some think that the same +writer forged them both. Others think that the Apocalypse is partly +derived from 2 Peter. They can strongly support their view by the fact +that when Christians were familiar with both writings, it was decided +to reject the Apocalypse and {251} keep the Epistle. Lastly, it might +be reasonably held that the coincidences in both writings are due to +the use of one earlier document or a common stock of ideas and phrases. +The popularity of Apocalyptic literature at the beginning of the +Christian era makes this theory credible. + +We may sum up the evidence for and against 2 Peter as follows:-- + +1. The external evidence is meagre. + +2. The internal evidence is perplexing, and may reasonably be +considered adverse. + +On the other hand:-- + +1. The external evidence is not definitely adverse. + +2. No convincing reason can be assigned for forging such an Epistle. +The critics who believe it to be forged, hold that it was written in +Egypt in order to oppose the Gnosticism of c. A.D. 150 or 160. But the +Gnosticism rebuked in 2 Peter cannot definitely be assigned to the 2nd +century. And it is very difficult to say that the heresy rebuked in 2 +Peter belongs to the 2nd century without also maintaining that the +heresy rebuked in Jude belongs to the 2nd century.[4] Yet several +facts in Jude point so decidedly to the 1st century that some of the +ablest writers who deny the authenticity of 2 Peter strongly assert the +genuineness of Jude. + +We can only conclude by doubting whether we know more about the problem +of 2 Peter than the Church of the 3rd and 4th centuries knew. Perhaps +we do not know nearly as much. And under these circumstances we cannot +effectively criticize the judgment of the Church which decided to admit +2 Peter into the Canon. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +To the same readers as the First Epistle (iii. 1). + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +It was probably written in Rome, and some of the earliest references to +it are by writers who lived in Rome. {252} Justin Martyr lived in +Rome, and if the references in Justin Martyr and other writers before +Hippolytus be considered doubtful, Hippolytus is a Roman witness of the +first importance. + +The date is perhaps between A.D. 63 and 67. If it were later than 70, +we might reasonably expect to find a reference to the destruction of +Jerusalem after the allusion to God's retribution on the people of +Sodom and other malefactors of old times. The errors which are +denounced are akin to those which are denounced in 1 and 2 Timothy. +The allusion to St. Paul's Epistles in iii. 16 suggests that some +collection of these Epistles already existed, and that St. Paul was +already dead. It has been urged against the genuineness of the Epistle +that it includes the Pauline Epistles in _Scripture_ (iii. 16), and +that this would have been impossible in the apostolic age. But the +statement need not necessarily mean more than that the Epistles were on +the margin of a Canon which was in process of formation. There is good +reason for believing that the Pauline Epistles occupied this position +at a time when men who had known some of the apostles were still +living, and perhaps earlier. The manner in which St. Peter has made +use of St. Paul's work in his First Epistle, makes it quite possible +for us to think that he believed in the peculiar inspiration of his +great comrade. And it is an interesting fact that the Syriac _Doctrine +of Addai_ in speaking of the Epistles of St. Paul, adds, "which Simon +Peter sent us from the city of Rome." + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The key-word to the Epistle is not _hope_, as in 1 Peter, but +_knowledge_ (i. 3, 8; ii. 20). We find, as in 1 Peter, a fondness or +the word "glory." But in 1 Peter glory seems to be represented as +given to Christ after His sufferings, and promised to Christians in the +future after their sufferings (1 Pet. i. 11; iv. 13; v. 1). Here glory +is rather spoken of as manifested in all the new dispensation, and +especially at the Transfiguration (i. 3, 17). The apostle {253} +appeals to the fact that he witnessed the Transfiguration as a +guarantee of his prophecy of the second "coming" of Christ. He finds +another warrant in the prophecies of the Old Testament, and asserts +that prophecy is not a matter for a man's own private unaided +interpretation, inasmuch as it was an utterance prompted by the Holy +Spirit (i. 19-21). + +This description of true religious knowledge is followed by an +arraignment of false prophets and speculative heresy. It is possible +that the teaching of definitely false doctrine was already combined +with previously existing immoral practice. The verse (ii. 1) in which +the writer speaks of false _teachers_, refers to the rise of these +heretics as future. But in other verses of the chapter the +"self-willed" teachers are spoken of as already active. We gather from +iii. 16 that the licence which is so sternly rebuked was a system in +which St. Paul's doctrine of justification by faith was represented as +a justification of vile indulgence. Although this part of the Epistle +is a paraphrase of Jude, it is not a mere reproduction. A new feature +in 2 Peter is that the heretics were sceptical concerning the second +coming of Christ (iii. 4). They argued that since the death of "the +fathers," _i.e._ the first followers of Christ, the world continued as +before. St. Peter urges that the deluge came, though its coming was +doubted, and also that it must be remembered that the Lord does not +reckon time as men do. A period which is long to us is not long to +Him. The day of the Lord will come suddenly "as a thief in the night," +and in view of judgment the readers are exhorted to holiness and +patience. + +{254} + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, a list of Christian graces which are to be successively +blended with faith, a reminder of the truth of Christianity as +testified by the words of God at the Transfiguration, and by the light +of prophecy (i.). + +Denunciation of the false teachers who are guilty of gross sin and +blindly follow their lower instincts (ii.). + +Allusion to the former letter, rebuke of those who disbelieve in the +last judgment, the coming of the day of the Lord and the destruction of +the world, exhortations to holiness, diligence needed, the +long-suffering of Christ witnessed to by Paul, growth in grace (iii.). + + + +[1] _H. E._ iii. 3. + +[2] The priority of 2 Peter is strongly defended by Spitta, in his _Der +Zweite Brief d. Petrus_, 1885. + +[3] This is very clearly stated by Dr. G. B. Stevens in his valuable +_Theology of the New Testament_, although he decides against the +genuineness of 2 Peter. + +[4] This is done by Harnack, who places Jude between A.D. 100 and 130. + + + + +{255} + +CHAPTER XXIII + +THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN + + +THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF JOHN + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The authenticity of this Epistle is bound up with the authenticity of +St. John's Gospel. Like the Gospel, it does not contain any statement +as to the name of the author. Like the Gospel, it is attributed by a +very ancient tradition to the nearest friend of Jesus Christ. The +external evidence is particularly good. We learn from the +unimpeachable testimony of Eusebius[1] that it was used by Papias, who +was a disciple of St. John. Polycarp, another disciple of St. John, +directly quotes 1 John iv. 3 in his still extant letter. It is quoted +by Irenaeus, the pupil of Polycarp, and was recognized as genuine in +widely distant Churches at the close of the 2nd century. + +The internal evidence shows that the writer claims to be an eye-witness +and intimate personal friend of Jesus Christ (i. 1-3).[2] And this +eye-witness must be St. John, if the fourth Gospel was written by St. +John. The style is similar, and the ideas are the same. It is true +that Christ is not called our "propitiation" in the Gospel as in this +Epistle (ii. 2; iv. 10), that in the Gospel there is no mention of +"antichrists" (as in {256} ii. 8), and that the word "Paraclete" is in +the Gospel applied to the Holy Ghost, while it is here applied to our +Lord (ii. 1). But the idea of propitiation is expressed in the +description of our Lord as "the Lamb of God" (John i. 29), the mention +of antichrists is uncalled for in the Gospel, and by naming the Holy +Ghost "another Paraclete" our Lord gave St. John the best possible +reason for calling Christ Himself by the same title. The description +of our Lord as "the only begotten Son" (iv. 9) is an important point of +contact with John i. 14, 18. The language about "light" and +"darkness," "God" and "the world," the "new commandment," the "love" of +God, being "born of God," "eternal life," "abiding in Christ," recalls +the Gospel at every turn. + +The Epistle, however, does contain some phrases and ideas which are not +to be found in the Gospel. Such are "love perfected," "a sin unto +death," "the lust of the eyes," "to come in the flesh," "to walk in the +light," "to do lawlessness," "to be from above." Yet they fit quite +naturally with the language and theology of the Gospel. Therefore +there does not seem to be any sufficient reason for holding that it was +the work of another writer. F. C. Baur and Hilgenfeld thought it to be +the work of a second forger of that mysterious band to which they +attributed such versatility and success. And several more recent +critics who have denied the authenticity of the Gospel, have maintained +with Baur that the Epistle is the work of a second forger. But these +negations have led to no assured result. They are seen to be fruitless +as soon as we realize that these critics have been quite unable to +agree whether the Epistle was composed before the Gospel or after it. +Some consider that it was a theological balloon sent to try the +credulity of Christian readers before the Gospel was despatched. +Others consider that there are "overwhelming indications" to prove that +the Epistle is only a poor imitation of the Gospel. Renan and Davidson +favoured the former view, F. C. Baur and C. Weizsaecker the latter. At +the present time the majority {257} of critics, both Christian and +non-Christian, believe that it was written by the writer of the fourth +Gospel. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +It seems to be a pastoral letter addressed to all the members of the +apostle's flock, intended therefore for the Christians of Asia in and +around Ephesus. It is a strange fact that St. Augustine, in quoting +iii. 2, describes the passage as "said by John in his Epistle to the +_Parthians_." This statement is a riddle which no commentator has been +able to answer satisfactorily. As the Eastern Churches had little or +no knowledge of this title, we are compelled to regard it as a mistake. +It may have arisen from some scribe failing to read a partially +illegible manuscript in which St. John may have been given the title of +_parthenos_ or virgin. But it is most likely that it arose from a +confusion with the Second Epistle, which was thought in the time of +Clement of Alexandria to be addressed to _parthenoi_ or virgins. The +absence of quotations from the Old Testament, and the command "guard +yourselves from idols" (v. 21), solemnly given at the very end of the +Epistle, suggest that the recipients of the letter were converts from +heathenism. The Christians of Ephesus, the mother-city of Asiatic +idolatry, were peculiarly in need of such an exhortation. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +We can hardly doubt that it was written at Ephesus, where the apostle +spent his last years. The assertion that St. John did not live at +Ephesus is in direct contradiction with the best and earliest +traditions. But it has been repeated at intervals during the last +sixty years by several critics, who found that they would be compelled +to admit the genuineness of the Revelation if they granted that St. +John lived at Ephesus, where the Revelation was evidently published.[3] +Against such criticism we can confidently marshal the express and +independent statements of Apollonius of Ephesus (A.D. 196), Polycrates +of Ephesus (A.D. 190), {258} Irenaeus of Lyons (A.D. 185), Clement of +Alexandria (A.D. 190), Tertullian of Carthage (A.D. 200), not to +mention some valuable indirect evidence of earlier date. If we are to +reject such evidence as this, the science of history must be laid in +the tomb. + +The question as to the exact date is very important for those who +believe that the Epistle was not written by the author of the Gospel. +They are involved in the most intricate questions about the +reproduction of the Gospel in the Epistle or of the Epistle in the +Gospel. For those who do not believe in a diversity of authorship the +problem is far less vital. The apostle was evidently advanced in +years. He includes all his people under the affectionate name "my +little children" (ii. 1). On the whole, it seems probable that it was +written rather later than the Gospel. This is suggested by the +teaching about the second coming of Christ. Both in the Gospel and in +the Epistle we find mentioned or implied a present and a future passing +from death to life, and a spiritual presence of Christ now and another +hereafter. But in the Epistle it is the future coming of Christ which +is more prominent (ii. 28; iii. 2; iv. 17). In the Revelation, A.D. +96, it is still more prominent. The Epistle suggests that St. John's +readers were already acquainted with the discourses in his Gospel. The +heresy described, and the fact that the heretics are already _outside_ +the Church, point to a comparatively late date. We can hardly place it +before A.D. 85. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +This Epistle contains no reference to any outward dangers. Domitian's +persecution had not yet affected the Church, and the controversy with +Judaism had closed. There is no trace of any conflict between Jew and +Gentile, and St. John, in asserting the truth of the incarnation of the +Son of God, is not opposing any heresy resembling that of those +semi-Christian Jews of the 2nd century who declared Christ to be +_merely_ the best of men. He is combating a form of error taught by +Cerinthus, who said that {259} Jesus was a man born of Joseph and Mary, +and that on this man there descended a divine element named Christ, who +left him before the crucifixion. Thus _Christ_ never suffered, though +the _Jesus_ who seemed to be Christ did suffer. In face of these false +views St. John asserts the truth. He asserts that One who is both +Jesus and Christ came in the flesh (iv. 2), and that He came, that is, +was manifested as Christ, both in the water of His baptism and the +blood of His cross (v. 6). By this blood He cleanses man from sin (i. +7). We may be sure of His help, for He lives as our Advocate with the +Father. To deny that Jesus is the Christ is to deny the Father, to +deny God altogether (ii. 22; iv. 3). St. Ignatius and St. Polycarp +inveigh in similar language against the Docetists, who flourished +between A.D. 110 and 120. It is important to notice that St. John's +opponents do not appear to have been Antinomian in conduct. He says, +"Every one that doeth sin, doeth also lawlessness; and sin is +lawlessness" (iii. 4). If he had been blaming Antinomianism it would +have been more natural to say, "Every one that doeth lawlessness, doeth +also sin." + +The main theme of the Epistle is not controversial. It is to show that +in faith and love is the guarantee of our fellowship with God and of +our salvation. Since this fellowship implies that He abides in us, it +may be recognized by His Spirit being in us (iii. 24). This Spirit is +distinguished from the spirit of error by the confession of Christ; so +to hear the apostle's teaching about Christ is a sign of the presence +of God within us. The moral and the religious life are summed up in +the words "God" and "Love," and those who love one another are born of +God. Love in action corresponds with a confession of the incarnation +in the intellect (iv. 7-12). It is wholly incompatible with sin (iii. +6), and is therefore righteous towards God and man. Every one who, as +a child of God, hopes to grow like God, purifies himself as Christ is +pure. He cannot love the world, which is a system of selfishness. St. +John speaks of the possibility of committing a "sin unto death." This +{260} is an old Jewish expression for a sin deserving natural death. +But the apostle lifts the phrase to a higher level and slightly alters +it. His words literally mean "a sin tending unto death." It is any +sin which by its very nature excludes a man from fellowship with +Christians. It is a sin which requires chastisement before +forgiveness, and St. John does not enjoin, though he does not forbid, +prayer for those whose sin makes them unable to share in the privileges +of the common life of the Church. + +Behind the practical teaching of the Epistle lies that great conception +of the Father which the writer had gained from intercourse with the +only-begotten Son. God is _Love_ (iv. 8, 16), and has given us the +greatest of all gifts (iv. 9); God is _Light_ (i. 5), and dispels all +moral darkness (i. 6); God is _Life_ (v. 20), imparting His own +existence to man (iii. 9); God is _Father_ (ii. 1; iii. 1)--though our +relationship with Him is forfeited by sin, perfect and fearless +intimacy may be gained through Christ (iv. 15, 18). + + +ANALYSIS + +A promise to impart knowledge of the incarnate Word; God is Light, +fellowship with God and forgiveness of sin (i.). + +Christ our propitiation, love of our brother a necessary condition of +walking in the light, messages to children, fathers, young men, the +love of the world, Antichrist and the denial of Christ, abiding in the +Son and in the Father (ii.). + +The love of God in calling us His children, the manifestation of Christ +to take away sin, love of our brother the sign that we are spiritually +changed, to believe in Christ and love one another the commandment of +God (iii.). + +Acknowledgment of the incarnation is the test of spirits, to love one +another is to be like God, perfect love loses fear (iv.). + +Faith in the incarnation overcomes the world, the three {261} witnesses +to the incarnation, eternal life possessed if we have the Son, prayer, +freedom from sin, knowledge through Jesus, who is the true God and +eternal life (v.). + + + +THE SECOND EPISTLE OF JOHN + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +The writer does not insert his name in the Epistle, but simply +describes himself as "the elder." Some writers have therefore supposed +that it was written by the presbyter named John, who lived at Ephesus +about the close of the apostolic age. But Irenaeus, who was not likely +to be mistaken in such a matter, certainly regarded it as the work of +the apostle, and the _Muratorian Fragment_ apparently so regards it. +Clement of Alexandria was certainly acquainted with more than one +Epistle by St. John, and a Latin translation of his _Hypotyposes_ +definitely says, "the Second Epistle of John, written to virgins, is +very simple." Moreover, the title "elder" or "presbyter" is by no +means incompatible with apostolic authorship. St. Peter in 1 Pet. v. 1 +expressly describes himself by this title, nor does the title appear to +have become confined to the presbyters or priests of the Church until +about A.D. 200. The similarity to the First Epistle is strong, seven +of the thirteen verses having parallels in the First Epistle. If the +Epistle were a forgery, it is probable that the writer would have +claimed to be an apostle in unmistakable language. And if the author +were not a forger, but the presbyter who was for some years a +contemporary of the apostle, it is hardly likely that he would have +been content to write this diminutive letter, which does little more +than sum up part of the First Epistle. The language of the Second +Epistle bears almost the same relation to that of the first as the +first bears to that of the Gospel. There is a fundamental likeness +combined with a few fresh expressions, such as "walk _according to_," +"_coming_ in the flesh" instead of "come in the flesh," "to have God." + +{262} + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto the elect lady and her children." The interpretation of these +words is a notorious difficulty. At first sight the "lady" would be +supposed to be a private individual. But if so, why is not the +individual's name mentioned, like the name of the recipient of the +Third Epistle? Perhaps it is mentioned, for the words translated "the +elect lady" may mean "the elect Kyria." The "house" of the lady (ver. +10) also suggests that the lady is an individual. On the other hand, +it has been supposed that the lady is a symbolical name for a local +_Church_. In favour of this interpretation is the fact that the writer +speaks, not only of the children of the lady who are with her, but also +of others whom he has met (ver. 4), and in a manner which suggests a +large number of persons. The same interpretation can be put upon the +"elect sister" mentioned in the last verse of the Epistle. Writers of +deserved repute accept this symbolical interpretation. But when a +literal meaning and a symbolical meaning are supported by equally good +arguments, it seems prudent to accept the simpler, _i.e._ the literal +interpretation. It is hard to believe that St. Jerome and Hilgenfeld +are right in thinking that it is addressed to the whole Catholic +Church. This is surely excluded by the mention of an "elect sister." + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +Probably from Ephesus, and the contents suggest that it was written +later than the first Epistle. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The letter contains an affectionate expression of happiness due to the +steadfast Christianity of the children of the "elect lady." But its +main object is to utter a warning against the deceivers who deny that +Christ is "come in the flesh." These deceivers were evidently +Docetists. In order to appreciate the necessity for such a warning we +must remember the extraordinary attraction which many persons who liked +a _dilettante_ Christianity found in the theory that Christ was a +divine Spirit who clothed Himself with flesh in which He did not +suffer. At the close of the apostolic age, and {263} for many +generations afterwards, orthodox Christianity was often regarded as too +materialistic for advanced thinkers. They endeavoured to make +Christianity keep pace with the times by infusing into it the decadent +Greek or Oriental mysticism which depreciated our human body. + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation, thanksgiving for certain of the elect lady's children, +reminder of the commandments to love and obey, the deceivers who deny +the incarnation not to be welcomed; the writer, expecting to visit his +correspondents, closes his letter. + + +THE THIRD EPISTLE OF JOHN + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +It is generally admitted, both by those who deny and those who accept +the authenticity of the works of St. John, that this Epistle was +written by the author of 2 John. It presents several close parallels +both with 2 John and with the Gospel. Its obviously private character +accounts for the fact that it is seldom quoted in early literature. It +is found in the Old Latin version of the New Testament, though not in +the _Muratorian Fragment_. It was known to Origen and Dionysius of +Alexandria. Eusebius places it among the _Antilegomena_ (_H. E._ iii. +25), but it was generally accepted in the 4th century. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +"Unto Gaius the beloved." The name was a common one, being a form of +the Latin "Caius." There is no reason for identifying this Gaius with +one of the persons of the same name who are mentioned as living in +Corinth, Macedonia, and Derbe respectively, all of whom may have been +dead at the late period when this letter was written. The Gaius of +this Epistle was evidently a faithful and hospitable Christian. Baur +displayed more than even his {264} usual powers of invention by +suggesting that Gaius was a Montanist of the latter part of the 2nd +century, and "Diotrephes" a symbolical name for one of the Catholic +bishops of Rome opposed to Montanism. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +Probably at Ephesus; subsequently to the First Epistle, and probably +very soon after the Second. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +This little letter gives us a few brief glimpses of the life of the +Church near the end of the 1st century. The purpose of the letter is +to commend a Christian of good character, named Demetrius, to the +hospitable care of Gaius. It appears, therefore, to be one of those +"letters of commendation" which are mentioned by St. Paul in 2 Cor. +iii. 1, and were common in later times. By the side of this +pleasantness there is distress. Connected with the Church to which +Gaius belongs there is an ambitious schismatic named Diotrephes, who +refuses to admit the authority of the apostle. The fact that he was +guilty of casting the friends of the apostle out of the Church (ver. +10), suggests that Diotrephes was at least a presbyter, and perhaps a +bishop appointed by the apostle. We are told by Clement of Alexandria +that St. John appointed bishops in Asia, and there is no reason for +doubting that episcopacy dates back to this period. The apostle +evidently intends to punish Diotrephes for his malice when he visits +the district again. It is just possible that the letter to the Church +(ver. 9) which Diotrephes repudiated is our "Second Epistle" of St. +John. This theory will win acceptance with some of those who think +that the Second Epistle was not written to an individual, but to a +Church. + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutations to Gaius, congratulations that he is walking in the truth, +his hospitality to travelling Christians, the tyranny of Diotrephes, +recommendation of Demetrius, personal matters. + + + +[1] _H. E._ iii. 39. + +[2] It is impossible to accept the recent Rationalist hypothesis that +these words were written by a pious Christian who had not seen Jesus, +but wished to emphasize the truth that the historical Church was +intimately connected with the historical Jesus. + +[3] Among these critics must be numbered Luetzelberger (1840), Keim +(1867), Bousset (1899). + + + + +{265} + +CHAPTER XXIV + +THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +"Judas, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James." We can be +sure that the James here mentioned is the James who acted as the first +bishop of the Church at Jerusalem. The author's designation of himself +would not be intelligible unless he meant that he was related to a very +prominent man of that name. The writer cannot be the Apostle Jude. He +does not claim to be an apostle, and he seems indirectly to repudiate +the authority of an apostle by describing himself only in relation to +his brother and by referring to "the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ" +in a manner which seems to distinguish them for himself. If the +Apostle Jude was the _son_ of James (as many scholars think), this Jude +was clearly another man. If the Apostle was the _brother_ of James (as +the English Authorised Version holds), then his identification with +this Jude is still doubtful. + +Jude was a son of St. Joseph. At first he did not believe in our Lord +(John vii. 5), but was convinced by the Resurrection (Acts i. 14). He +was married (1 Cor. ix. 5). Hegesippus, a writer of the 2nd century, +tells us that two of his grandsons were taken before the Emperor +Domitian as being of the royal house of David, and therefore dangerous +to the empire.[1] He found them to be poor rough-handed men, and +dismissed them with good-humoured contempt when they described the +kingdom of Christ as heavenly. Philip of Side, about 425, says {266} +that Hegesippus gave the names of these two men as Zocer and James. + +The Epistle was known to Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian, and is +in the _Muratorian Fragment_. + +The chief objections to the authenticity of this Epistle fall under +three heads. It is said that (a) a late date is indicated by the +allusion to the teaching of the apostles in ver. 17. But the allusion +seems to correspond exactly with a late date in the apostolic age, for +vers. 17 and 18 assume that the readers remember what the apostles had +said. It is said that (b) the phrase in ver. 3, "the faith which was +once for all delivered unto the saints," indicates that a definite body +of doctrine was recognized by the Christians of the period, and that +the Christians of the apostolic age did not use the word "faith" in +this sense. But it is not difficult to suppose that the word would be +soon extended from the act of believing to the facts believed. And in +such early passages as Gal. i. 23 and Rom. x. 8 we find the word +closely approximating to the latter sense. It is said that (c) the +heresy which is described is a heresy of the 2nd century, and implies a +definite Gnostic system. But the fact that the Epistle does not +describe such a definite system is convincingly shown by the inability +of certain critics to determine who the heretics are. The Balaamites +of Asia Minor, the Carpocratians of Egypt, and some obscure sects of +Syria, are all suggested. There is no evidence to show that the errors +here described could not have grown up in apostolic times, and the +Epistles of St. Paul contain several passages which point to similar +perversions of Christianity. The word "sensual" in ver. 19 was an +insulting term applied to ordinary Christians by the Gnostics of the +2nd century, but St. Jude's use of it betrays no consciousness of this +later application. + +The style of the letter makes it practically certain that it was +written by some one who had been a Jew. The Greek is forcible. It +shows a considerable knowledge of Greek words, {267} including various +poetical and archaic expressions. But the manner is stiff, and the +sentences are linked together with difficulty. Several phrases come +from the Septuagint, some of them being taken from the Book of Wisdom. +It is probable that the author was acquainted with the Hebrew Old +Testament, as ver. 12 (from Ezek. xxxiv. 2) and ver. 22 f. (from Zech. +iii. 2 f.) suggest this. + +[Sidenote: To whom written.] + +The Epistle is simply addressed "to them that are called, beloved in +God the Father, and kept for Jesus Christ." It seems that these +Christians must have been natives of Palestine or Syria. They had been +personally instructed by the apostles (ver. 17), which makes this +region probable. No place seems more likely than Antioch and its +neighbourhood. The libertinism which was endangering the Church would +not be likely to arise except in a district where the Christians were +in close contact with heathenism. Extreme critics now usually maintain +that it was written either in Asia or in Egypt. If written in Asia, it +can hardly have been written by the Lord's brother, as we know that his +descendants lived in Palestine. If written in Egypt, it can hardly +belong to the age of the apostles. These two sceptical theories as to +the place where the Epistle was written contradict one another +effectively. + +[Sidenote: Where and when written.] + +The style and contents of the letter show that it was probably written +in Palestine and at Jerusalem. The date is probably soon after the +martyrdom of St. James in A.D. 62. St. Jude was dead before his +grandsons had their interview with Domitian. The Epistle must +therefore be before A.D. 81. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +The Epistle is remarkable as containing references to two Jewish books +of an apocalyptic character which are not mentioned in the Old +Testament. This caused some writers in early days to hesitate to +ascribe the Epistle to a brother of St. James, and in recent times the +same argument has been revived in a new {268} form. But these +quotations seem quite compatible with a belief in the genuineness of +the Epistle. The books quoted were in existence in the apostolic age, +and would be likely to be valued by a devout Jew. In ver. 9 there is +reference to Michael, which Origen says was derived from the +_Assumption of Moses_, a Jewish work written at the beginning of the +Christian era. In 2 Pet. ii. 11 the allusion to Michael is so +modified, that the origin of the reference is no longer obvious. In +vers. 4, 6, and 14, there are quotations from the _Book of Enoch_, a +Jewish book composed of sections written at various dates, the latest +being written in the century before Christ. + +The purpose of the Epistle is to warn the Church against certain +depravers of God's grace who denied "our only Master and Lord, Jesus +Christ" (ver. 4). The author sees fit to remind his readers of ancient +examples of unfaithfulness and impurity, and shows that they must be +compassionate towards the wavering, and try to save the worst by a +desperate effort. It is plain that the false teachers were guilty of +gross and unnatural vice, that they were greedy, and destitute of godly +fear. They also, like the evil Christians at Corinth, brought +discredit upon the Agape (ver. 12), a social meal which the Christians +were first wont to partake of before the Eucharist, and at a later date +after the Eucharist. The licence which is rebuked by St. Jude probably +arose from a perversion of the doctrine of justification by faith which +had been taught by our Lord. Christians who had been taught that they +could be saved without observing the Jewish ceremonial law, imagined +that they could be saved without any self-discipline or self-restraint. +Many parallels to such errors have been found in modern times, the +worst example being that afforded by the Anabaptists, who arose in +Germany at the time of the Reformation. It is worth noticing that, in +spite of the untheological character of this Epistle, the writer shows +his belief in the Holy Trinity by the manner in which he refers to the +Father {269} and Jesus Christ (ver. 1) and the Holy Ghost (ver. 20). +The Epistle gives no encouragement to the theory that the first Jewish +Christians were Unitarians. + + +ANALYSIS + +Salutation and charge to maintain "the faith" (1-4). Warnings from the +punishment of the Israelites, of the angels, of Sodom and Gomorrha +(5-7). + +Railing at dignities rebuked (8-10). + +Denunciation of those who imitate Cain (murder), Balaam (encouragement +of impurity), Korah (schism), and spoil the _Agape_ (11-13). + +These sectaries foretold by Enoch (14-16). + +And by the apostles (17-19). + +Duty of edifying believers, and saving sinners (20-23). + +Doxology (24, 25). + + + +[1] Eusebius, _H. E._ iii. 20. + + + + +{270} + +CHAPTER XXV + +THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE + +[Sidenote: The Author.] + +Like the First Epistle of St. John, the Revelation has particularly +strong external evidence in its favour. About A.D. 150 Justin Martyr +speaks of it as the work of "John, one of the apostles of Christ," in +his dialogue held with Trypho, a Jew, at Ephesus, where St. John had +lived. Still earlier, Papias looked upon the book as "inspired," and +"bore testimony to its genuineness." Irenaeus, the pupil of Polycarp, +the disciple of St. John, quotes it as written by "John, the disciple +of the Lord." About A.D. 170 Melito of Sardis, one of the places to +which part of the book was specially addressed, wrote a commentary upon +it. It was accepted by the Churches of Vienne and Lyons in Gaul in +A.D. 177, for they wrote of it as "Scripture" in their letter to the +Christians of Asia Minor. Near the same date the _Muratorian Fragment_ +mentions it twice. It will be observed that this evidence is not only +good, but it is also mostly drawn from sources which were most closely +connected with St. John. The evidence of the Churches of Vienne and +Lyons would be important, even if it stood alone. For these +Greek-speaking Churches were allied with the Church of Ephesus, and +were not likely to be mistaken about this question. And the evidence +of Irenaeus and Melito is still more weighty. + +Strange to say, the belief in the authenticity of the Revelation began +to waver as time went on. We need pay little heed to the sect known as +the Alogi, who attributed both St. John's {271} Gospel and the +Revelation to Cerinthus, because they disliked the doctrine of the +Logos contained in these two books. They were too ignorant to have +been influenced by any real critical knowledge. But it is an important +fact that about A.D. 248 Dionysius of Alexandria stated that it was +probably written by John the Presbyter, and that the great Eusebius +seems at one time to have been inclined to accept the opinion of +Dionysius.[1] So far as we can discover, Dionysius founded his opinion +solely on the difference of style which can be observed as separating +the Revelation from the Gospel. He does not seem to have been in +possession of any facts which gave historical support to his theory. +Nevertheless, we can legitimately think that there was another reason +which induced orthodox Christians to regard the Revelation with less +confidence. The Montanist sect, which arose in the latter half of the +2nd century and became powerful in Asia Minor and North Africa, taught +an extravagant doctrine about the millennium when Christ would return +to reign on earth. This doctrine was partly founded on Rev. xx., and +was supported by pretended prophecies. It caused orthodox Christians +to be more suspicious about the statements of Christian prophets, and +probably made them less anxious to translate and circulate the +Revelation. This hesitation was soon overruled, and Eusebius, in spite +of his own slight doubts, reckons it as received among the undisputed +books of the Canon. This was c. A.D. 320. + +In modern times the controversy about the authorship has been revived. +About one hundred years ago a school of critics took up the argument of +Dionysius. They urged that the Gospel and the Revelation must have +been written by two different authors, the Revelation being much more +Hebrew in style than the Gospel. The argument was elaborated by F. C. +Baur and the Tuebingen School. As they were determined to deny the +genuineness of the Gospel which so clearly teaches {272} that Jesus is +God, they tried to discredit the Gospel by insisting upon the +authenticity of the Revelation. The successors of these critics soon +found themselves on the horns of a dilemma. A closer examination of +the Revelation made it clearer that on many important points the +theology of the Revelation is the same as that of the Gospel. If they +admit that St. John wrote both the books or one of them, they will be +forced to admit that the apostle taught definite orthodox Christian +theology.[2] If, on the other hand, they affirm that both the books +were written by John the Presbyter, they will shatter the old argument +that diversity of style proves diversity of authorship. It will +therefore surprise no one to learn that they are now engaged in +continuous disputes with regard to the identity of the author, and the +materials, Jewish or otherwise, which he is supposed to have used in +compiling his book. At the present time the writers who hold the +Revelation to have been written by various authors, are divided into no +less than four camps, while the rationalists who hold that it was +written by one author cannot agree who that author was. It is +extremely significant that, in spite of his conviction that the book +was not all written at the same date, the critic who is now by far the +ablest opponent of orthodox Christianity, holds that the Revelation was +(i.) published in the time of Domitian, as the tradition of the Church +affirms; (ii.) published by the author of the fourth Gospel, though not +by the real St. John.[3] + +It must be admitted that the style of the book is more Hebrew and less +Greek than that of the Gospel. But some arguments may be reasonably +alleged against the theory that {273} this proves the Revelation to be +by a different author. The difference in the scope and origin of the +two books account in a large measure for the differences of vocabulary +and style. No book in the New Testament is so steeped as the +Revelation in the imagery of the Old Testament; Daniel, Isaiah, +Ezekiel, and Zechariah are constantly used. The thoroughness with +which their spirit has been assimilated, and their ideas combined by +the writer, would create a Hebrew tendency in his language. Whether +St. John made use of the material furnished by non-canonical +apocalypses is uncertain. If he did, their style would also influence +him in the same way. We must also beware of exaggerating the contrast +in style which does exist between the Gospel and the Revelation. The +Gospel is not always in correct Greek, and never shows a thorough +mastery of that language. But the Revelation is certainly in much +rougher Greek. The writer uses the nominative case for the accusative +(vii. 9; xiv. 6); similar instances are in iii. 12; xiv. 12. This +rugged usage is introduced with magnificent, and perhaps intentional, +effect in i. 4, where the author emphasizes the eternity of God by +using an entirely ungrammatical construction.[4] Apart from the +question of grammar, the language of the Apocalypse shows a remarkable +affinity with St. John's Gospel. We may observe the use of such words +as "witness," "true," "tabernacle," "have part," "keep the word," and +"overcome." + +The theology of the two books is in close agreement. This can easily +be shown in the case of the doctrine of Christ's Person. He is called +the "Lamb" [5] in the Gospel (i. 29, 36) and in the Revelation (v. 6, +8, 12, etc.). He is called the "Word" in the Gospel (i. 1, etc.) and +in the Revelation (xix. 13). He is taught to be eternal and divine. +He is "the Alpha and {274} the Omega, the first and the last" (xxii. +13; cf. Isa. xliv. 6). He shares the throne of God (xxii. 1, 3); He +determines who shall be released from the realm of death (i. 18); He +joins in the judgment (vi. 16); He is worshipped by the elders and the +angels (v. 8, 11). He is the Bridegroom of the Church (xix. 7; xxi. 2, +cf. John iii. 29). The attitude towards Judaism is the same as that in +the Gospel. The Jews who oppose Jesus are strongly denounced (iii. 9), +and though the Church is a new _Jerusalem_, it is composed of people +gathered out of every nation (vii. 9). The necessity of good works is +strenuously upheld (ii. 5, 19); but they are not works of rabbinical +righteousness, but works of Jesus (ii. 26), and the "righteous acts of +the saints" (xix. 8) are based on "the faith of Jesus" (xiv. 12). +Salvation is the free gift of Christ (xxi. 6; xxii. 17). The saints +who overcome, conquer not by relying upon their own righteousness, but +"because of the blood of the Lamb" (xii. 11). + +In the Revelation (ii. 17) Jesus promises to believers "the hidden +manna;" in the Gospel, referring also to the manna, He promises "the +true bread from heaven" (John vi. 32). In the Revelation (xxii. 17) +Jesus says, "Let him that is athirst come, and whosoever will, let him +take of the water of life freely;" in the Gospel He says, "If any man +thirst, let him come unto Me and drink" (John vii. 37). If, then, the +Revelation is full of Hebrew expressions, it is essentially and +profoundly Christian, and linked with the other Johannine books by the +closest kinship. The theology and the style of the Revelation are the +same throughout.[6] We can therefore reject without hesitation the +recent hypothesis that it is one large Jewish work with numerous +Christian interpolations. The difficulty of supposing that the book +was ever a purely Jewish Apocalypse {275} can quickly be realized by +any one who undertakes to strike out all the Christian allusions in the +book. + +The author states that he is John, in the strongest fashion both in the +beginning and end (i. 4, 9; xxii. 8), and his attitude towards the +seven Churches is inexplicable unless the writer held a position of the +highest ecclesiastical importance. + +[Sidenote: For whom written.] + +Plainly for the whole Church, as represented by "the seven Churches +which are in Asia" (i. 4). + +[Sidenote: Date.] + +From i. 9 we learn that the revelation was made to John when he "was in +the isle that is called Patmos" (in the Aegean Sea) "for the word of +God and the testimony of Jesus." Irenaeus expressly says that the date +of this banishment was at the end of the reign of Domitian (Emperor +81-96 A.D.), and therefore he says it was almost within his own +generation. On the other hand, some modern writers have assigned part +or the whole of the book to the time of Nero (54-68), or a little +later. But though some parts of it seem earlier than Domitian, the +final form of the book is unquestionably late. A late date is +indicated by the corruptions existing in some of the Churches +addressed, by the expression "the Lord's day" (i. 10) instead of the +older expression "first day of the week," by the strong opposition to +Judaism which is called the "synagogue of Satan" (ii. 9; iii. 9), and +above all by the attitude of the writer towards Rome. The imperial +rule is no longer regarded with the tolerance which we find in Acts and +in St. Paul's Epistles. It is no longer the "restraining" and +protecting power. It is denounced as cruel and aggressive, and not +only is the worship offered to the Roman emperor mentioned as +widespread, but also the worship offered to Rome. The city is called +the Great Harlot, because in prophetical language idolatry is described +as an act of fornication, being a violation of the pure love which +should be felt by man towards his Creator. The worship of Rome does +not seem to have become common in {276} Asia until late in the 1st +century, and it is not even mentioned once in Acts. + +The destruction of Jerusalem is definitely mentioned in xi. 2, where +the earthly Jerusalem is symbolized as the "court which is without the +temple," the temple which the prophet measures being the heavenly +temple only (xi. 19). This chapter seems to imply that Jerusalem is +already destroyed, and is founded on Ezek. xl., when the prophet +measures the ideal city, not the city which had been destroyed +previously. We are therefore pointed to a date later than A.D. 70. +The same seems to be suggested by xiii. 1 and xvii. 10. For the beast +in xiii. 1 is the pagan Roman State as typified by Nero, and so is the +number 666 in xiii. 18; for if the words Nero Caesar are written in +Hebrew letters, and the numerical values of the letters are added +together, the result is 666. In xvii. 8 Nero is described as dead, and +in xvii. 10 Vespasian is the sixth emperor, Titus the seventh, and the +eighth, in xvii. 11, is Domitian, who plays the Satanic part of Nero. +The sixth emperor is described as still living, and we therefore seem +compelled to assign part of this passage to Vespasian's reign. +Nevertheless, there is abundant internal evidence for thinking that the +book was not completed until the time of Domitian. It is worth noting +that Domitian exacted a more extravagant worship of his own person than +any previous emperor, and that his policy therefore made the +publication of the book doubly appropriate. + +[Sidenote: Character and Contents.] + +There were a number of Jewish books called by the name of Revelation or +Apocalypse (_i.e._ revelation or unveiling). In the Old Testament an +Apocalypse is to be found in the second part of Daniel, and there is a +fine short Apocalypse in Isa. xxiv.-xxvii., where we find striking +passages relating to the resurrection and eternal life. The _Book of +Enoch_ and the _Apocalypse of Baruch_ are later examples of this class +of literature. These books were generally written with the special +purpose of giving encouragement to the {277} servants of God in times +of distress and persecution. The Revelation of St. John was written +under similar circumstances, but is by far the most sublime of these +writings. The interpretation of the Revelation appears to have always +been a standing difficulty, in spite of the fact that there has been no +age of the Christian Church which has not been able to draw consolation +and vigour from its beautiful pages, all illuminated as they are with +glowing pictures. The question as to whether different portions of the +book were written at different dates, and afterwards edited in one +volume by the writer, does not necessarily interfere with the +interpretation. For the book is one work, the materials have been +fitted into one structure. + +The connection between the different parts is organic and internal. +Not only is the doctrinal standpoint the same throughout, but the whole +book has an immense number of connecting thoughts and words. The +letters to the seven Churches contain statements which are taken up in +the visions which follow. Among such we may compare ii. 7 with xxii. +2; ii. 11 with xx. 6; ii. 26 with xii. 5, ii. 28 with xxii. 16; iii. 5 +with xix. 8; iii. 12 with xxi. 2. The description of the glorified +Redeemer in i. 10-18 is reflected in numerous passages, and the strong +assertion of the author's personality in i. 9 is again presented in +xxii. 8. And the meaning of the book rapidly becomes clearer to the +reader if he sees (a) that the notices of contemporary history in each +of the seven parts of the book are arranged chronologically in +reference to what is contained in that part; (b) that these seven parts +are not related to one another in the order of temporal succession: +each part is complete in itself, and is a full presentation of one +aspect of the whole subject. This is exactly what we find in Isaiah, +Amos, and Zechariah. + +This leads us to another fact. Some writers have held that the +Revelation is to be interpreted simply on _historical_ lines, as though +it contained a list of events occurring through the whole of history +since the time of St. John. Other writers {278} have held that little +or no historical meaning can be found in the book, and that it is to be +interpreted on _ideal_ lines, as teaching certain principles of +religion. The truth seems to be that these two methods of +interpretation are both partly true. Certain historical facts, such as +the Ascension of our Lord, the destruction of Jerusalem, the +persecution of the Church, the struggle between the Church and the +Roman empire, are taken as a basis. Certain great principles of God's +dealings with the world, and of the continued conflict between good and +evil, are then illustrated in connection with these facts, and the +whole is knit together by the fixed expectation that Christ will come +again to vanquish the wicked and rescue the good. While each division +of the book thus possesses a real meaning, it seems hardly possible to +attach a significance to each detail in the imagery which is employed. +Many items and even numbers appear to be introduced in order to make +the scenes clear to the mind's eye rather than impart a knowledge of +independent events. In after-ages Dante, like St. John, showed this +care for minute imagery in the midst of verses of mystic vision. The +book is the highest example of Christian imagination led and inspired +by the Holy Spirit, and although at is written in prose it is of the +nature of a poem. + +The book contains seven revelations, which are preceded by a prologue +concerning the divine Son of Man and the seven Churches of Asia. Of +these seven revelations, the fourth is central both in place and +meaning. It represents the kingdom of the world becoming the kingdom +of Christ as the result of the coming of the Messiah, born of that +glorious mother, the woman whose seed wars against the serpent (Gen. +iii. 15), and the maiden who bears Immanuel (Isa. vii. 14), and who +also represents the Church banished to the wilderness. + +On each side are three revelations, which correspond with one another +like the petals of a mystical rose. The _third_, which deals with the +divine judgment upon Jerusalem, corresponds with the _fifth_, which +contains God's judgment upon {279} Rome. Here we see the triumph of +God over corrupt religion and corrupt imperialism. The _second_, which +describes the powers of divine judgment kept in check, and the seal of +God imprinted on the saints of the new Israel, corresponds with the +_sixth_, which describes the war of the Word of God with the Beast, and +events which end with the universal judgment. The _first_, which +describes the Lamb that was slain and the book of destiny which He +alone could open, corresponds with the _seventh_, which describes the +Bride of the Lamb, the New Jerusalem in heaven. Thus the final glory +of the Church corresponds with the glory which the ascended Jesus +already receives in heaven. + +The whole closes with a short epilogue. + +It will be observed that the book contains seven choric songs. The +first revelation contains two such songs, one after each division. The +second, third, and fifth revelation, each close with a song. The +fourth and central revelation contains two songs; one is sung by the +bodyguard of the Lamb before they go to war, the other is sung after +the victory is gained. The seventh and last chorus celebrates the fall +of Babylon (Rome), and ushers in the marriage of the Lamb. It comes at +the end of the fifth revelation. Its form is double, and it sums up +the remaining action of the book. Two more facts must be mentioned in +this connection. The first is that the words of the song of the +bodyguard of the Lamb (xiv. 3) are not told; it can only be learned by +the redeemed. It begins with the voice of Christ, the voice "of many +waters," and it is taken up by the "thunder" of the cherubim and the +harps of the elders. The second is that there is no song between the +sixth and seventh revelation. It is simply the voice out of the throne +itself, the voice of the cherubim who uphold the throne of God (see iv. +6), which proclaims that the tabernacle of God is now with men, and +that He shall wipe away every tear (xxi. 4). The exquisite art of this +arrangement of the songs is manifest. + +{280} + +ANALYSIS + +Title and description (i. 1-3). + +Prologue (i. 4-iii. 22). + +The vision of the Son of Man (i. 4-20). + +The message to each of the seven Churches of Asia (ii., iii.). + +A general idea of conflict is present in this introduction. The +Churches of Asia have special temptations against which they must +fight, _e.g._ coldness at Ephesus, false prophecy at Thyatira, emperor +worship at Pergamum. + +I. Revelation of the Book of Destiny: iv.-v.--The throne of God is +manifested, surrounded by the elders and by the four living creatures +who represent the created universe, _chorus of creation_ (iv.). The +sealed book which none can open but the Lamb, _chorus of redemption_ +(v.). + +II. Revelation of the Seals: vi.-viii. 1.--The first four seals of the +book are opened. Christ appears riding on a white horse, and is +followed by four symbolic powers of evil: (a) Apollyon, who rides on a +red horse; (b) the Steward, who rides on a black horse, and dispenses +corn at a dear price, representing a perverted ministry of the Word, +which nevertheless cannot hurt the unction given to the Christian nor +the wine of Christ's Passion; (c) Death on a pale horse; and (d) his +companion Hell. When the fifth scene is opened, the martyrs who are +under the altar which is before the throne cry in expectancy. With the +sixth seal there is a warning of prophetic horrors. The day of God's +wrath all but comes. But judgment is restrained for a season (vi.). +Chastisement is suspended until 144,000 of Israelites are sealed, then +a multitude of all nations, _chorus of salvation_ (vii.). The seventh +seal, which discloses a war against God, can now be opened; silence +(viii. 1). + +{281} + +III. Revelation of the Trumpets: viii. 2-xi. 18.--Seven angels receive +trumpets, incense offered. With the sounding of each of the first four +trumpets a chastisement is sent from above to rouse repentance (viii.). +With the fifth, chastisement ascends from the pit; with the sixth, +angels and terrific horsemen come from the Euphrates; but men repent +not (ix.). Before the seventh trumpet sounds, an angel tells the seer +that when it has sounded the mystery of God as declared to the prophets +will be finished (x.). Two prophets resembling Elijah and Moses appear +as the symbols of Christian prophecy; they are slain in Jerusalem where +our Lord was crucified, they ascend like Christ amid the wreck of a +tenth of the city. The city confesses God. Then the seventh trumpet +proclaims the subject of the next revelation: the kingdoms of the world +becoming the kingdoms of Christ, _chorus of God reigning_ (xi. 1-18). + +IV. Revelation of the Lamb's Redemption: xi. 19-xv. 4.--The ark itself +is revealed to show that the coming revelation manifests what is most +sacred and most profound. The conflict between Christ and evil is +shown first as the conflict of the Child of the Woman against the +dragon, then as the conflict of Michael and his angels against the +dragon, then as the conflict of the dragon against the woman's seed +(xii.). Next come the allies of the dragon, the beast out of the sea, +which is imperial pagan Rome; and the beast out of the earth, which is +the priesthood of Asia appointed to promote the worship of the emperor +(xiii.). Then there is seen on Mount Zion the Lamb with His bodyguard +of 144,000, singing _the incommunicable chorus_. An angel proclaims +the eternal gospel; another tells that Babylon, _i.e._ pagan Rome, has +fallen; another proclaims the eternal punishment of those who worship +the beast. Then a voice from heaven announces the blessedness of the +dead in Christ. The Son of Man is seen with a sickle; then comes the +harvest of the good, and the vintage of those who {282} are to suffer +in the winepress of God's wrath (xiv.). Seven angels appear, and the +victors over the beast sing _the chorus Of Moses and the Lamb_ (xv. +1-4). + +V. Revelation of the Bowls: xv. 5-xix. 10.--The heavenly temple opens, +and the seven angels come to pour out the seven last punishments from +the golden bowls (xv. 6-8). There is a plague, and the turning of the +sea, and then of the rivers, into blood, then the sun's heat is +intensified, then darkness is poured over Rome. Then, in conformity +with Revelation III., we are shown the Euphrates. It is dried up that +the kings of the East, probably conceived of as Parthians, may march to +destroy Babylon. Other kings come to aid the beast. They muster at +Har-Magedon. The seventh bowl is poured on the air. Babylon breaks +into three parts. Storms (xvi.). Then an angel shows John Babylon +riding triumphantly upon a beast as the mother of harlots, drunken with +the blood of the martyrs, and he explains how she shall be destroyed by +her subject kings (xvii.). There follows a solemn dirge on Babylon +(xviii.). Then comes a _triumphant chorus_ for the judgment of the +city (xix. 1-8). John is forbidden to worship his angel-guide (xix. +10). + +VI. Revelation of the Word of God and the universal Judgment: xix. +11-xx. 15.--It is now shown that judgment is the work of the Word of +God Himself. As in Revelation II., He appears upon a white horse. +Brief sections display the complete overthrow of the great enemies of +Christ, the beast, the false prophet, and the dragon. Then comes the +millennium, when the martyrs of Jesus reign with Christ while Satan is +bound. Satan is then loosed, and with Gog and Magog, who are leaders +of nations hostile to God's people, he is finally vanquished. The +final judgment takes place, and Death and Hell are cast into fire. + +{283} + +VII. Revelation of the New Jerusalem: xxi. i-xxii. 5.--From a +mountain-top is seen the Church, the holy city, New Jerusalem, the +Bride prepared for Jesus. Its luminary and structure are described. +It rises on a vast rock of jewels. The throne of God is no longer +remote from man, but in the midst of the city. From the throne pours +the river of life through the very heart of the city. The river is +shaded on both sides by the "tree" or wood of life, with its perpetual +variety of fruit. This is in contrast with the one tree and its +forbidden fruit which was the means of the Fall. + +_Epilogue_ (xxii. 6-21). + +The attestation of the angel, the watchword of Jesus, John again +forbidden to worship the angel. The book to remain unclosed. The +watchword repeated. The attestation of Jesus to Himself and the angel, +to His Bride, to the book, to His advent. + +The response of John to the Lord Jesus. + +Salutation. + + + +[1] _H. E._ iii. 25, 39; vii. 25. + +[2] The determination to deny that St. John could have believed in the +Divinity of Christ made Zeller maintain that in the Revelation Christ +is called the _Word of God_ as a mere honorary title. Davidson +interpreted it as meaning "the highest creature." Renan tried to +extricate himself from the difficulty by saying that St. John did not +write the Revelation, but, "having approved of it, saw it circulate +under his name without displeasure" (_L'Antichrist_, p. xli.). + +[3] Harnack, _Chronologie_, vol. i. pp. 245, 246, 679. + +[4] Many of the supposed wrong constructions in the Revelation are +capable of justification (Dr. Benson, _The Apocalypse_, p. 131 ff.). + +[5] It is true that a different Greek word for Lamb is used in the +Revelation from that in the Gospel, but the variation can be accounted +for by the author's desire to use a word similar in form to the word +used for the Beast, who is contrasted with the Lamb. + +[6] The attempt to divide a supposed Judaizing element in the book from +a more Catholic element has led to the assertion that vii. 1-8 is +inconsistent with vii. 9-17. There is no more incongruity between +these two passages than in the statement of St. Paul in Rom. i. 16, +that the gospel is a power unto salvation "to the Jew _first_, and also +to the Greek." + + + + +{284} + +APPENDIX A + +RATIONALIST CRITICISM ON ST. JOHN'S WRITINGS + +The following table will illustrate the points of agreement arrived at +by the more prominent Rationalist critics of the last sixty years:-- + + THE GOSPEL. 1 JOHN. 2 AND 3 JOHN. REVELATION. + + F. C. Baur, By a forger, By a By a By St. + 1847. 170 A.D. second third John. + forger. forger. + + Th. Keim, By the same forger, ---- Not by + 1867. 100-117 A.D. St. John. + + A. Hilgen- By a forger, All by a second forger, By St. John. + feld, 1875. 120-140 A.D. 130 A.D. + + E. Renan, By the Presbyter John and others, who Not by St. + 1879. pretended that they were by St. John, John, but + 120 A.D. circulated + by him. + + C. Weizsaec- By a disciple Not by St. John nor by the Not by + ker, 1886. of St. John. author of the Gospel. St. John. + + A. Harnack, The Gospel and Epistles all probably by By the + 1897. the Presbyter John, who did not pretend Presbyter + that they were by St. John, John, + 80-110 A.D. 96 A.D. + + A. C. Uncertain. By the Uncertain. Possibly + McGiffert, author by the + 1897. of the Presbyter + Gospel. John. + + + B. W. By an All by another unknown By St. + Bacon, unknown writer, A.D. 95-100 A.D. John. + 1900. writer, + 100-110 A.D. + + P. W. Not by St. By a By a third Possibly + Schmiedel, John, nor second forger. by the + 1901. by the forger. Presbyter + Presbyter. John. + + + + +{285} + +APPENDIX B + +PAPIAS AND JOHN THE PRESBYTER + +Papias, a Phrygian by birth, and Bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, wrote +in the first half of the 2nd century a book called _Expositions of +Oracles of the Lord_. Among the "Elders" whom Irenaeus quotes, Papias +and Polycarp alone are called "ancient" (_archaios_--_Adv. Haer._ v. +33). This helps us to fix the date of Papias. For Polycarp died +either in A.D. 155 or 156. He had been a Christian for eighty-six +years, and was therefore born in A.D. 70 at the very latest. Papias +was therefore probably born about A.D. 70. We know from Irenaeus that +Polycarp was a disciple of St. John, and several ancient writers, +including Irenaeus, expressly assert that Papias also was a hearer of +St. John. Eusebius (_H. E._ iii. 39) says that "in his preface" Papias +does not declare that he was an "eye-witness of the holy _apostles_." +But Eusebius in his Chronicle (_Syncell._ 655, 14) plainly says that +Papias, like Polycarp, was a "hearer" of John the Divine and Apostle. +The preface of Papias, which Eusebius transcribes, mentions John the +Presbyter. The following is a literal translation of it:-- + +"But for your advantage I will not hesitate to put side by side with my +interpretations everything that in time past I learnt well from the +Elders, and remembered well, guaranteeing its truth. For, unlike the +many, I did not take pleasure in those who say much, but in those who +teach the truth; nor in those who relate alien commandments, but in +those who relate such as were given from the Lord to the Faith, and are +derived from 'the Truth' itself. And again, on any occasion when a +person came who had been a follower of the Elders, I would inquire +about the discourses of the Elders--what Andrew or what Peter said, or +what Philip or what Thomas or James, or what John or Matthew or any +other of the disciples of the Lord, and the things which Aristion and +John the Presbyter (Elder), the disciples of the Lord, say. For I did +{286} not suppose that the contents of books would profit me so much as +the utterances of a living and abiding voice." + +The exact meaning of this passage is disputed, but much of it is +perfectly clear. It is plain that Papias is referring to his action at +a time long past (_pote_), probably about A.D. 100. It is also plain +that he had no direct access at that date to the apostles about whose +sayings he inquired. They were already dead, their speech was a thing +of the past (_eipen_). On the other hand, Aristion and John the +Presbyter were then living, their speech was a thing of the present +(_legousin_). They survived at the time of his inquiries, and we +cannot accept the hypothesis that Papias only meant that he inquired +what Aristion and John the Presbyter said in their books. He recorded +what they said to his friends, and he quoted them both so freely that +Eusebius believed that Papias also wrote down words which Aristion and +John the Presbyter said in his own hearing. But whether he heard them +or only heard about them, it is evident that he had reached manhood +before they were dead. It is also certain that he calls them +"disciples of the Lord." He must mean by this that they had been +personally in contact with Christ, like the apostles whom he has just +mentioned. We therefore can only draw the conclusion that Papias +believed that these two men had known the Lord in their boyhood, and +the fact that he mentions only two such men favours this interpretation. + +With regard to the other Elders, the question at once arises, Did +Papias include among those Elders the apostles whom he mentions? If he +did _not_ include them, he means that he inquired of travellers what +they had heard from Elders who had known the apostles. This seems +incredible; the information gained would be far inferior to that +contained in books, whereas Papias speaks of it as superior. Moreover, +it would imply that the knowledge possessed by Papias about those who +had known the Lord was less direct than that possessed by Irenaeus! +For Irenaeus (1) knew Polycarp (2) and others, who knew St. John and +others who had seen the Lord. Whereas, according to this theory, +Papias (1) was instructed by travellers (2), who had heard the Elders +(3) speak about the apostles. If Papias had no better knowledge than +this, Irenaeus would not have referred to Papias with such marked +deference. We conclude, therefore, that Papias used the word "Elders" +to denote Christians who had actually seen the Lord, including the +apostles whom he mentions. This interpretation is {287} supported by +the fact that in the New Testament both St. Peter and St. John give +themselves this very title. + +If the above views are correct, they have an important bearing on the +authenticity of St. John's Gospel. The lifetime of Papias, like that +of Polycarp, covers the whole period of dates to which modern +Rationalists now assign that Gospel. If it was not written by the +apostle, it is hard indeed to suppose that Papias did not know the +truth, and record it. And it is equally hard to believe that his +statements about it would not have been copied by such men as Irenaeus, +Dionysius of Alexandria, and Eusebius. + + + + +{288} + +APPENDIX C + +THE MURATORIAN FRAGMENT + +The _Muratorian Fragment_ is part of a Latin list of the books of the +New Testament, named after Muratori, the librarian at Milan, who +published it in A.D. 1740. The Canon of which the Fragment is a part +was probably written about A.D. 180. It begins in the midst of a +sentence relating to St. Mark-- + +[Sidenote: The Gospels.] + +". . . at some things, however, he was present, and has thus recorded +them." + +"The third book of the Gospel according to Luke, Luke compiled in his +own name from report, the physician whom Paul took with him after the +ascension of Christ, for a companion as devoted to the law: however he +did not himself see the Lord in the flesh, and hence begins his account +with the birth of John as he was able to trace (matters) up." + +[Sidenote: The Epistles of St. John.] + +"Of the fourth of the Gospels (the author is) John, one of the +disciples. At the instance of his fellow-disciples and bishops he +said, 'Fast with me to-day for three days, and whatever shall be +revealed to each, let us relate it to one another.' The same night it +was revealed to Andrew, one of the apostles, that John should write all +in his own name, the rest revising. . . . And therefore, although +varying ideas may be taught in the several books of the Evangelists, +there is no difference in that which pertains to the faith of +believers, since by one Sovereign Spirit in all are declared all things +that relate to the nativity (of the Lord), His passion, resurrection, +intercourse with His disciples, and concerning His double advent, the +first in humble guise, which has taken place, the second splendid with +royal power, which is yet to be. . . . What wonder, then, if John in +his Epistles also, speaking of his own authorship, so boldly advances +each {289} detail, saying, 'What we have seen with our eyes, and have +heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, these things we have +written unto you.' For thus he professes himself not only an +eye-witness, but a hearer, yea, and a writer as well, of all the +wonders done by the Lord in their order." + +[Sidenote: Acts.] + +"But the Acts of all the Apostles are written in a single book, Luke +relates them excellently to Theophilus, confining himself to such as +fell under his own notice, as he plainly shows by the omission of all +reference either to the martyrdom of Peter or the journey of Paul from +Rome to Spain. . . ." + +[Sidenote: The Epistles of St. Paul.] + +"But the letters of Paul themselves make known to those who would know +both what they are, and from what place, or what occasion they were +sent. At considerable length he wrote to the Corinthians first, +forbidding schismatic divisions, then to the Galatians (forbidding) +circumcision, and to the Romans (expounding) the general tenor of the +Scriptures, showing, however, that Christ is the essence of their +teaching; to these (Epistles) we must devote separate discussion; for +the blessed Apostle Paul himself, following the example of his +predecessor John, wrote by name to seven Churches only in this order: +First to the Corinthians, second to the Ephesians, third to the +Philippians, fourth to the Colossians, fifth to the Galatians, sixth to +the Thessalonians, seventh to the Romans. True, he wrote twice to the +Corinthians and Thessalonians for their correction, but he shows +thereby[1] the unity of the universal Church; for John also in the +Apocalypse, though he writes to seven Churches only, yet speaks to all. +He also writes one to Philemon, one to Titus, and two to Timothy, out +of personal regard and affection, but these too are hallowed in the +respect of the Catholic Church for the arrangement of ecclesiastical +discipline. Moreover, there is in circulation an Epistle to the +Laodiceans, another to the Alexandrians forged under the name of Paul, +looking towards the heresy of Marcion, and several others which cannot +be received into the Catholic Church; for gall should not be mixed with +honey. However, the Epistle of Jude, and two of John the above named, +are received among Catholics. Also the Book of Wisdom written by the +friends of Solomon in his honour." + +{290} + +[Sidenote: Apocalypses.] + +"We receive, moreover, the Apocalypse of John and Peter only, though +some of our body will not have the latter read in the Church. The +_Shepherd_ indeed was written quite recently in our own times in the +city of Rome by Hermas, while his brother Pius occupied the seat of +Bishop of the Church of Rome; wherefore the private reading of it is +indeed commendable, but it can never be publicly read to the people in +the Church whether among the Prophets . . . or among the Apostles." + +"We receive nothing whatever of the Arsinoite, or Valentinus, or of +Mitias (?) . . . who also were the compilers of the new Book of Psalms +(?) for Marcion, together with Basilides. . . ." + + + +[1] As symbolized by the number seven. + + + + +{291} + +APPENDIX D + +SOME EARLY WITNESSES TO NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS[1] + + +CLEMENT OF ROME. Bishop of Rome. + _Epistle to Corinthians_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 95 + +BARNABAS. _Epistle of_, not by the Barnabas who + was St. Paul's companion . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 98 + +DIDACHE. "The Teaching of the Twelve + Apostles," a manual of Church regulations . . . . c. A.D. 100 + +IGNATIUS. Bishop of Antioch and Martyr. + 7 _Epistles_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 110 + +POLYCARP. Bishop of Smyrna and Martyr. + _Epistle to Philippians_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 110 + +PAPIAS. Bishop of Hierapolis. _Expositions of + the Oracles of the Lord_ (fragments are + preserved by Eusebius) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 130 + +HERMAS. _The Shepherd_, an allegory . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 140 + +MARCION. Heretic from Pontus at Rome . . . . . . . c. A.D. 144 + +JUSTIN MARTYR. Apologist. _1 and 2 Apologies_ + and _Dialogue with Trypho_ . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 152-157 + +EPISTLE TO DIOGNETUS. Anonymous defence + of Christianity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 160 + +TATIAN. Syrian Apologist, disciple of Justin + Martyr. _Diatessaron_, a harmony of the Gospels A.D. 160-170 + +THEOPHILUS. Apologist of Antioch. _Ad Autolycum_ c. A.D. 180 + +IRENAEUS. Bishop of Lyons. _Against Heresies_ c. A.D. 185 + + + + +[1] In the case of most of these witnesses the date here given is that +of their chief literary activity. + + + +{292} + +CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. Head of the Catechetical + School. _Paedagogus, Hypotyposes_, etc. . . . . c. A.D. 190 + +TERTULLIAN. Of Carthage. Apologist . . . . . . . . A.D. 200 + +HIPPOLYTUS. Presbyter at Rome. _Refutation of + All Heresies_ and numerous commentaries . . . . . c. A.D. 220 + +ORIGEN. Of Alexandria. Successor of Clement, + great philosopher and writer . . . . . . . . . . . c. A.D. 230 + +DIONYSIUS. Bishop of Alexandria . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 248 + +EUSEBIUS. Bishop of Caesarea. _Ecclesiastical + History_, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 320 + +APHRAATES. Syrian writer . . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 338 + +ATHANASIUS. Bishop of Alexandria . . . . . . . . . A.D. 328-373 + +EPIPHANIUS. Bishop of Salamis . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 380 + +JEROME. Author of the revised or "Vulgate" + Latin version of the Bible . . . . . . . . . . . . A.D. 390 + + + + +{293} + +APPENDIX E + +BOOKS RECOMMENDED + +In this list are included the most useful books written in English or +translated into English. An * is placed before those commentaries +which contain the whole Greek text of the books indicated, or which +comment much on the Greek text. + +1. CANON-- + Charteris (Prof. A. H.), Canonicity, 18s. + Sanday (Dr. W.), Inspiration, 6s. 6d. (Longmans.) + Westcott (Bishop), History of the Canon, 10s. 6d. (Macmillan.) + +2. TEXT-- + The Greek Text of the Revised Version, various prices. + (Oxford University Press.) + Concordance to the Greek Testament, by Moulton (W. F.) + and Geden (A. S.), 26s. (T. and T. Clark.) + +3. TEXTUAL CRITICISM-- + Lake (Prof. K.), The Text of the New Testament, 1s. net. + Oxford Church Text Books. (Rivingtons.) + Nestle (E.), Textual Criticism of the Greek New Testament, + 10s. 6d. (Williams and Norgate.) + +4. INTRODUCTION-- + Zahn (Prof. Th.), Introduction to the New Testament, 3 vols., + English Translation, 36s. (T. and T. Clark.) + Salmon (Prof. G.), Historical Introduction to the Books of + the New Testament, 9s. (Murray.) + Godet (F.), Introduction to the New Testament. Part I. + The Epistles of St. Paul, 12s. 6d. (T. and T. Clark.) + +5. THE GOSPELS AND THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM-- + Burkitt (Prof. F. C.), The Earliest Sources for the Life of + Jesus, 1s. net. (Constable.) + Sanday (Dr. W.), Studies in the Synoptic Problem, 12s. 6d. + (Oxford Clarendon Press.) + Wright (Dr. A.), *A Synopsis of the Gospels in Greek, 10s. + (Macmillan.) + Campbell (Dr. Colin), *The First Three Gospels in Greek, + 5s. (Williams and Norgate.) + +{294} + + Hawkins (Sir J. C.), *Horae Synopticae, 7s. 6d. + (Oxford Clarendon Press.) + Rushbrooke (W. G.), *Synopticon, 35s. (Macmillan.) + Westcott (Bishop), Introduction to the Study of the Gospels, + 10s. 6d. (Macmillan.) + Stanton (Dr. V. H.), The Gospels as Historical Documents, + Part I. 7s. 6d., Part II. 10s. (Cambridge University Press.) + +6. COMMENTARIES-- + _St. Matthew._--Godet (F.), The Collection of the Four + Gospels and the Gospel of St. Matthew, 6s. (T. and T. Clark.) + Allen (Ven. W. C.), *Commentary, 12s. (T. and T. Clark.) + Plummer (Dr. A.), *Exegetical Commentary on the + Gospel according to St. Matthew, 12s. (Elliot Stock.) + Carr (A.), "The Gospel according to St. Matthew, 4s. 6d. + (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges.) + + _St. Mark._--Swete (Prof. H. B.), *Greek Text with Notes, + 15s. (Macmillan.) + Maclear (G. F.), *The Gospel according to St. Mark, + 4s. 6d. (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and + Colleges.) + + _St. Luke._--Plummer (Dr. A.), *Commentary, 12s. + (T. and T. Clark.) + + _St. John._--Godet (F.), Commentary, 3 vols., 31s. 6d. + (T. and T. Clark.) + Westcott (Bishop), Commentary, 10s. 6d. (Murray.) + Lightfoot (Bishop), Biblical Essays, 12s. (Macmillan. + Sanday (Dr. W.), The Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, + 7s. 6d. (Longmans.) + + _Acts._--Knowling (Dr. R. J.), in *Expositor's Greek Testament, + vol. ii., 28s. (Hodder and Stoughton.) + Rackham (R. B.), 12s. 6d. (Methuen.) + Ramsay (Prof. W. M.), The Church in the Roman + Empire, 12s. (Hodder and Stoughton.) + Ramsay (Prof. W. M.), St. Paul the Traveller and the + Roman Citizen, 10s. 6d. (Hodder and Stoughton.) + + _Romans._--Sanday (Dr. W.) and Headlam (A. C.), + *Commentary, 12s. (T. and T. Clark.) + Liddon (Dr. H. P.), *Analysis, 14s. (Longmans.) + Gore (Bishop), Exposition, 2 vols., 3s. 6d. each. (Murray.) + +{295} + + _1 Corinthians._--Goudge (H. L.), in Westminster + Commentaries, 6s. (Methuen.) + Findlay (G. G.), in *Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. ii. + + _2 Corinthians._--Meyer's *Critical Commentary on the New + Testament, 1 and 2 Cor., in 2 vols., 10s. 6d. each. + (T. and T. Clark.) + + _Galatians._--Lightfoot (Bishop), *Text with Introduction, + 12s. (Macmillan.) + Ramsay (Prof. W. M.), Historical Commentary, 12s. + (Hodder and Stoughton.) + + _Ephesians._--Abbott (T. K.), *Commentary on Ephesians + and Colossians, 10s. 6d. (T. and T. Clark.) + Robinson (Dr. J. Armitage), *St. Paul's Epistle to the + Ephesians, 12s. (Macmillan.) + Westcott (Bishop), *St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, + 10s. 6d. (Macmillan.) + Gore (Bishop), Exposition, 3s. 6d. (Murray.) + + _Philippians._--Lightfoot (Bishop), Text with Introduction, + 12s. (Macmillan.) + + _Colossians and Philemon._--Lightfoot (Bishop), *Text with + Introduction, 12s. (Macmillan.) + + _1 and 2 Thessalonians._--Milligan (Dr. G.), *Commentary, 12s. + (Macmillan.) + Ellicott (Bishop), *Commentary, 7s. 6d. (Longmans.) + + _1 and 2 Timothy, Titus._--Bernard (Dr. J. H.), *Cambridge + Greek Testament, 3s. 6d. (Cambridge University Press.) + + _Hebrews._--Westcott (Bishop), *Greek Text with Notes. + 14s. (Macmillan.) + Davidson (Prof. A. B.), Handbook, 2s. 6d. + (T. and T. Clark.) + + _St. James._--Mayor (Dr. J. B.), *Greek Text with Notes., 12s. + (Macmillan.) + Carr (A.), *The General Epistle of St. James, 2s. 6d. + (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges.) + + _1 and 2 St. Peter, St. Jude._--Bigg (Dr. C.), *Commentary, + 10s. 6d. (T. and T. Clark.) + Mayor (Dr. J. B.), *The Epistle of St. Jude and the + Second Epistle of St. Peter, 14s. (Macmillan.) + + _1, 2, 3 St. John._--Westcott (Bishop), *Greek Text with + Notes, 12s. 6d. (Macmillan.) + +{296} + + _Revelation._--Ramsay (Prof. W. M.), Letters to the Seven + Churches, 12s. (Hodder and Stoughton.) + Simcox (W. H.), *The Revelation of St. John the + Divine, 5s. (Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools + and Colleges.) + Milligan (Prof. W.), Lectures on the Apocalypse, 5s. + (Macmillan.) + Swete (Prof. H. B.), *The Apocalypse of St. John, 15s. + (Macmillan.) + + + + +{297} + +INDEX + + Acts, Book of, 102 + Agape, or Love-feast, 139, 269 + Alexandria, St. Mark at, 50; philosophy of, 95 + Alogi, rejected St. John's writings, 82 + Antichrist, in 2 Thess., 131; in 1 John, 255 + Antilegomena, or disputed books, 222, 271 + Antioch, in Syria, collision between SS. Peter and Paul at, 121, 157 + Antioch, Pisidian, 152 + Apocalypse. _See_ Revelation + Apocalyptic teaching, in St. Matt., 38; in 2 Thess., 131; + general nature of, 276 + Apollos, his partisans at Corinth, 135, 137; supposed author of + Hebrews, 211 + Aramaic language, 1; original of St. Matt., 34 + Aristion (author of St. Mark xvi. 9-20), 63, 285 + + "Babylon" in N. T., 242, 279 + Balaamites, 266 + Baptism, St. Paul's doctrine of, 164, 175, 205; for the dead, 140 + Barnabas, St., author (?) of Hebrews, 211 + Barnabas, so-called Epistle of, 14 + Baur, F. C., his misrepresentation of the apostles, 111, 121; + what Epistles accepted by, 133; repudiation of Rom. xv., xvi., + 158; of Colossians, 171; of Ephesians, 182; of Philippians, 188 + Beast in Revelation, 276, 281 + Bousset, W., denies St. John's residence at Ephesus, 257 + Brethren of our Lord, 224 + + Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, not Pauline, 166 + Canon, formation of, 2, 220 + Catholic Epp., 219; gradual insertion in Canon, 3, 221 + Census in St. Luke, 79 + Christology, or doctrine about Christ's Person, in St. Matt., 40; + in St. Mark, 54, 56; in St. Luke, 71; in St. John, human side of, + 31, divine side of, 82, 95; in Acts, 109; of St. Paul, 123, 146, + 174, 185, 192 + Church, doctrine of, in St. Matt., 44; in St. Paul, 185 + Clement, St., of Rome, quotes Synoptic narrative, 14; quotes + the Epistles, 133, 235 + Clement of Alexandria, on date of St. Mark, 52; on 2 Peter, 248 + Colossians, Ep. to, 170; heresy of, 173 + Corinthians, Epp. to, 133, 143; first lost Ep. to, 135; second + lost Ep. to, 145; factions among, 137; doctrine of resurrection + in Epp., 140, 146 + + Date of N. T. books, p. x.; of Christ's nativity, 78 + Date of Christ's death, 28; St. John supported by St. Luke as to, + 30; and by St. Paul, 142 + Davidson, S., on I John, 256; on Christology of Revelation, 272 + "Diaspora," or Dispersion, 229, 241 + Diatessaron of Tatian, 11 + Dionysius of Alexandria on Revelation, 271 + Diotrephes, 264 + Disputed books, 222, 271 + Docetic heresy, 197, 259, 262 + Domitian, his treatment of Christians, 265, 276 + + Ebionites, their Gospel, 34; St. Luke not influenced by, 72 + Enoch, Book of, 249, 268, 276 + Epaphroditus or Epaphras, 171, 191 + Ephesians, Ep. to, 180 + Ephesus, St. John at, 81, 257 + Epiphanius on Gospel of the Hebrews, 34 + Eschatology, in St. Matt., 38; in St. Mark, 58; in St. Luke, 67; + in St. John, 97; in St. Paul, 121, 131, 146 + Essenes, sect of, possible influence at Rome, 167; at Colossae, 173 + Eucharist, in St. Luke, 70; in 1 Cor., 139 + Eusebius, on Hebrews, 209; on Catholic Epp., 222; on 2 Peter, 248; + on Revelation, 271 + + Faith, St. Paul's doctrine of, 154, 164; in Hebrews, 211; in + St. James, 231; in St. Jude, 266 + Feasts, Jewish, in St. John, 98 + Felix, Antonius, procurator of Judaea, 115 + Festus, Porcius, procurator of Judaea, 115 + Florinus, letter of Irenaeus to, 87 + + Galatia, North or South (?), 151 + Galatians, Ep. to, 150 + Gallic, 134 + Gieseler, J. K. L., on the Synoptic problem, 21 + Gnosticism, supposed influence on Ep. to Philippians, 188; rebuked + in Pastoral Epp., 197; in 2 Peter and Jude, 251, 266 + Godet, F., writings of, 293, 294 + Gospels, the four, 9, St. Matt., 33; St. Mark, 49; St. Luke, 64; + St. John, 80 + + Harnack, A., on St. John, 93, Appendix A; on the apostles' + doctrine, 111; on Revelation, 272 + Hebrews, Apocryphal Gospel of, 35 + Hebrews, Ep. to, 208; its connection with Philo, 211 + Hegesippus, on St. James, 225, 229; on St. Jude's grandsons, 265 + Heresies in N. T. times, 120, 137, 153, 172, 197, 251, 258, 266 + Herod the Great, 79 + Herod Agrippa I., 114 + Herod Agrippa II., 115, 190 + Hilgenfeld, A., on St. John's writings, Appendix A + + Idols, eating meat offered to, 139 + Ignatius, St., relation to St. Matt., 14; to St. John, 14, 85; + heresy rebuked by, 197, 259 + Irenaeus, St., on Canon of the Gospels, 11; on St. Luke, 64; + on St. John, 84, 87; on Catholic Epp., 222 + + James, St., Ep. of, 223 + Jerome, St., author of the Vulgate, 5; on the Hebrew of St. Matt., + 34; on 2 John, 262 + Jewish Christianity, 34, 120, 137, 153, 172 + John the Presbyter, not the author of the fourth Gospel, 83; + Papias on, Appendix B + John, St., Gospel of, 15, 27, 80; relation to Synoptists, 27; does + not quote them, 32; Epistles of, 255; Revelation of, 270; + rationalist criticism of his writings, 83, Appendix A + John, St., the Baptist, his infancy and ministry, 76; interest + shown in, 115 + Josephus, on St. James, 229; not quoted in 2 Peter, 246 + Jude, St., Ep. of, 249, 265 + Judgment, the, in St. Matt., 38; in St. John, 97, 258, 282 + Juelicher, A., on St. John, 83 + Justification, in St. Luke, 71; in St. Paul, 157, 163; + in St. James, 231 + Justin Martyr, used our four Gospels, 12; ascribes Revelation + to St. John, 270 + + Keim, Th., on St. John's writings, Appendix A + Kingdom of God in St. Matt., 44 + + Laodiceans, Ep. to, identical with "Ephesians," 176, 182 + Latinisms in St. Mark, 54 + Law, teaching of Christ on, 44, of St. Paul on, 154, 163, of + Hebrews on, 216 + Linus, ? Bishop of Rome, 205 + _Logia_, meaning of the word, 13; early books of, 24, 34 + Logos, doctrine of, in St. John, 95 + Luke, St., Gospel of, 64; its dependence on St. Mark, 16; + Acts written by, 65, 102 + Lycus valley, Churches of, 123, 171, 182 + + Magi and the star, 78 + Marcion, Canon of, 13; Gospel of, 66; why he repudiated 1 and 2 + Tim. and Titus, 196 + Mark, St., Gospel of, 49; its dependence on St. Peter, 51, 54 + Marriage and celibacy, St. Paul's teaching on, 138, 187 + Matthew, St., Gospel of, 33; its dependence on St. Mark, 16, + 36; some primitive features in, 22; numerical arrangement in, 25 + Ministers of the Church, in Acts, 111; in Ephesians, 186; in + Pastoral Epistles, 198; in 3 John, 264 + _Muratorian Fragment_, Appendix C + + Nazarenes, Gospel of, 34 + Nero, persecution by, 108, 124, in Revelation, 276 + Nicopolis, 204 + + Onesimus of Colossae, 177 + Onesiphorus of Ephesus, 206 + Oral teaching, influence on St. Matt., 26; on St. John, 101 + Oral tradition theory of Gospels, 21, 22 + Origen, on Hebrews, 209; on Catholic Epp., 222; on 2 Peter, 248 + + Papias, on the "Oracles," 13; on the Logia of St. Matt., 24, 34; + on St. Mark, 51; on John the Presbyter, Appendix B + Parables, the different classes of, 74 + Pastoral Epp., 195 + Paul, St., Epp. and life of, 116; Epp. questioned, 117, 125, 133, + 171, 181, 188, 195 + Peter, St., source of St. Mark's Gospel, 51, 57; "Memoirs" + of, 50; Epistles of, 235, 246; "Apocalypse" of, 250, 290 + Philemon, Ep. to, 177 + Philippians, Ep. to, 188 + Philo, his difference from St. John, 96; his similarity to + Hebrews, 211 + Polycarp, St., connection with St. John, 11, 86, 87, 222 + Polycrates on St. John, 81 + Prayer in St. Luke, 74 + + Quirinius, P. Sulpicius, governor of Syria, 79 + + Ramsay, W. M., on authenticity of Acts, 105 + Renan, E., on St. John's writings, 272, Appendix A + Revelation, Book of the, 270 + Romans, Ep. to, 158 + Rome, attitude of, towards the Church, 108, 131, 275; religion + at, 160; worship of, 275 + + Sabatier, A., on ministry in Acts, 111 + Sanday, W., on Catholic Epp., 221; writings of, 293, 294 + Schmiedel, P. W., on Acts, 111; on St. John's writings, Appendix A + Silvanus or Silas, not the author of Acts, 107; bearer of + 1 Peter, 243 + Sinaitic Syriac version of Gospels, 43 + Slavery, St. Paul on, 175, 178, 187 + Spirit, the Holy, doctrine of, in St. John, 97; in St. Paul, 147 + Synoptic problem, 16 + Synoptists, relation of, to St. John, 15, 27, 95 + + Tatian, Diatessaron of, 11 + Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, or Didache, 14; Johannine + language in, 85 + Tertullian ascribes Hebrews to St. Barnabas, 211 + Theophilus of Antioch, 291 + Thessalonians, Epp. to, 125 + Timothy, Epp. to, 195 + Titus, Ep. to, 203 + Titus, Roman emperor, 276 + Tuebingen School, on St. Paul's Epistles, 117; on relation of + St. Peter to St. Paul, 121 + Tychicus of Asia, 172, 176 + + Versions of the Bible, 5 + Vespasian in Revelation, 276 + Virgin birth of our Lord, 43 + + "We sections" in Acts, 65, 102 + Weizsaecker, C., on St. John's writings, 83, Appendix A + Westcott (Bishop), writings of, 294, 295 + Works, doctrine of, in St. Paul, 155, 204; in St. James, 231; + in Revelation, 274 + + Zechariah, quoted by St. Matt., 41; by St. John, 88 + Zeller, E., on Revelation, 272 + Zenas, 204 + + + +***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT*** + + +******* This file should be named 22459.txt or 22459.zip ******* + + +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: +http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/2/2/4/5/22459 + + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://www.gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://www.gutenberg.org/about/contact + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: +http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + diff --git a/22459.zip b/22459.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..3e115ae --- /dev/null +++ b/22459.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..bab61f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #22459 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/22459) |