The Books ol NE'W TESTAMENT EDITED BY C. tJ Etlioott, D, £k Bisk^ of Gioncester ^Bristol ^ PRINCETON, N. J. SM/ Division 43 0^3^ I Section it ^["(^7 Number p PLAIN INTEODUCTIONS THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE PLAIN INTRODUCTIONS TO THE Books of the Bible VOLUME II ^tin Testament Introtructions Edited by CHAELES JOHN ELLICOTT D.D. Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol CASSELL AND COMPANY Limited LONDON PARIS d: MELBOURNE 1893 ALL BIGHTS KESEEVED COI^TENTS. GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT. By the late Yery Rev. E. H. Plumptre, D.D. . ST. :matthew. By the late Very Rev. E. H. PLUiiPTRE, D.D. . ST. MARK. By the late Very Rev. E. H. Plumptre, D.D. c ST. LUKE. By the late Very Rev. E. H. Pll-mptre, D.D. . ST. JOHN. By the Ven. Archdeacon Watkins, D.D. . . THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. By the late Very Rev. E. H. Pllmptre, D.D. . ro:mans. By the Rev, Professor Sanday, D.D. L CORINTHIANS. By the Rev. Canon Teignmolth Shore . n. CORINTHIANS. By the late Very Rev. E. H. PLrMPXRE, D.D. . GALATIANS. By the Rev. Professor Sanbay, D.D. THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL'S FIRST CAPTIVITY. By the Right Rev, Alfred Barry, D.D. . EPHESIANS. By the Right Rev. Alfred Barry, D.D. . PHILIPPLVNS. By the Right Rev. Alfred Barry, D.D, . , COLOSSIANS, By the Right Rev. Alfred Barry, D.D. . L THESSALONLANS, By the Rev, Canon Mason, D.D. vjii CONTENTS. II. THESSALONTANS. By the Rev. Canon Mason, D.D. . , . 237 I. TIMOTHY. By the Very Rev. H. D. M. Spence, D.D. . 241 n. TIMOTHY. By the Very Rev. H. D. M. Spence, D.D. . 244 TITUS. By the Very Rev. H. D. M. Spence, D.D. . 246 PHILEMON. By the Right Rev. Alfred Barry, D.D. . . 250 HEBREWS. By the Rev. F. W. Moulton, D.D. . . 257 JAIMES. By the Rev. E. G. Punch ard, D.D. . . 271 I. PETER. By the Rev. Canon Mason, D.D. . 280 n. PETER. By the Rev. Alfred Pltjmmer, D.D. . 285 L JOHN. By the Ven. W. M. Sinclair, D.D. . . 297 II. AND Iir. JOHN. By the Ven. W. M. Sinclair, D.D. . . 311 JUDE. By the Rev. Alfred Pltjmmer, D.D. . 315 THE REVELATION. By the Right Rev. W. Boyd-Carpenter, D.D. . 321 GENERAL IXTRODUCTIOX TO THE JfEW TESTAMENT. Bt the late Yeet Eev. E. H. PLUMPTEE, D.D. 1.— THE BOOKS OF THE XEW TESTA:MEXT. commonly speak of the volume which all CTmstians accept as he- ing, in some sense, their rule of faith and life, presents many terms more or less technical in character, each of which has a distinct his- tory of its own, not without in- terest. The whole volume for us is The Bible, or, more fully, The Holy Bible, containing The Old AND Xew Testaments. Some- times we use The Scripttre. or The Sckiptl-res, or The Holy ScRiPTVREs, as a s^-nonym for The Bible. With these we sometimes find, bound up in the same volume, " the hooks called Apocrypha," which are distinguished in the Sixth of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England from the " Canoxical Books of the Old and Xew Testament." It is desir- able that the student of the Xew Testament should know, at least in outline, something as to the meaning and history of each of these terras. II. Of aU the words so used, ScRiPTCRE, or The Scriptures, is that which stands highest, as far as the claims of antiquity and author- ity affect our estimate. It had come to be used by the Jews before 1 our Lord's time as contrasting — as the Moslem now contrasts, in refer- ence to the Koran — those who had a written rule, or book, as the rule of faith and life, with those who had not. The books that had been written in " sundry times and divc-K manners " (as the familiar passage in Heb. i. 1 should read;, and which, after various processes of sifting, editing, and revising, were then received as authoritative, were known as " the Writings," " the Scriptures," as in Matt. xxi. 42, Luke xxiv. 27, John ■^-iii. 39, sometimes with the addition of the term "holy," or "sacred" (2 Tim. iii. 5). It was because they studied this literature '^ram- mata) that the interpreters of the Law were known as "scribes" [grainmnteis). When these books were quoted, it was enoug-h to sav, "It is written" {e.g., Matt. iv. 4, 6; xxi. 13; xx^i. 24), or, with more emphasis, " the Scripture saith" [e.g., Eom. iv. 7; ix. 17), or to cite this or that " Scripture " (Markxii. 10). It may be noted, however, that the later terminology of the Jews in their classification of the Sacred Books differed from this. They applied the term " Wiitings " {Kethubim), or "Holy Writings." NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. (from which, we get the Greek Ilayiographa, with the same mean- ing) to one portion only of the collection, and that, in some sense, the one which they reckoned as the lowest. First came the Law, including the Five Books of Moses, whence the tei-m Pentateuch (=the five-vohmaed Writing) ; (2) the earlier Prophets, including imder that head Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings; and (3) the later Prophets, including («) the three Greater Prophets— Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel — and [b) the twelve Minor Prophets, as we have them; (4) the Kethnbim, or " Writings," including the follow- ing groups of hooks : — («) Psalms, Proverbs, Joh ; {b) the five Megil- lotk, or Rolls, the Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther ; (c) Daniel, Ezra, Nehe- miah, 1 and 2 Chronicles. So far as the later Jews wanted one word for the whole of what we call the Old Testament, they used the term Ilikra ( = " what is read or re- cited"), a word which has the interest of heing connected with the Koran, or sacred book of Islam. III. The Greek word for Bible {Biblion) occiu^s in our version as "book," in 2 Tim. iv. 13, Rev. x. 3, v. 1, but not apparently with any specially distinctive sense. • It is just possible that in the first of these passages St. Paul may refer to what he elsewhere calls the Scriptures. (See 2 Tim. iv. 13.) This sense, however, did not begin to attach to the word by itself tin the twelfth or thirteenth century. Greek writers, indeed, talked, as Avas natural, of the sacred or holy "books" on which their faith rested ; and, as in the Council of Laodicea, drew up catalogues of such books, or spoke of the whole universe as a book, or " bible," in which men might read the wisdom and the love of the Creator. It was natural, as the word came to be used, like other Greek tenns, in the Western Chui'ches, that tran- scribers, or binders, of the "sacred books " should label them as Biblia Sacra. As the centuries passed on, however, men forgot the origin of the word, and took Biblia, not for a neuter plural, as it really was, but for a feminine singular ; and so we get the origin of the " Holy Bible," betraying itseK in most Eiu'opean lamguages, as, e.g., in La Bible, La Bibbia, die Bibel, by the feminine form of the noun. We are able to fix, within compara- tively narrow limits, the date of the introduction of the word so used into our English language. It was imknown to our Saxon fathers. They use.l ge-writ, the "Writing," or, following Jerome's felicitous phrase, Bibliothekh, the " library " or collection of books. "Bible" came into use through the Norman Conquest and the prevalence of French. Chaucer \ises it in his earlier poems {House of Fame, Book iii., 1. 244) as applicable to any book. In the Prologue to the Canterbury Tales, 1. 437, his latest work, it stands as " the Bible," with its new distinctive honours. Wycliffe's translation of what was headed as the Holy Bible, and the frequent use of the term in the Preface to this translation, prob- ably gained for it a wide accept- ance, and all idea of its plural j meaning having dropped out of I sight, the definite article acquired j a new significance, and it was 1 received, as ninety-nine readers out j of a hundred receive it now, as the ; Bible, ^7*^ Book above all other books. GENEKAL INTRODUCTION. 3 IV. The history of the terms the Old and the New Testament leads us into a region of yet higher in- terest. They have their starting- point in the memorable distinctions dra-ma between the Covenant that had been made with Israel through Moses, and the New Covenant, with its better promises, which was proclaimed for the future in Jer. xxxi. 31. That promise received a fresh significance, and was stamped for ever on the minds of the fol- lowers of Christ, by the words that were spoken on the night of the Last Supper, when He told the Apostles that it was ratified by His own blood. (See Matt. xxvi. 28, where Covenant, and not "Testa- ment," is the right rendering.) The stress laid on the distinction between the two Covenants in the Epistle to the Hebrews (chaps, -sii. — X.) was, as it were, the natural development of that thought; and the repetition of the words of insti- tution, as we find them in 1 Cor. xi. 25, at every celebration of the Supper of the Lord, secured for it a universal acceptance in all the Churches. For a time the essential outlines of the New Covenant — the tenns, as it were, of the New Contract — were conveyed chiefly or exclusively by the oral teaching of the Apostles and their immediate followers. But soon the New Covenant, like the Old, gathered roimd it a literature of its own. ^Vithout anticipating what wiU have to be said hereafter as to the liistory of individual books, it lies on the surface that within sixty or seA'enty years after the Death and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus, there were written records of His words and deeds. Epistles pm-port- ing to be written by His Apostles and disciples, revelations of the future of His kingdom. In com-so of time, but probably not till the foui-th century, the books so re- ceived came naturally enough to be knowTi as the Books of the New Covenant [diatheke), as distin- guished from those of the Old ; and so in the Council of Laodicea, in A.D. 320, we have lists of the Books which were recognised as belonging to each {Can. 59). The G-reek word for Covenant was never natu- ralised, however, in the Latin of the Western and African Chm-ches, and the vaiters of those Churches were for a time undecided as to what equivalent they should use for it, and wavered between fiedus, a " covenant " ; instrumentum, a " deed " ; and testamentum, a " will." The earlier Latin ^Titers, such as Tertullian [Adv, Marcion, \\. 1), use both the two latter words, but state that the last was the more ' generally accepted term. As such, it passed into the early Latin ver- sions of the Scriptures, and then int« St. Jerome's Vulgate, and so became familiar through the whole of Latin Chiistendom. If we confine its meaning to its strict legal sense of " \\all," it must be admitted to be a less accurate ren- dering than fcedus of the general sense of the Greek diatheke (Heb. ix. 16 is, of course, an excep- tion), and the latter word has accordingly been adopted by some of the more scholarly Protestant theologians, such as Beza, as part of their terminology. So in the writings of the French Reformed Church, the New Testament ap- pears as La Xouvelle Alliance. Luther, with a certain characteristic love for time-honoured words, used Testament thi'oughout ; and though some recent German writers have used Bund, it does not seem likelv NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. to gain general acceptance. In the history of the English versions we find Wycliffe, as was natural in a translation from the Vulgate, nsing " Testament " imiformly. Tjoidale, in spite of his usual tendency to change the familiar ternis of Latin theologj^, was probably in part in- fluenced by Luther's example, and retained " Testament " throughout. He was followed in the other Eng- lish translations, till we come to that knoAvn as the Geneva version, where it is replaced by " Covenant " in most passages, still retaining, so to speak, its place of honour in Matt. xxAd. 28, Luke xxii. 20, and Heb. ix. 16 ; and it has thus secured a position from which it will not be easy to dislodge it. In strict ac- curacy, we ought to speak, as the title-page of our Bible does, of the Books of the New Testament, but the natural tendency of popular speech to economy of utterance leads men to speak of the "New Testament " as including the books. • V. In the Sixth of the Thirty- nine Aiticles of the English Church, wo find the phrase Can- onical ScKiPTURES, and that term also has a noteworthy history of its own. "We start from the Greek word kanon, connected with "canna," "cane," "canalis," "chan- nel," "canal," "cannon" — all the words implying the idea of straight- ness — and iind its primary meaning to be that of a "reed," or rather (for that belongs to the earlier foi-m, /cane), of a rod ; then of a rod tised as a carpenter's rule ; thence, by a natural use of metaphors, it was employed, chiefly by Alexandrian critics and grammarians, for a " rule " in ethics, or rhetoric, or grammar. So the great writers of Greece were referred to as being the Cayion or standard of accuracy. In the LXX. version of the Old Testament the word is found only once, in Mic. vii. 10. The passage is very obscm-e, but it is apparently used in the sense of a column or bar of some sort, as it is also in Judith xiii. 8. The figurative sense had become dominant in the time of the New Testament, and so we find St. Paul using it in Gal. vi. 16, Phn. iii. 16, for a "rule" of faith and life, and 2 Cor. x. 13, 16, for one which marked out a man's appointed line of work. So Coim- cils made Canons, or Rules, for the Churches. So those who were boimd by the rules of cathedrals and collegiate churches were called Canonici, or Canons. So the first invariable part of the Roman lit- urgy was known as the Canon of the Mass. At even an earlier period than that to wh>h these later illustra- tions refer, the word had come into use as belonging to the language of theology. Clement of Alexandria speaks of the Canon of the Church being found in the agreement of the Law and the Prophets with the traditional teaching of the New Covenant {Strom, vi., p. 676). Chrysostom and other commenta- tors find the Canon, or Rule of Faith in Scripture. Tertulliau, ob"\dously Latinising the same word, speaks of the doctrine which the Church had received from the Apostles, or embodied in a creed, as the regula Jidel. Alexandria appears in this, as in other in- stances, to have been the main source of ecclesiastical terminology. In Origcn we find the next appli- cation of the word, and he speaks (in books of which we have only the Latin Version) of the Scripturce Canonicce, the libri regular es^ the GENERAL INTRODUCTION. Hh'i canonizati — of books that are "in the Carton.^' Here there is a slight change of meaning. The books are not only the rule of the Church's faith ; they are themselves in confoi-mity with a standard. They find their place in a list which is accepted by the Church as the rule of what is or is not Sci-ipture. So Athanasius speaks of books that are in this sense " canonised," and the Council of Laodicea {Can. 39) of those that are not so. Amphilochius (circ. A.D. 380) takes up the language of the Latin translator of Origen, and uses it for the actual CataJogrie of Books. With Jerome the term is in fi-equent use in this sense, and from his writings it passed into the common language of Latin Christendom, and so into that of modem Europe, and men spoke of the Caiioiiical Scriptures as those which were in the Canon. yj. The histoiy of the word has to bo followed by the history- of the origin and gi-owth of the thing. Without anticipating what will find a more fitting place in the Intro- duction to each several book, A-iz., the traces which each has left of itself in early ecclesiastical writings, and the e-s-idence which we have in those traces of its genuineness, it lies on the surface that the Christian Society had a literatm-e of some kind at a very early period. There were the "Words of the Lord Jesus," quoted by St. Paul as known (Acts XX. 35), and quoted as Scrip- ture (1 Tim. V. 18). There were Epistles that were cited in the same way (2 Pet. iii. 16). There were "many" records of the life and teaching of Christ (Luke i. 1). The "memoirs" of the Apostles were readpublicly in Christian assemblies, and these were known as Gospels (Justin, Apol. c. 66). Besides these books, which are now in the Canon, we find a Gospel of the Hebrews, and of St. Peter, a Revelation bear- ing the name of the same Apostle, an Epistle to the Laodiceans, and so on. It was obvious that men would want some standard by which to discern the genuine from the spurious : and as lists of the Old Testament had been drawn up at an early period of the Chuix-h, by Melitoof Sardis (a.d. 180) and others, so, as we have seen, the Church of Alexandria, the centre of the criti- cism of early Christendom, supplied the thing, as it had supplied the word. The process by which such a list was drawn up must be left, in part, to imagination, but it is not difiicult to picture to ourselves, with little risk of en-or, what it must almost necessarily have been. A man of culture and great industry, imbued with the critical habits of his time, such, e.r/., as was Origen, finds a multitude of books before him professing to ha-\e come down fi-om the time of the Apostles. He takes them one by one, and examines the claims of each. Has it been read in church at all, and if so, where, and in how many chirrches ? Has it been quoted by earlier Avriters? Has it been one of a group assigned to the same writer, with the same characteristics of style as the other books so assigned ? Whence has it come ? Who can report its history? It is obA'ious that the answer to these questions was to be found in a process of essentially personal inquiry, of the exercise of private judgment, of the critical reason working upon hist or}\ And so, to take the earliest instance of such a list which we can connect with a name, we find Origen giving NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. one which includes the f oixr Gospels by name, the Epistles of St. Paul (the names of the Epistles, however, are not given, nor even the total number of them), the two Epistles of St. Peter, the second being noted as open to question, the Revelation, and one "acknowledged" Epistle by St. John. Elsewhere he men- tions the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the traditions which assigned it to St. Paul, St. Luke, and Clement of Rome respectively. Another, without a name, but commonly known as the Muratorian Canon, from that of the scholar who first found it among the MSS. of the Ambrosian Library at J\Iilan, is assigned, on internal groimds, to a period about a.d. 170. It is im- perfect both in the beginning and in the end, and, though in Latin, bears every mark of having been translated from the Greek. It had ob'viouslv mentioned the Gosj)els of St. Matthew and St. Mark, for it begins "in the third place, Luke the Physician wrote a Gospel." It then names St. John, the Acts, the Epistles of St. Paul, enumerating nine Epistles to seven chm-chos; the three Epistles now known as Pastoral, and that to Philemon. It rejects two, to the Laodiceans and Alexandrians, as spurious ; recog- nises a Revelation of St. Peter, two Epistles and the Revelation of St. John ; and strangely enough, for a list of books of the New Testament, includes the Wisdom of Solomon,* and the Pastor or Shepherd of Hennas. The whole fragment is of extreme interest, as representing a transition stage in the foi-mation of the Canon, exhibiting at once the spirit of critical investigation which was at work, and the imcertainty which more or less attended the process of inquiry. A nearly con- temporaneous A-ersion of the New Testament writings in the Spiac, known as the Feschito (= the "simple" or "true" version), ex- hibits nearly the same results . It includes fom-teen Epistles by St. Paul, that to the Hebrews being assigned to his authorship, but omits 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and the Apocalypse. A like catalogue is given in the fourth century [circ. A.D. 330), by Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, and Amphi- lochius of Asia ]Minor icirc. a.d. 380) . The f onner di^-ides the books into two classes, the one those which are gsnerally recognised, and the other those that were still open to question {AntUcgomena) ; and the latter list includes 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and the Apocalypse. This may be taken, though not exhau.stive, as a sufficient account of the e'sddence siapplied by individual wi-iters ; and as they in- clude representatives of Alexandiia, Palestine, Syria, Asia Minor, and Rome, it may fairly be considered as embodying the general consent of the Christian Church in the foui'th centur\% These individual testimonies were confirmed about the same period by i the authoritv of two local Councils of the Chiu-ch. That held at Lao- * The facts connected with this remark- alile liook are briefly— (1) That it is not named by any pre-Christian writer ; (2) that it is not quoted by any writer before Clement of Rome; (3) that it presents iniinmei-able points of rescmblaiice in phi-aseology and style to tlie Epistle to tlie Hebrews. These facts liave led the present writer to the conviction that they are both by the same author, the one written before, and the other after, his conversion to the faith in Clirist. (8ee two]iapers "On the wi-itings of Apollos," in the Expositor, Vol. I.) GENERAL INTRODrCTIOX. dicea a.d. 363 (?) gives a list of ; the " Books of the Old Testament " ! that ought to be read, agreeing with the Hebrew Canon, except that it inserts Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah ; and in its catalogue of the " Books of the Xew Testament " gives a complete list of those now received, without noting, as Eusebius notes, any difference between them, with the one exception that it makes no mention of the Apocal>-pse, and that it assigns the Epistle to the Hebrews to St. Paul. That known as the thii'd Council of Carthage (a.d. 397) enumerates among the " Canonical Scriptin>:s of the Old Testament" Tobias (= Tobit), Judith, and the two books of Maccabees, and in its list of those of the Xew includes, with- \ out any exception, all the books that j are now recognised, and does so on the ground that this was what had been received from "the Fathers." i The histoiy of this gTowth of the Canon of the Xew Testament is in j many ways instructive. It has j been often thrown in the teeth of ; those who urge the right of private judgment as against the authority of the Chmch of Rome, or of the Chiu-ch in her Councils generally, that we have no ground for our acceptance of the Scriptures them- selves, and especially for that of the Scriptures of the Xew Testa- ment, but that authority. The facts that have been stated exhibit a process w^hich leads naturally and necessarily to the very opposite con- clusion. What we have traced is the exercise, at every stage, of pri- vate judgment, of criticism working upon history ; and it is not till this has done its work that Councils step in to recognise and accept the results that haA^e been thus obtained. And when this is done, be it observed, it is not by any (Ecumenical or General Council, nor by the Church which claims to have been founded by St. Peter, nor by the Bishop who claims to be his suc- cessor, but by two Synods, in com- paratively remote provinces, who confine themseh-es to testifpng what they actually foimd. Other men had laboured, and they entered into their labours. The authority of the Chirrch, so far as it was as- serted, rested on the previous exer- cise of free inquiry and private judgment. How far later inquiry may have modified the results of the earlier, throwing doubt on what was then accepted as certain, or establishing the genuineness of what w^as then looked upon as doubtful, compensating for its re- moteness by its wider range and manifold materials, by its skill in following up hiats and tracing coin- cidences designed or \m designed — this is a question which in its bear- ing on indiA-idual books of the Xew Testament will be best discussed in the Introduction to each of those Books. VII. Side by side with the Books as belonging to the Old or Xew Testament thus recog-nised as Ca- nonical, there were those which had been weighed in the balance and found wanting. These w^ere known either as being simply "imcanon- ised" or "uncanonical," as not being in the list which formed the standard of acceptance. Such as continued, from their having formed part of the generally accepted Greek version of the Old, to be read in churches or quoted by devout scholars, were described by a term which had already become conspicuous as ap- plied to the Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, the book Ecclesiasticus, and 8 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. were kno-wn as " ecclesiastical," and | these included all, or nearly all, the hooks which we commonly know as the Apockypha. Later writers, especially among the more liberal or critical Roman Catholic writers since the Council of Trent, have invented and applied the term Beutero- Canonical to those hooks, as recognising that they do not stand on the same level as those included in the older Canons of Laodicea and Carthage. The Council itself [Sess. 4), however, had the courage of its conAT^ctions, and setting aside the authority of earlier coimcils, and of the gTeat Father to whom it owed its Vulgate, drew no such distinction. It added to the Canon of Scripture, not, indeed, all the hooks that we know as the Apocrj^ha, hut the greater part of them : Tohit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the additions to Esther and Daniel, and the two hooks of Maccabees. It declared that all these books were to be received with the same rever- ence as the other sacred writings. It placed the traditions of the Church on the same level with the sacred books thus defined. It pronounced its anathema on all who did not accept its Canon of Scripture, or despised its traditions. It deliber- ately proclaimed to all men that this was the foundation of its faith. The history of the word Apocry- pha exhibits a curious instance of a change from honour to dishonour. Primarily it simply meant "hidden" or " secret." In "this sense we find it in Luke viii. 17; Col. ii. 13; Ecclus. xxiii. 19. It was used accordingly by teachers who claimed q, higher esoteric wisdom which they embodied in secret, i.e., in this sense, apocryphal, writings. Traces pf such a boast, even among Jews and Christians, are found in 2 Esdr. (obviously a post-Christian book), where the scribe is instructed to reser^■e seventy books for " such only as be wise among the people " (2 Esdr. xiv. 46), in distinction from the twenty- four (this, and not two hundred and four, is probably the right reading) of the Hebrew Canon. The books thus circulated, with their mysterious pretensions, im- posing on the credulity of their readers, were "hidden" in another sense. No man knew their history or their authorship. They were not read in the synagogues of the Jews, or, for the most part, in the churches of Christians. They de- served to be hidden, and not read. And so the word sank rapidly in its connotation, and became a term of reproach. Already, in the time of Tertullian {Be Artimd, c. 12) and Clement of Alexandria {Strom, i. 19, 69), it is used in the sense which has ever since attached to it, of sj)urious and unauthentic. Its pre- sent popular application dates from the time of St. Jerome. In Greek churches and Latin churches that used a version based upon that of the LXX,, the position occupied by many of the books now included under that word secui-ed for them the same respect as the other books ; they were quoted as " Scripture," as " inspired," as " prophecy." Where, on the contrary, men were brought into contact with Judaism, and so with the Hebrew Canon, they were led to draw the distinction which has since obtained. So Melito of Sardis (a.d. ISO), in his Canon of the Old Testament, follows that of the JcAvs, and CjtH of Jerusalem (a.d. 315—386) adds only Baruch and the later Esther. Jerome, bent upon a new version from the He- brew, and with the natural instincts GENERAL INTEODUCTION. 9 of a scholar, looked on the Greek version of the LXX. as heing faulty, not only in its translations, but in j its text, For him the Hebrew 1 Canon was the standard of authority, j and he applied without hesitation ' the term Apocrypha, as equivalent to | spurious, to all that were not included in it [Prol. Gal.) . Augustine shrank fi'om so bold an application of the word. Western Christendom, as a whole, followed his lead, rather than that of Jerome. The doubtful books kept their ground in the MSS. of the Latin Vulgate, and were read and quoted freely as Scripture. It was not till the revival of the study of Hebrew in Western Europe in the iifteenth and sixteenth centuries, warmly pursued as it was by Luther and his fellow- workers, that the old line of demarcation was di-awn more boldly than ever. Luther, following the example of the LXX. that had been printed at Strasbirrg in 1526, when he published his complete German Bible, in 1534, placed all the books that Jerome had not received together, with the title of "Apocrypha — i.e., books which are not of like worth with Holy Scrip- ture, but are good and useful to be read." His example was followed by Cranmer in the English Bible of 1539, and has obtained in all later versions and editions. The effect of this has been, to some extent, that the word has risen a little in its meaning. "SYhile the adjective is used as equivalent to " spurious," and therefore as a term of opprobrium, we use the sub- stantive with a certain measure of respect. The "Apocrypha" are not necessarily thought of as " apocryphal." Among the books that are now so named, one, 2 Esdras, is certainly of post- Christian origin, and some j ' critics have ascribed the same date to the Wisdom of Solomon, and Judith. These, however, either in the circumstances of the history they contain, or by their pseudon;^Tnous authorship, obviously claim atten- tion as belonging to the Old Testa- ment, and are therefore rightly classed among its Apocrypha. The Xew Testament, however, was not without an apocryphal literature of its own — spurious Gospels of Peter, of the Infancy of Jesus.of Xicodemus, of Matthew, of James ; spurious Acts of Philip, of Andrew, of Mat- thew, of Thomas, of Pilate, of Bartholomew, of John; spurious Epistles of St. PaultotheLaodiceans and to Seneca ; spurious Revelations of St. Peter. Xone of these, how- ever, ever attained to the respectable position occupied by most of the Apocrypha of the Old Testament. They met a ■\ailgar curiosity as to the unrecorded facts of the child- hood of Jesus, as to the woi^k that He had done behind the veil in the Descent into Hades. They were read more or less widely, and formed the nucleus of a popular Christian mythology which has left its traces in literature and art. The legends as to the childhood of the Virgin, her betrothal to Joseph when his rod alone budded, and those of all her other suitors remained as they had been before ; as to her physical A-irginity, that remained unaltered after the birth of the Divine Child ; the fantastic notions that the gold which the Magi brought was the same as that which the Queen of Sheba had brought to Solomon ; that the wood of the Cross had been grown in Paradise as the tree of Hfe ; that Calvary was named from the skull of Adam, and that it received the first drops of the blood by which the children of Adam 10 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. were redeemed ; the release of the souls of the Patriarchs from the limbo [Imbus, the "outer fring-e") of Hades into Paradise— all these had their origin in the Apocryjihal Gospels; and their appearance in the art of the Renaissance period, as, e.g., in the paintings of Raffaclle and others, is a proof of the hold they had taken upon the imagination — one can hardly say, the mind — of Christendom. But from tirst to last, happily, they were not received by a single teacher with the slightest claim to authority, nor included in any list of books that ought to be read by Christians publicly or pii- vately. Here and there, as A\e have seen, books that we now re- ceive were for a time qiiestioned. Here and there other books might be quoted as Scripture, or bound up with the sacred volume, as the Epistle of Clement is with the Alex- andrian MS., or the " Shepherd " of Hermas with the Sinaitic ; but none of these spurious Gospels, Acts, or Epistles were ever raised for a moment to the level of the Canonical Scriptures. They re- mained in the worst sense of the word as Apocrypha. The Canon of the New Testament has never varied since the third Council of Carthage. If we have to receive the statement that there was "never any doubt in the Church " about any one of them, with some slight modification, it is yet true that that doubt was never embodied in the decrees of any Sjaiod, and extended no f lU'lher than the hesitation of individual critics. II. -THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. I. Introductory. — We might have expected, had we been framing the history of a Revealed Religion according to our wishes or a priori assumptions, that, so far as it de- pended on written records, those records would be preserved through successive ages as an authentic standard of appeal. Facts are, however, against all such theories of what ought to have been. Not a single autograph original of any book is known to exist now, nor does any writer of the second or third century say that he had seen such an original. Failing this, we might have fallen back on the notion that each transcriber of the books would be guarded by a super- natural guidance against the usual chances of transcription ; that each translator would be taught how to convey the meaning of the original without error in the language of his version. Here also we have to accept facts as we find them. There has been no such perpetual miracle as this theory would require, ex- tending, as it does extend when pushed to its logical conclusions, to the infallibility of every com- positor in a printer's office who had to set the type of a Bible in any language. jManuscripts vary, ver- sions differ, printed Bibles are not always free from error. Here also we trace the law in things spiritual which we recognise in things na- tural. " Pater ipse colendi Hand facilem esse viain voluit." [" The Father from whose gift all good things flow, No easy path hath oped His truth to know." GENEEAL INTRODUCTION. 11 Here also the absence of any immimity from error has tried men's faith and roused them to labour, and lahoui' has received its reward. Accej)ting- probability as the only attainable result, the prob- ability which they have actually attained is scarcely distinguishable fi'om certainty. ExjDerience shows that, had they begun with postu- lating infallibility somewhere, and accepting its supposed results, in- quiry would ha-^e ceased, criticism would have slumbered, and en-ors would have crept in and multiplied without restraint. II. The Process of Tran- scription.— Dealing, then, with facts, we have to realise to ourselves in what way copies of the books of the New Testament were multiplied. It is obWous that prior to the invention of piinting, two methods of such multiplication were possible. A man might place a MS. before him, and copy it with his own hand, or he might dictate it to one or more writers. The former was probably the natui-al process when Christians were few and poor, when it was a labour of love to transcribe a Gospel or an Epistle for a friend or a church. The latter became natural, in its tiu'n, when the books were in sufficient demand to be sold by booksellers, or when Chris- tian societies were sufficiently or- ganised, as, e.g.^ in monasteries, to adopt the methods of the trade. Each process had its o^tn. special forms of liability to error. Any- one who has coiTccted a proof- sheet will be able to take a measnre of what they are in the former. Anyone who has had experience of the results of a dictation lesson can judge what they are in the latter. We may assume that in most cases, where the work was done systematically, there woidd be a process for correcting the en-ors of transcription, analogous to that of correcting the errors of the press now. MSS. of the New Testament, as a matter of fact, often bear traces of such correction by one or more hands. III. The Sources of Varia- tion. — Exj)erience shows that in such a process as that described, A'arious readings, more or loss of the nature of errors, may arise in many different ways. In some cases they may be entii-ely in- voluntary. The eye may mistake what it reads, or pass over a word, or, misled by two lines that end with the same word or syllable, omit even a whole line (as in the omission in many MSS. of " He that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also," in 1 John ii. 23) ; or, where contractions are employed freely, as they were by most Greek writers, might omit or insert the mark that indicated contraction. Thus in the famous passage of 1 Tim. iii. 16 the two renderings, " God was manifested in the flesh " and " Who was manifested," re- present respectively the readings 02 (0€bs, God) and 02 (&s. Who). Or the ear might mistake the sound of vowels, and so we find Christos for Ch rest OS (=: "giacious ") in 1 Pet. ii. 3, or Hetairoi [■=. " com- panions ") ioT Heteroi (=^" others") in Matt. xi. 16, or Kaviilon (rr:"a rope ") for Kamelon (=" a camel ") in Luke srsdii. 25. In not a few cases, however, the element of will came in, and the variation was made deliberately as an imjDrove- ment on what the transcriber had before him. Taste, gmmmatical accuracy, the desire to confii-m a 12 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. doctrine, or to point a moral, or to soften down a hard saying, or avoid a misconstruction, or bring about a closer agreement between one book and another in passages where they were more or less parallel — all these might come into play, ac- cording to the temperament and character of the transcribers. Thus, e.g.^ one set of MSS. gives in Luke XV. 16, '■'■ would fain have fdled his belly ; " and another, aiming appar- ently at greater refinement, " would have been satisfied " or ^'filled.'" Some, as has been said, give " God was manifested in the flesh," in 1 Tim. iii. 16, and some " Who w^as mani- fested." So, we find "the only begotten Son''^ and "the only be- gotten God^^ in John i. 18. Some in Acts XX. 28 give " the Church of God, which He hath purchased wdth His own blood," and some " the Church of Christ,''^ or " the Church of the Lord:' 1 John v. 7, which speaks of the "three that bear record in heaven," and which is not found in any Greek MSS. earlier than the thirteenth century, is manifestly an interpolation of this nature. So some give and some omit the italicised words in the following passages : — " Whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause,''' Matt. V. 22. " Thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly,'''' Matt. \i. 4, 6. " When men speak all manner of evil against you falsely,'' Matt. V, 11. " This kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting," Mark ix. 29. " That ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer," 1 Cor. \i\. 5. Or the alteration might be made to avoid a difficulty, as when we find " I go not yet up to this feast " for " I go not up " in John vii. 8, or '■'■Joseph and His mother" for '•'• His father and His mother" in Luke ii. 33 ; or to make one Gos- pel correspond with another, as when we find " Why callest thou Me good?" for "Why askest thou con- cerning that which is good?" in Matt. xix. 17 ; or to bring the Gospel into closer accord with liturgical usage, as when the dox- ology was inserted in the Lord's Prayer, in Matt. yi. 13, or the full confession of faith, I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, put into the mouth of the Ethiopian eunuch, in Acts viii. 37 ; or to insert introductory words, "the Lord said," " Jesus said imto His disciples," as in some of the Gos- pels in our Prayer Book ; or mere grammatici'l accuracy might lead the transcriber to reject forms and modes of spelling which the gi-am- marians pronoimced inaccurate. The last class, however, affecting form only, does not come imder the notice of the student of a trans- lation, nor need it be much dwelt on even by those who study the original. IV. Canons of Criticism.— Men who gave themselves to the work of classifying phenomena such as these, soon formd that they had a sufficient basis for the results of an induction. It was easy to note the causes of error, and to fi-ame canons, or rules, by which, in addition to the weight of e^'idence di'awn from the number or anti- quity of MSS. and the like, to judge of the authority of this or that reading. Thus, e.g., it has been laid down (1) that, cccteris paribus, the shorter of two various GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 13 readings is more likely to be the true one ; (2) that the same holds good of the more difficult of two readings ; or (3) of one that agrees less closely with another parallel passage. In each case there was a prohahle motive for the alteration which made the text easier or more complete, while no such motive was likely to work in the opposite direction. Other rules, not resting, as these do, on antecedent prob- ability, but on the nature of the materials with which criticism has to deal, will follow on a sm-vey of those materials. V, Manuscripts. — The extant MSS. of the New Testament are classed roughly in two great divisions, determined by their style of writing. Down to the ninth or tenth century the common usage was to write in capital letters, which, as having been originally of a bold and large type, like those which we use for the title-page of a folio Bible, were spoken of as liferce iinciales (" letters an inch big"). The word is thus applied by St. Jerome, and from this use of it the whole class of MSS. so writ- ten are known as Uncials. Some- what later a smaller rimning-hand came to be employed, and the later MSS. are accordingly known as Cursive. They begia to appear in the tenth century, and extend to the sixteenth. The invention of printing did away with the demand for copies multiplied by transcrip- tion, and, with the exception of one or two conspicuous instances of spurious MSS. of parts of the New Testament palmed off upon the unwary as genuine antiquities, none are extant of a later date. Experts in such matters acquire the power of judging, by the style of writiag, or by the material employed, of the date of a MS. belonging to either class, and in their judgment there are no extant MSS. of any part of the New Testament earlier than the fourth century. Most critics, how- ever, are agreed in assigning a date as early as a.d. 350 to the two known respectively as the Siuaitic, as ha-ving been discoA'ered by Tis- chendorf in the monastery of St. Catherine, on Mount Sinai, and the Vatican, so named as being the great treasure of the library of the Papal palace. Two others, the Alexandrian— sent by Cyril Lucaris, Patriarch of Constantinople, to Charles I., as a precious Codex, or MS., that had been brought from Alexandria — and the Codex Ephraem— so called from its having been foufld underneath the text of the works of Ephraem, a Spian Father of the fourih century — are ascribed to the middle of the fifth centur^^* The Cambridge MS., or Codex Bezje, so called because it was given by Theodore Beza, the French Reformer, to the University of Cambridge in 1562, belongs probably to the latter part of the tifth or beginning of the sixth century. Others — some complete, and some existing only in frag- ments, either as originals or as palimpsests — came later, in the seventh or eighth, or even as low as the eleventh century. As a matter of convenience, to avoid the constant repetition of the * This way of using up old MSS. by partially effacing wth pumice - stone what had first been WTitten, and then writing what was thought of more im- portance, was a common practice in monasteries. The works of many ancient authors lia\'e probably fallen a sacrifice to this ecouomy. MSS. so used are known as palimpsests, literally, " re- scraped." 14 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. names of these and other MSS., a notation has heen adopted by which letters of the alphabet stand for them, as follows : — K (Aleph) for the Sinaitic. This contains the whole of the Greek version of the Old Testament as well as the New, and the Shepherd of Hennas, an allegorical book more or less of the Pilgrim^ s Progress type, ascribed to the second century. It represents the early text that was received at Alex- andria. A. The Alexandi-ian, containing- the Old and New Testa- ments, a Greek Evening HjTnn, a Psalm ascribed to David after the slaughter of Goliath, some Psalms ascribed to Solomon, and the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians. It is mu- tilated in parts of St. Mat- thew and St. John. It represents the text received at Constantinople. B. The Vatican, containing the Old and New Testaments. This agrees generally with K, as representing the Alex- andrian text of the foiu'th century. C. The Codex Ephraem; con- tains portions of most of the Old and New Testaments, 2 Thess. and 2 John having disappeared in the process of cutting up and re-making. It agrees generally with k and B, but has been corrected at Constantinople, and so gives later readings in the margin. D. The Codex Bezie ; contains the Gospels and Acts only, with a Latin version. The presence of the latter shows a Western origin, and the Greek seems to have been copied by an ill-instructed scribe. The Greek text is peculiar, and has more in- terpolations than any other MS. The Latin represents the A-^ersion that preceded the Vulgate. L. The Paris Codex, containing the Gospels only, and with several gaps. It agrees gen- erally with K and B. The MSS. that come between D and L, and others, are not of sufficient importance to claim men- tion here. It is obvious, as e^-ery transcription involves the risk of fresh errors, that the later MSS. must be prima facie of less auth- ority than the more ancient, and hence it is not thought necessary to give in this place any detailed account of the cursive MSS. It is, of coui'st possible, as some have urged, that they may represent a text more ancient than that of any uncial ; but it is clearly against common sense and the laws of evidence to accej)t a bare possi- bility on one side against a strong probability on the other, and all that can be allowed in their favour is that where the uncials differ they may come in and help, so far as they can be shoA\Ti to give an independent testimony, to turn the scale in favoiir of this or that reading. IMSS. that are manifestly copied from the same original, or come from the same school of transcribers, are obviously not independent, and their value is proportionately diminished. The following Table of New Testament MSS., from Dr. Scri- vener's Introduction, p. 225, will show the range of materials with GENERAL INTKODUGTION. 15 which criticism has to deal, and the relative proportions of the two classes : — Un- Cur- ^ial. sive. Gospels 34 601 Acts ami Catholic Epistles 10 229 St. Paul's Epistles . . 14 2S3 Revelation 4 102 Evaiigelistaria (Service '^ Books containing Qos->oS 183 pels for the year) . . ) Apostles (do. containing ) ,, «, Epistles for do.) 127 l,4tJ3 Many of these, however, are im- l)ei'fect, some containing only a few chapters or even verses. YI. Versions. — Over and above M8S. of the actual text of the Greek Testament, we have an im- portant subsidiary help in the translations which were made, as soon as the Canon was more or less complete, into this or that language. If we know when a translation was made, we can infer, in most cases ^ith very little room for doubt, what Greek text it was made from; and so can, in some cases, arrive at that which repre- sents an earlier text than any existing MS. Of these versions the most important are — (1) The Syriac, commonly known as the "Peschito," i.e., the "simple" or " accui'ate " version, made in the second century. Later Syriac ver- sions were made in the fifth and sixth centuries. (2) The early Latin version, be- fore Jerome, commonly knowTi as the Italian version. Most of the MSS. belong to the foiu-th, fifth, or sixth centimes. (3) Jerome's Latin version, known as the \"ulgate {i.e., made in the common or vulgar tongue), re^jre- serts, of course, the Greek text received in the churches of Pales- tine, perhaps also in that of Rome, in the fom-th centmy. The most ancient MSS. of this version are of the sixth centmy. (4) The Gothic, made by Llphi- las, the Apostle of the Goths, when they settled on the Danube in the foiu"th century. (5) The ^thiopic, in the foui-th centiu-y. (6) The Ai-menian, in the fifth century. YII. Quotations in the Fathers.— One other element of e^ddence, often of considerable im- portance, comes to the help of the textual critic. The early writers of the Christian Chirrch, of whom we speak commonly as the Fathers, read Scripture, studied it some- times very carefully, and almost in the modem spirit of critical ac- curacy, lived in it, and quoted it perpetually in their -vsiitings. In some cases, of course, they might quote from memory, subject to the risks incident to such quotations ; but as soon as they felt that they were writing for educated men, in the presence of adversaries who would easily fasten upon a blvmder or misquotation, they would natu- rally strive after accuracy, and verify their quotations as they pro- ceeded. The Greek Fathers occupy ob^dously the first place as giving the words of the text of the Greek Testament, and of these the most important are — Clement of Rome {ch-c. A.D. 91 — 101), Justin Mai-t^T (a.d. 140—164), Clement of Alex- andria {ob. A.D. 220), Origen {ob. A.D. 254), Irenaeus, where we have the Greek text of his works {ob. A.D. 200), Athanasius {ob. a.d. 373), Eusebius {ob. a.d. 338), Chrysostom {ob. A.D. 407). The earlier writers 16 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. are obA-iously of more authority than the later. That of Orig-en, on account of his indefatigable labours, and the critical character of his mind, stands as the highest authority of all. Alone, or almost alone, among the early Fathers, he notes, again and again, the various readings which he found even then existing — as, for example, " Gada- renes " and " Gerasenes " in Matt. ^dii. 28 ; " Bethabara " and " Beth- any " in John i. 28 ; " Barabbas " alone, and "Jesus Barabbas," in Matt. xxAii. 17. Of the Latin Fathers, Tei-tullian {ob. a.d. 240), Cyprian [ob. a.d. 257), Ambrose [ob. A.D. 397), Augustine [ob. a.d. 430), Jerome {ob. a.d. 420), are the most important, as giving in their quotations the text of the earlier Latin "\'ersions, and so enabling us to judge upon what Greek text they have been based. VIII. Results. — As a rule it is found that the lines of evidence from these classes of materials tend to converge. The oldest MSS., the oldest versions, the quotations from the earlier Fathers present, though not a universal, yet a general agreement. "NMiere differences arise the judgment of one editor may differ from that of another ; but as coiTecting the text upon which the Authorised Version was based, there is now something like a consensus of editors on most important passages. It has not been thought desirable in the Commentary to which this In- troduction belongs to bring the evidence in detail before the reader in each individual case; but, as a rule, the readings which are named as " better " than those of our printed Bibles, are such as are supported by convergent evidence as above described, and adopted by one or more of the most eminent scholars in New Testament criticism. IX. Printed Text of the Greek Testament.— It may seem strange at first that the He- brew text of the Old Testament should have been printed for Euro- pean use, at Soncino, in 1488, thirty-three years before the Greek text of the New. In the one case, however, we must remember that there was a large Jewish popula- tion in almost every great city in Germany, Italy, and France, want- ing copies for their synagogues and for private use. In the other, the Latin of the Vulgate satisfied ecclesiastics, and as yet there was not a sufiicient number of Greek students even in the Universities of Europe to create a demand for books in that language. During the last quarter of the fifteenth century, however, the knowledge of Greek spread rapidly. When Constantinople was taken by the T\irks, refugees fled to Italy and other parts of Western Europe, bringing with them Greek MSS. and offering themselves as instruc- tors. In 1481 a Greek Psalter was printed at Milan, and in a reprint at Venice in 1486 the hvanns of Zacharias and the Virgin were added as an appendix, being thus the first portions of the New Testa- ment to which the new art was applied. In 1504 the first six chapters of St. John were appended tentatively to an edition of the poems of Gregory of Nazianzus, published at Venice. About the same time (1502), under Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, the great Cardinal Ximenes, who had founded a University at Alcala, began a GENERAL IXTRODUCTION. 17 grand work on a princely scale. It was by far the noblest task to which the art of printing had as yet been applied. It was to give the Hebrew of the Old Testament, with the Chaldee Targum or Para- phrase, and the LXX. or Greek version, and the Vulgate. Hebrew and Greek lexicons were appended, and something like a dictionaiy of proper names. MSS. were bor- rowed from several quarters, chiefly fr(jm the Vatican Library at Borne. The work went on slowly ; and was not completed till 1517, fonr months before the Cardinal's death ; nor published till 1522, after it had received the approval of Leo X. in 1520. The edition is commonly known as the Complutensian from Coinplutum, the Latin name of Alcala. Meantime Erasmus, the head of the Humanists, or Greek scholars of Germany, had been employed in 1515 by Froben, the head of an enterprising publishing house at Basle, to bring out a Greek Testament, which was to get the start of the Complutensian. The work was done hurriedly, in less than a year, and the book appeared in February, 1516. But little care had been taken in col- lecting MSS., and in some cases we find somewhat bold conjectural interpolations. The omission of 1 John V. 7 was, however, a sign that a spirit of honest criticism was at work. Erasmus had not found it in any Greek MS., and therefore he would not insert it. A second edition appeared in 1519, and in 1522 a third, in which, through fear of giving offence, he had re- stored the disputed text on the strength of a single MS. of the thirteenth century, now in the library of Trinity College, Dublin, and known as the Codex Montfor- 2 tianus. Later editions followed in 1527 and 1535. Paris, however, soon took the lead in meeting the demand, now rapi(.lly increasing, partly thiough the labours of Erasmus, and partly through the theological excitement of the time, for copies of the Greek Testament. After an edition by Simon de Colines (Colinasus), in 1543, of no great importance, the foremost place was taken by Robert Etienne (or Stephanus), and main- tained afterwards by his son Henry, His first edition, based upon colla- tions of MSS. in the Royal Library at Paris with the Complutensian text, appeared in 1546; another in 1549. A third, in 1550, was on a larger scale, and gave for the first time — thus marking an epoch in the progress of textual criticism — a systematic collection of various readings to the number of 2,194. A fourth edition, published in 1557 at Geneva, and therefore intended primarily, we may believe, for the use of the pastors and students of the Reformed Church there, is re- markable as giving for the first time the present division into verses. The work of Henri Etienne went on, guided in 1556 by Beza, and the text, as re^-iscd by him (not very critically), was printed in suc- cessive editions in 1565, 1576, 1582, and 1598. The name of the great Reformer stamped the woi'k with a sanction which most Protestant students recognised. The editions were widely circulated in England, where as yet no Greek Testament had issued from the press ; and this and the earlier text of Etienne were probably in the hands of the translators of the Authorised Version. The house of Elze^dr, at Leyden, famous for the beauty of type and 18 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. the "diamond" editions which we now associate with the name, took np the work at the hegimiing of the seventeenth centnry, and a Greek Testament, almost perfect in typography, was issued in 1624, and another in 1633. Both were based, as far as the text was con- cerned, upon the later editions of Etienne and Beza, and in the pre- face to the latter the editor assured the reader that he coidd now rely on ha^dng an undisputed text [textum ah omnibus rcceptum). The boast was not without foundation, and it tended, for a time at least, to secure its own fulfilment. Most English editions in the seventeenth century reproduced it with hardly any varia- tion, and the Textns receptus, though no critic now receives it as a whole, still keeps its ground as a standard of comparison. We measure the value of MSS., for the most part, by the extent to which they diif er from or agree with it. The spirit that craves for accuracy as an element of truth was, however, still active in England, as elsewhere. The arrival of the Alexandrian MS. (see above) attracted the notice of scholars. They began to feel the importance of versions as bearing on the text, and in Bishop Walton's famous Polyglot Bible, the Syi^ac, Arabic, Persian, and iEthiopic versions were printed side by side with the text of Etienne, and various readings were given, though not very fully, from the Alexan- drian, the Cambridge, and fourteen other MSS . The work of collecting and comparing these and other materials was carried on for thirty years with unremitting ind^xstry by Dr. John Mill, Professor of Di-sdnity at Oxford, and in 1706 the labours of his life were crowned, just before his death, by the publication of an edition of the Greek Testament, in two folio volumes, which, while practically retaining the text of Etienne — i.e., the Textns receptus— contained a far larger mass of ma- terials, and a more thoroiigh ex- amination of their relative value than had ever been before attempted. The Prolegomena extended over 180 pages; the various readings were reckoned at 30,000. The shallow scepticism of the Free- thinkers of the time assumed that all grounds for certainty as to the contents of the New Testament writings had vanished. Timid and prejudiced theologians took up the cry that textual criticism was dan- gerous. It found, however, a suf- ficiently able apologist in Richard Bentley, Master of Trinity College, Cambridge. He urged with great power and success, in a pamphlet published under the pseudonym of Phileleuthe, us lipsiensis, in 1714, that truth had no need to fear truth ; that if the existence of the various readings is compatible with the Christian faith, the knowledge of their existence cannot be fatal to it ; that it \n as with the New Testa- ment, as with other ancient books, a help and not a hindrance, to have to edit from many MSS., and not from one only, which might chance to be aefective; that every fresh discovery of variations was, there- fore, a step to certainty ; and that the result had been to fix the range of possible uncertainty within such narrow limits that no single fact or doctrine of the religion of Christ was imperilled by it. Bentley him- self aspired to take a high place among the workers whom he thus defended, and in 1716 sketched out a plan for printing a revised Greek text, on principles which j)resented a singular approximation to those GEXEEAL INTEODUCTION. 19 that have since been acted on by Lachmann and Tregelles. He believed that it was possible to ascertain from the uncial MSS., the early versions, and the early- Fathers, what text was received in the tifth century, and was pre- pared to receive all later variations. Acting on those principles, he pro- posed to use the materials which Willi's indefatigable labours had collected. Bentley was, however, involved in personal troubles and disputes which hindered the accomplishment of his purpose, and for a long series of years the work was left to be carried on by the scholars of Ger- many, while English students were content to accept, with scarcely any inquiry, the text which was Imown as Mill's, but which practically hardly differed at all fr-om the Textus receptus. Among the former the most conspicuous was Bengel (173-4), whose essentially devout Commentary bore witness that cri- ticism did not necessarily lead to scepticism, that he was a verbal critic mainly because he believed in verbal inspiration. He was fol- lowed bv Griesbach (1774 — 1806), Scholz (1830—1836), and by Lach- mami (1831), who avowedly looked on himself as Bentley's disciple, working on his lines, and completing the work which he had left im- finished. The list culminates in Tischendorf, the labours of whose life in collating and publishing, often in facsumle, MSS. of the I highest value (amongst others, the Codex Ephraem) were crowned by the discovery, in 1859, of the Sinaitic MS. Two coiuitrymen of our own — Dr. S. P. Tregelles {d. 1876), and the Eev Dr. Scrivener — may claim a high place in the list of those who, with unshaken faith, have consecrated their lives to tho work of bringing the printed text of the Greek Testament to the greatest possible accuracy. Alford and Wordsworth, in their editions of the Greek Testament, though not professing to do more than use the materials collected by others, have yet done much to bring within \ the reach of all students the residts i of textual criticism. In Dr. Tre- I gelles's Introduction to the New ! Testament, Dr. Scrivener's Intro- ' ditction to Keiv Testament Criticism, ! and Mr. Hammond's Outlines of I Xeiv Testamemt Criticism, in the Clarendon Press Series, the student who %nshes to go more fully into the subject will find ample inf onna- tion. Of these Lachmann and Tre- j gelles are, perhaps, the boldest in setting aside the Textus receptus in i deference to the authority of the I imcial MSS. and the early Fathers ; j Scrivener and Wordsworth, and I more recently Mr. Maclellan, in maintaining the probability that the cursive MSS., upon which the Textus receptus was mainly based, though themselves of late date, may represent an ancient text of higher authority than that of the oldest existing imcials. III.— THE ENGLISH VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. I. The Earlier Versions.— Wherever men have believed in earnest that they had the ground- work of their faith in God mainly or wholly in a written record, it is natural that they should desire, if 20 NEW TESTAMENT IXTRODITCTIONS their religion has any life and energy, to have that book in the speech to -which they were horn, and in which they think. The religious life of oiu' early English or Anglo-Saxon forefathers, after their conversion by Augustine, was a deep and earnest life ; and as soon as schools and monasteries gave men the power to study the Scrip- tures in the Latin of the Vulgate translation, portions of them were translated into Anglo-Saxon. There were A'ersions of the Psalms in the eighth century. Bede, as in the well-known narrative of his scholar Cuthbert, died (a.d. 735) in the act of tinishing the last chapter of St. John's Gospel. Alfred prefixed a translation of the Ten Command- ments, and some other portions of Exodus, to his Code of Laws (a.d. 931). The Homilies of ^Ifric (fi^». A.D. 1005) must have made many passages of Scripture familiar to lay as well as clerical readers. In the tenth century the foiu' Gospels were translated; a little later the Pentateuch and other portions of the Old Testament. Most of these were made of necessity from the Vulgate, without reference to the originals. Hebrew was utterly un- known, and the knowledge of Greek which Theodore of Tarsus [ob. a.d. 690) brought with him to the See of Canterbury did not spread Here and there ordy, as in the case of Bede, who spent his life in the ^Monastery of Jarrow, founded by Benedict Biscop, do we find oxij traces of it, and even in him it hardly goes beyond the explanation here "and there of a few isolated terms. There are no signs that he had studied a single chapter of a Gospel in the Greek. It was na- tural when the Norman rule, in- troducing a higher culture thi'ough the medium of two languages, one of which was dead and the other foreign, repressed the spontaneous development of that which it had foimd in existence, that these ver- sions should drop into disuse, and be forgotten. At the best they were but tentative steps to a goal which was never reached. II. WyclifFe. — The stinings of spiritual and intellectual life in the thirteenth centiuy, mainly under the influence of the Fi-anciscan and Dominican Orders in the UniA'er- sities of Eiu'ope, led, in the first instance, to the development of a logical and metaphysical system of theology, of which the works of the great schoolmen Peter Lombard {ob. A.D. 11 64) and Thomas Aquinas {ob. A.D. 1274) fuiTiish the most complete examples. This was, for the most part, subservient to the great scheme c? a spiritual universal monarchy on the part cf the Bishop of Eome, which found its most prominent representatives in Inno- cent III. {oh. A.D. 1216) and Boni- face VIII. {oh. A.D. 1303). The teaching of Scripture was still for- mally the basis of that of the school- men, but it was Scripture as found in the Vulgate and commented on by the Fathers; and, practically, the comments and glosses of the doctors took the place of the text. Against this, whenever men foimd themselves on any ground, political or theological, opposed to Eome, there was, in due course, a natural reaction. Roger Bacon {ob. a.d. 1292), who certainly knew some Greek and a little Hebrew, is loud in his complaints of the corrupt state of the current text of the Vulgate, and of its defects as a translation. Devotional minds turned then, as always, to the GEXEEAL INTRODUCTION". 21 Psalms, as giving utterance at once to the passionate complaints and the fervent hopes of men in dark and troublous times; and three English versions of them belong to the first half of the fourteenth century. It was significant, as an indication of what was ripening for the future, that the first book of the New Testament to be translated into English should have been the Eevelation of St. John. The e%'ils of the time were gi-eat. Men's minds were agitated by wild Com- mimistic di'eams of a new social order, and by the false revelation of a so-called Everlasting Gospel, ascribed to the Abbot Joachim of Calabria {oh. a.d. 1201). It seemed to John AVycliffe, in a.d. 1356, that men would find the guidance which they needed in the Apocalypse, and with this accordingly he began. He soon formed, however, the wider plan of making the whole Bible accessible to his countrymen. It seemed to him, as John of Gaunt put it in a speech before the King's Council, a shameful thing that other nations, French, Gascons, and the Bohemians, who, in the person of the wife of Richard II. had supplied England with a queen, should have the Scriptures in their own tongue, and that Englishmen should not. The next step accordingly was a translation of the Gospels, with a commentary; and by 1380 there was a complete English New Testa- ment. A version of the Old Testa- ment was begun by Nicholas de Hereford, and earned on to the middle of the Book of Baruch, which then stood after Jeremiah, when, as is seen in the original MS. in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, his work was interrupted, probably by an ecclesiastical prosec ution, which first summoned him to London and then diTjve him into exile. Wycliffe, or some fellow-worker, finished it be- fore his death, in 1384. A few years afterwards it was carefully revised throughout by another dis- ciple, John Purvey, whose text is that commonly printed (as in For shall and Madden' s edition) as "Wycliffe's version. There is much that is touching in the history of the work thus accomplished, as Purv^ey describes it in his preface. It was hard to get at the true text of the Vulgate ; harder often to understand it. He felt that it was a task that required the consecration of all powers, "to live a clean life, and be full de^ out in prayer ; " but he laboured on in the belief that his toil would not be fruitless. " By this manner, with good lining and great travail, men may come to clear and true translating, and true understanding of Holy Writ, seem it never so hard at the begimiing." A work so begun and completed could hardly fail of success. It met a, great want, and in spite of aU the difficulty and cost of multiplying books by hand, and the active measures taken by Archbishop Arimdel, under Henry V. [oh. A.D. 1413), not fewer than 170 copies of the whole, or part, of one or other of the versions, most of them of the Revised text, are still extant. The greater part ap- pear to have been made between 1420 and 1450 ; nearly half of them being of a portable size, as if men desired to have them in daily use. The book was clearly in great de- mand, and though the " Lollardie," with which it was identified, was repressed by the strong arm of persecution, it doubtless helped to keep alive the spirit of religious freedom. Wycliif e's version did not profesa 22 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. to have "been made from the ori^nal, and it had, therefore, against it all the chances of error that belong to the translation of a translation. Thus, to coniine ourselves to a few instances from the New Testament, the " Pontifex," which stands for High Priest in Heb. ix. 11, 25, and elsewhere, is rendered by "Bishop ; " the "knowledge of salvation," in Luke i. 77, appears, as from the scicniia salutis of the Vulgate, trans- fonned into the " science of health" ; for "repent," in IStatt. iii. 2, we have " do ye penance " ; for " mys- tery," in Eph. V. 32, "sacrament." The " tillages " of the Gospels are turned into " castles " (Luke x. 38) ; the "soldiers" into "knights"; " pearls " into " margaiites " ; " un- learned men." into "idiots." III. Tyndale.— The work of giving an English Bible to the English people had to be done over again, in one sense, under happier conditions. Under the influence of the great Renaissance movement Greece "had risen from the grave," to modify a well-known saying, "with Plato in one hand for the scholars of Italy, but with the New Testament in the other for those of Germany and England." The printing-presses of all coimtiies were at work to miiltiply and trans- rait the labours of all scholars from one coiuitry to another. The re- sults, as far as the printed text of the Greek Testament is concerned, haA'e already been described above. An impulse had been given to the study of Greek at Oxford by GrocjTi (ol). A.T>. 1519) and Linacre [ob. a.d. 1524), who went to Italy to learn what was almost as a newly-dis- covered language, and was carried forward by Colet, the foimder of St. Paul's School (o*. a.d. 1419), and Sir Thomas More {ob. a.d. 1525), who, as a la^Tnan, gave lectures in one of the city churches on the Epistle to the Romans. Lexicons and grammars began to issiie from the press. Erasmus, the great scholar of the age, studied Greek at Oxford, and taught it at Cam- bridge from 1509 to 1524. It was in vain that the adherents of the old scholastic methods urged that the study of Greek would probably make men Pagan, and that those who read Hebrew were in danger of becoming Jews ; in vain that the editors of tlie Complutensian Bible compared the position of the Vulgate version of the Old Testa- ment with the Hebrew text on one side, and the LXX. Aversion on the other, to that of Christ crucified between the two thieves. Coltvu-e asserted the claim of classical studies to be the li^er(e hiana/iiores of edu- cation, and .nen were not slow to discover that A\dthout a true and thorough "humanity," in that sense of the word, there could be no true theology. Foremost in the gi*eat work which, carried on step by step through nearly a century, ended in 1611 in what is known as the Authorised Version,* stands the * The name seems to have been attached to it from tlie fact that it was unflt-rtalcen at James I.'s command, and dedicaterl to him, and that the title-page spoke of it as " appointed to be read in churches." Historians have, however, sought in vain fur any Act of Parliauient, Vote of Con- vocation, Orderin Council, or other olhcial document so appointing it. Practically, it has tacitly received its sanction from being exclusively printed by the King's printers and the University presses ; but simi^ly as a matter of strift law, the Act of Parliament which authorised the Great Bible remains unrepealed, and that is, therefore, still the only version authorised by law. GENERAL INTRODUCTIOX. 23 n-iine of WiUiam Tyndale. Bom in 1484, studying at Oxford under Grocyn and Linacre, carrying on his Greek studies under Erasmus at Cambridge in 1510, attracted by the new theology of Luther, as he had been before by the new learning of his great riyal, he formed the purpose of tm-ning laymen into theologians. Himself a "priest," and more deyout and thoughtful than his fellows, he was among the fii"st — perhaps in England quite the first — to realise the truth, that the work of the ministers of the Church was to be not priests, in the scholastic and mediaeyal sense, but -preachers of the Word. At the age of thirty- six he declared his purpose, "if God spared his life, to make a boy that driveth a plough to know more of Scripture than the Po^De ; " and from that purpose, through all the changes and chances of his life, he never swerved, even for a single hour. The main features of that life can be stated here but very biiefly. Bent upon his work, and knowing that Timstal, Bishop of London, stood high in repute among the scholars and humanists of the time, he came up to London, in 1522, in the hope of enlisting his support, and presented himself with a trans- lation of one of the Orations of Isocrates as a proof of his com- petency. He was met with delays and rebuffs, and found that he was not likely to gain help from him or any other prelate. He was forced to the conclusion that, "not only was there no room in my Lord oi London's palace to translate the New Testament, but also there was no place to do it in all England." He accordingly went abroad, first to Hamburg, and beiran with versions of St. Matthew and St. Mark with marginal notes ; thence to Colog-ne, where his work was interrupted by one of Luther's bitterest opponents, CochUeus ; thence, with his printed sheets, to Worms, four years after Luther's famous entry into that city. From its presses came two editions — one in octavo, the other in quarto — in 1525. They appeared without his name. Six thousand copies were struck off. They soon found theii- way to England. Their anival had been preceded by rumours which roused an eager desii-e in some, fear and a hot enmity in others. The King and the Bishops ordered it to be seized, or bought up, and burnt. Timstal preached against it at St. Paul's Cross, de- claring that he had found 2,000 errors in it. Sir T. More wrote against it as being both heretical and imscholarly. The Reforming spiiit was, however, gaining groimd. Tyndale defended him- self successfidly against More's criticisms. The books were eagerly read by students and tutors at Oxford and Cambridge. They were given by friend to friend as precious treasures. The very jjro- cess of buying up created a demand which was met by a fresh supply. The work of destruction was, how- ever, thorough. Of six editions, three genuine, three surreptitious, there were probably 15,000 copies printed. Of these, in strange con- trast to the 170 MS. copies of Wycliff'e's version, some four or five only, the greater part incom- plete and mutilated, have come down to our own time. ]\Ieanwhile Tpidale went on with his work. The prominence of the Jewish element at Worms, the synagogue of which is said to 24 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. be one of the oldest in Western Europe, may have helped him to a more accm-ate knowledge of He- brew. Jewish editions of the Old Testament had been published by Bomberg- in 1518 and 1523. A new Latin translation from the Hebrew text was published by Pag-ninus in 1 5 2 7 . Luther' s Penta- teuch had appeared in 1523; the Historical Books and HagiogTapha in 1524. A like work was carried on simultaneously by Zwingli and other scholars at Zurich. Tyndale was not slow to follow, and the Pentateuch appeared in 1530 ; Jonah in 1534. The latter year witnessed the publication of a re- vised edition of his New Testa- m.ent, of three unauthorised editions at Antwerp, with many alterations of which Tyndale did not approve, by George Joye, an over-zealous and not very scrupulous disciple. In Tyndale's own edition short marginal notes were added, the beginnings and endings of the lessons read in Church were marked, and prologues prefixed to the several books. The state of things in England had been altered by the King's divorce and mar- riage with Anne Boleyn, and in return for her good offices on be- half of an Antwerp merchant who had suffered in his cause Tpidale jDresented her with a copy (now in the British Museum) printed upon vellum and illuminated. The in- scription Anna liegina Anglic, in faded red letters, may still be traced on the gilded edges. So far Tyndale lived to see of the travail of his soul ; but his work was nearly over. The enemies of the Reformation in Flanders hunted him down under the persecuting edicts of Charles V., and in October, 1536, he suffered at the stake at Vilvorde, near Brussels, breathing the prayer of longing hope, as seeing far off the Pisgah vision of a good land on which he was not himself to enter, "Lord, open the King of England's eyes." So passed to his rest the truest and noblest worker in the English Reformation. The labours of Tyndale as a translator of the New Testament were important, not only because he prepared the way as a pioneer for those who were to follow him, but because, to a great extent, he left a mark upon the work which endures to this day. The feeling that his task was to make a Bible for the English people kept him fi-om the use of pedantic "ink-horn" terms belonging to the vocabulary of scholars, and varying with their fashions, and gave him an almost instinctive tact in choosing the phrases and turn of sj)eech which happily have not yet disappeared, and, we may add, are not likely to disappear, in any process of revi- sion. And this, we must remember required at the time a courage which we cannot easily estimate. The dominant feeling of the eccle- siastics was against translating the Bible at all. Those who did not oj)enly oppose it, such as Gardiner and those who acted with him, surrounded their consent with reser- vations of all kinds. The dignity of Scripture was to be secured by keeping its language as distinct as possible from that of the common people. Time-honom-ed and eccle- siastical words, on which the Church had, as it were, stamped its seal, were to be used as largely as j)ossible. Tyndale's leading idea was precisely the opposite of this. He felt that the scholastic theology of the time had so suiTounded the GEXEPtAL INTRODUCTION". 25 language of Chxist and His Apostles with new associations, that their meaning, or what had been called their connotation, was practically altered for the worse ; and it seemed to him that the time was come for la}-ing the axe to the root of the tree by the excliision of the terms which had thus been spoilt for common use. And at first the work was done with a thorough- ness in which subsequent ^e^•isers have not had the courage to follow him. " Congi'egation " imiformly instead of "church," "favour" often instead of "grace," "mys- tery" instead of "sacrament," "overseer" instead of "bishop," "repentance" instead of "pen- ance," "elder" instead of "priest," "love" instead of "chaiity," "ac- knowledge" instead of "confess." It was just this feature in Tyn- dale's work that roused the keenest indignation on the part of the Bishops of the English Church, and even of scholars like Sir Thomas More; and made Eidley (the uncle of the martyr) say of it, not untruely as appearance went, that Ms translation was "accursed and damned (condemned) by the consent of the j>relates and learned men." If we wish to picture to ourselves what might have been the result had Tyndale acted as the " prelates and learned men " would have had him act, we may see it in the Rhemish New Testament. If we ask what shape his translation might have taken had he been only a scholar and a ciitic, we may find the answer in the fragments of a translation left by Sir John Cheke, the great scholar, who first — " . . . . tauglit Cambridge and KiDg Edward Giet:k." The fii-st process would have given us " azymes " for " unleavened bread" ; " evacuated from CTirist" (Gal. V. 4); "the justifications of our Lord" (Luke i. 6); "long- animity " (Rom. ii. 4) ; " sicer " for " strong drink " (Luke i. 15) ; "replenished with fear" (Luke v. 26) ; " the specious gate of the Temple " (Acts. iii. 2) ; "a greater host " (Heb. xi. 4) ; " contemning confusion " (Heb. xii. 2) ; the " consummator, Jesus" {Ibid.) — and so on through a thousand in- stances. The secrjnd, with a pedan- try of a different kind, would have given "biword" for "parable," "frosent" for "apostle," "fi-esh- men ' ' for ' * proselyt es, " " uprising ' ' for " resmTection," " gainbii-th," for "regeneration," and the like. Instead of such monstrosities, we have a version which represents as accurate a scholarship as was pos- sible under the then conditions of culture, and the faithfulness of one A\'ho felt that what he was dealing with contained God's messfige to mankind, and never consciously tampered with its meaning. Two testimonies to its value may well close this brief accoimt of it. One is fi'om the jjen of the most emi- nent of modem English historians. "The peculiar genius — if such a word may be permitted — which breathes through it, the mingled tenderness and simplicity, the Saxon simplicity, the pretematui-al grandeur, unequalled, unapproached, in the attempted imj^rovements of modem scholars— all are here— and bear the impress of the mind of one man, "William T^Tidale " (Fronde, Histoiy of England, iii. p. 84). The other comes from one who seems to have felt keenly the change which he found when he had to quote the phrases of the lihemish version, almost, as it were, to think in it, 26 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. instead of those with which his youth and manhood had been familiar, and after which he now sighs with the vain wish that, heing ^hat it is, it was with Rome and not against her. "It was surely a most lucky accident for the yoimg religion that, while the English language was coming to the birth with its special attributes of nerve, simplicity, and vigour, at its very fh'st breathings Protestant- ism Avas at hand to form it upon its own theological patois, and to educate it as the mouth-piece of its tradition. So, however, it was to be, and soon, ' As in tliis bad world below Holiest things find vilest using,' the new religion employed the new language for its purposes, in a great undertaking — the translation of its own Bible; a work which, by the purity of its diction and the strength and harmony of its Gtyle, has deservedly become the very model of good English, and the standard of the language to all f utm-e times " (J. H. Newman, Lectures on the Present Position of Catholics, p. 66). IV. Tyndale's Successors. — In this, as in the history of most great enterj)rises, it was true that " one soweth, and another reapeth." Other men, with less heroism and less genius, entered into the labours of the martyr of Yilvorde. The limits of this Introduction exclude a full account of the work of his successors. It will be enough to note briefly the stages through which it j)assed till it reached what was to be its close and consumma- tion for more than two centuries and a half. (1) First in order came Cover- dale (bom 1485, died 1565), after- wards, under Elizabeth, Bishop of Exeter. In him we fijid a diligent and faithful worker, and we owe to him the fii-st complete translation of the whole Bible, published in 1535. Partly perhaps from his inferior scholarship, partly from a wish to conciliate at once the fol- lowers of Luther and those who had been accustomed to the Vul- gate, he did not even profess to ha^e had recourse to the original text, but was content with an- nomicing on his title-page that it was " truly translated out of the Douche" {i.e., German) "and Latyn." Tyndale for the New Testament, Luther's version and the Zurich Bible of Zwingli for the Old, were his chief authorities ; but he was less consistent than Tjnidale, and deliberately defends his inconsistency, in not excluding the worJs that had become asso- ciated with scholastic definitions. He uses, e.ff., " penance " as well as "repentance," "priest" as well as "elder," "charity" as well as " love." " Congregation," how- ever, keeps its ground as against " church." Reprints of this ver- sion appeared in 1536 and 1537, and even in 1 5 5 and 1 5 5 3 . Among smaller facts comiected with this version we may note that the Latin Biblia, and not Bible, aj^pears on the title-page ; that the Hebrew letters fonning the name of Jihovah are also there ; and that the alpha- betic elegies of the Book of La- mentations have the Hebrew letters attached to their respective verses. There are no notes, no chapter headings, nor division into A-erses. (2) Matthew's Bible apiieared in 1537, and is memorable as having been dedicated to Henry VIII. and his Queen, Jane Sey- GENEKAL INTRODUCTION. 27 mour, and set forth "with the King's most gracyous license." AVho the Thomas JMatthew was by whom the book purports to be translated, no one knows. There was no scholar of repute of that name ; and though his name is attached to the dedication, the ex- hortation to the study of Scriptm-e has the initials J. R. as a signa- ture. Possibly, Thomas IMatthew was, as some have supposed, a simi^le alias assumed by John Rogers, afterwards the proto- mart;^T: of the Marian persecution, in order that the name of one who was known to have been a friend of Tjmdale might not appear with an midue prominence on the title-jDage. Possibly he was a lay- man, who made himself responsible for the cost of printing. The book was printed in large folio. Thx'ough Cromwell's influence, which was then in the ascendant, backed by Cranmer's — partly, also, we may conjecture, through Matthew's name appearing as the translator instead of Rogers's — the King's license was obtained without diffi- culty. The j)ublishers (Grafton and Whitchm-ch) were bold enough to ask for a monoply for five years ; to suggest that " every curate " {i.e., parish priest) should be com- pelled to buy one copy, and every abbey six. As a literary work, Rogers's translation is of a com- posite character. The Pentateuch and New Testament are reprinted from Tyndale ; the Books of the Old Testament, from Ezra to IMalachi, from Coverdale. From Joshua to 2 Chronicles we have a new translation. The most notice- able feature of the book was found in the marginal notes, which made a kind of ruiming commentary on the text, and which were, for the most part, of a strong Lutheran character. It is scarcely conceiv- able that the King could have read, with any care, the book to which he thus gave his sanction. As it was, a copy was ordered to be set up in every parish church, and Matthew's Bible was the first authorised ^'ersion. (3) It was, perhaps, in part owing to the antagonism which Rogers's notes naturally roiised that it was scarcely published before another "S'ersion was begun imder Cromwell's authority. Coverdale was called on to undertake the task of revision, and he and Bonner (names strangely joined) were for a time acting together in getting it printed at Paris, and transmit- ting the sheets to London. The notes disappeared, and a marginal hand took their place, indicating the " dark places " that required the comment which CoA'erdale was not allowed to write. I'his also came out in an extra-sized folio, and is known, therefore, as the Great Bible. It had no dedica- tion, but there was an elaborate frontispiece title-page, engraved, probably, from Holbein's designs, representing the King on his throne, giving the Verhum Dei to Cromwell and Cranmer, while they in their turn distribute it to clergy and laity. It aj^peared with a preface by Cranmer in 1540, and a copy of j it was ordered to be set up in every ! church. Other editions followed, i two in the same year, and three iji i 1541. In the third and fifth of ' these two new names appear on the I title-page (the first two editions i having been issued without the I name of any translator) as having ! revised the work — Tunstal, then Bishop of Durham; and Heath, Bishop of Rochester. The impulse 28 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. which T^'iidale had given had told even on tho man to whom he had applied in vain for support at the; outset of his career, and, as hy the strang-o irony of history, ho who had been foremost in condemning- Tyndale's version as dangerous, full of eiTors, and heretical, was now found giving tho sanction of his name to a translation which was at least largely based on that version. It is significant that under this editorship even the maigiiial "hands" of Coverdalc's inifultilled intentions disappeared, and the Bishops were thus com- mitted to what twenty years be- fore they had shrunk from and den()unc(;d : the policy of giving to the English poo])le a Bible in their own tongue without note or com- ment. It was Avell that all this was done when it was, Cromwell's fall, in July, 1540, was followed by a time of reaction, in which Gardiner and Bonner gained the ascendant. They did not, how- ever, A'cnturc to recall the step that had thus been taken, and the Great Bible, chained to its desk in every church, and allowed, for some years at least, to be r(\ad out of service-time to any who choose to listen, did a work which not even the king's proclamations against discussing its teaching, nor Bon- ner's threats to withdraw the Bibles unless the discussions were sup- pressed, were able to imdo. It remained the authorised version, recognised in the Ijiturgical Ke- foi-ms under Edward VI., and from it accordingly were taken the Psalms which appeared in the Prayer Books of that reign, and have kept their place through all revisions to the i)resent day. Tlu! version, as a whole, was based upon Coverdale and Tyndale, with alterations made more or less \mder the influence of the Latin versions of Erasmus for the New Testament and the Vulgate for the Old. All readers of tho English Prayer Book Psalms have accordingly the means of comparing this translation with that of the Authorised Version ;* and, probably, the general im- pression is in favour of the Prayer Book version as bcdng, though less accurate, more rhythmical and hai-monious in its turns of phrase- ology ; often with a felicitous ring in its cadences, that seems, even when the l^salms are road, to cany with it a music of its own. A certain ostentation of learning? is seen in the ai)poarancc of the He- brew names of books, such, e.g., as liereschilh (Genesis), Vellc Hhrmoth (Exodus). On the other hand, by what was obviously the hasty sub- stitution of what was thought a moi'o r>^spectful term than Apo- crypha, tho books which arc now classed under that head are said to be "called Jlagiographa^^ (t.<;., "sacred writings "), because they " were read in secret and apaii." (4) Nearly contemporaneous with tho Great Bible — issuing from tho press, indeed, before it — anoth(;r translation was published in Ijon- d;round found the acceptance which is indicated by two editions, folio and (iiiarto, of the whole liible, and two, quarto and octavo, of the New Testament, in the same year, followed by a snbseqiient reprint. It never oc- cupied, however, any position of authority, nor had it any traceable influence on subsequent versions. It deserves to be noted, however — as if each translation was to have something specially memorable with it — as an instance of a lajinan's scholarship and devotion, of the assertion of a layman's right to translate, publish, comment on, the Sacred Books. The work which Tavcrner had done in this way was so far recognised that in the reign of Edward VI. he received a special license to preach, and perfonned his office with an almost ostenta- tious disregard of conventional rules of costume, preaching, not in the dress of his uni^•ersity degree, but in velvet hat, damask gown, gold chain, and sword. (5) The Gkneva Bible. The last five years of the reign of Tlenry VIII. wevG conspicuously a time of reaction, but it kept, as has been said, within limits. The old horror of Tyndale's name revived, and all books bearing his name were or- dered to be destroyed. The notes in all editions that had them— i.e., Matthew's and Tavemer's — were to be erased. No women , except those of noble and gentle birth, no men below what we should call the njiper middle-class, were to read the Bible, publicly or privately, to others, or by themselves. Coverdale's New Testament was proscribed, as well as Tyndale's, and this involved in most instances the destruction of the whole Bible that bore his name. Gardiner proposed that a translation shoidd be made by the Bishops (Tunstal and Heath now dis;l^•owing the work of rt^vision for wiiieh the title-page of the Great BihU^^made them responsilile), and urged the retention in the original Latin of every ecclesiastical and theological term, and even of others, such as oriois, siinpl(Z, ft/ninniis, in which he seemed to see a peculiar and untranslatable force. That project happily fell through. The matter was discussed in Convocation, and referred to the iniiversities, but nothing more was done. The Great Bible kept its position as the authorised translation. Under Edward VI. the attention of Cranmer and the other reforming Bishops was occupied with the more urgent work of liturgical reforma- tion, and though many reprints of both Bibles and New Testaments issued from the press, and were eagerly purchased, nothing was done towards a new revision, beyond the appointment of two foreign re- formers, Fagius and Buccr, to pro- fessorships at Cambridge, with a view to their nndertaking such a work. The former was to take the Old Testament, the latter the New. They were to write notes on dark and obscure places, and reconcile those that seemed repugnant to each other. Their work was hindered by illness, and the accession of Mary, in 1553, put a stop to this or any like enterprise. The work was, however, done for England, though not in England, and in 1557, the last year of Mary's reign, a New Testament with copious notes was printed at Geneva, with an introductory epistle by 30 NEW TESTAIVIENT INTRODUCTIONS. Cahon. The work appeared anony- mously, "but it was probably by WTiittingham, one of the English refugees, who had man^ied Calvin's sister. For the first time in the history of the English Bible the chapters were di^ided into verses, after the manner with which we are familiar, and so the facility of reference and verifying quota- tions was enormously increased. The example of such a division had been set, as stated above (p. 17), in the Greek Testament published by Stephens (or Etienne) in 1551 ; but there the verses were only noted in the margin, as is done, for example, in the Oxford reprint of Mill's Greek Testament. It was also the first translation printed in Roman type, and so presenting a clearer and easier page to the reader. The work was earned on by "WTiitting- ham, Coverdale, and others, after the accession of Elizabeth, for two years, and the whole Bible was published in 1560. Of all English versions before that of 1611, it was by far the most popvdar. Size, price, type, notes, division into verses, made it for more than half a century the household Bible of the English people. In most of the editions after 1578 it was ac- companied by a useful Bible Dic- tionary, It was found in every family. It was the text-book of every student. It came in oppor- tmiely to fill up the gap which had been caused by the wholesale de- struction of Bibles in the later years of Henry VIII. and during the whole reign of Mary. It was only slowly displaced by that which we now know as the Authorised Version — several editions being- printed after 1611— and from one point of view it may be questioned whether there was not loss as well as gain in the displacement. The presence of notes, even if they were, like those of the Geneva Bible, somewhat over-dogmatic and con- troversial in their tone, was yet at once an incentive and a help to a thoughtful study of Scripture. The reader could find some answer — often a clear and intelligent answer — to the questions that perplexed him, and was not tempted, as a Bible without note or comment tempts men, to a mechanical and perfunctory perusal. For good or for e-\il, and it is believed that the former greatly predominated, it was the Geneva version that gave birth to the great Puritan pariy, and sustained it through its long conflict in the reigns of Elizabeth and James. So far as the religion of the peasantry of Scotland has been stamped with a more intelligent and thoughtfii character than that of the same class in England, the secret may be found in the more enduring influence of this version among them. Among its other distinctive features it may be noted (1) that it omitted the name of St. Paul in the title of the Epistle to the He- brews, and left the authorship an open question, and (2) thatit avowed the principle of putting words not in the original in italics. One of the English editions of this version is that commonly known as the "Breeches Bible," from its use of that word instead of " aprons " in Gen. iii. 7. As compared with the Great Bible, the Geneva Aversion shows a careful work of comparison and roAdsion. In the Old Testament the re^-isers were helped both by the Latin and the French traixslations of foreign Protestant scholars, especially by the Latin New Testament of Theo- GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 81 dore Beza, and by the notes attached to it. Beza's scholarship was ahove the level of that of most of his contem- poraries, and in many instances the corrections which were introduced on his authority in the Geneva version have heen recognised by later re-sisers, and have found their place in the Authorised Version. On the other hand, he was some- what over-bold in dealing ^^•ith the Greek text of the New Testament, substituting conjecture for the pa- tient work of laborious criticism ; and in this lespect his influence was mischievous. On the whole, however, the work was well and faithfully done, and was so far a gTcat step forward to the consum- mation in which the English people were to rest for more than two centuiies and a half. (6) The Bishops' Bible. The popularity of the Geneva version, its acknowledged superiority to the Great Bible, which was then the authorised version of the Church of England, coupled perhaps with a slight feeling of alarm at the boldness of the marginal notes, led Archbishop Parker, about 1563 — though he had forwarded the re- publication of that version in Eng- land — to imdertake the work of re\'ision, by committing the several books of Scripture to individual scholars or groups of scholars. Many of these (Sandys, Guest, Hame, Grindal, and others) were Bishops, and when the book ap- peared, in 1568, it soon became known by the title which now attaches to it, of the Bishops' Bible. It was published, like most of the Bibles intended for use in church, in a stately folio. It has no dedi- cation, but a portrait of Elizabeth appears on the engTaved title-page, and others of Leicester andBurleish appear, with strange, almost ludic- rous, inappropriateness, before the Book of Joshua and the Psalms. It does not appear to have distinctly received the Queen's sanction, but a vote of Con vocation ordered copies to be bought by every Archbishop and Bishop, and placed in his haU or dining-room, for the convenience of strangers, by all cathedrals, and, as far as possible, by all churches. Fresh issues, more or less re^-ised, appeared in 1575 and 1578. The Bishops' Bible is memorable as to a certain extent fulfilling ("over- dale's intention, which had been adjourned sine die by the successive editors of the Great Bible, and for the first and last time there was thus a quasi-authorised commentary on the whole Bible. It aimed, too, more than most previous -s-ersions, at reproducing the exact spelling of Hebrew names, as, e.ff., in giving Izhak for Isaac, and affixing the final u to names like Hezekiahu, Josiahu, and the like. It classified the books both of the Old and New Testament as legal, historical, sa- piential, and prophetic. Passages were marked to be omitted when the chapters were read as the lessons for the day. In the edition of 1572 there was, for the first time, a map of Palestine, \\ith degi'ees of lati- tude and longitude; and elaborate genealogical tables were prefixed to it. The judgment of most scholars is unfavourable to this version of the Old Testament, but the New shows considerable scholarship, canydng on its work of re^dsion at each successive issue. (7) The Rhemish Version of the New Testament, followed by the DouAY Version of the Old, was intended partly to refute the charge that the Church of Rome was op- posed altogether to the work of 32 NEW TESTA^'.TENT INTRODUCTIONS. translation, partly to show that she had scholars who were not afraid to challenge comparison with those of the RefoiTaed Churches. It appeared at Rheims in 1582, and had coj)ioiis notes, mostly of a con- troversial character. It was just such a version as Gardiner would have welcomed, based avowedly on the Vnlgate as more authoritative than the Greek, and on the text of the Vulgate that had been stamped by Clement YIII. with Papal sanc- tion, retaining, as far as j)0ssible, all technical and theological terms, such as depositum (1 Tim. \i. 20 j, exinanited (Phil. ii. 7), penance, chalice, priest (for "elder"), host (for "sacrifice"), advent (for "com- ing"), coinquination (2 Peter ii. 13), peregrination (1 Pet.i. 17), prepuce, azymes, and the like. In many cases, but natm-ally more in the Old Testament than the New, they were content to rest in a rendering which had simply no meaning at all. Two specimens may be suf- ficient to show to what extent stones were oifered to English Catholics instead of bread. Eph. vi. 12. "Onr wrestling is . . . against princes and potentates, against the rec- tors of this world of dark- ness, against the spirituals of wickedness in the celes- tials." Heb. xiii. 16. "Beneficence and commimication do not for- get, for with such hosts God is premerited." In not a few cases, however, the words of Latia use which were thus introduced had become current ia the language of English religious writers, and a list of considerable length might be made of words which the revisers under James I. were not afraid to take from the Rhemish Testament ia place of those which were found in the Bishops' Bible or the Geneva version. Among these we may note " charity " for "love "in 1 Cor. xiii., "church" for " congTCgation " in Matt, xrv'i. 18, xviii. 17. Y. The Authorised Version. The position of the Church of England on the accession of James I. in 1603, in relation to the trans- lations of Scripture then current, presented two conflicting currents of feeling. On the one hand, the Bishops' Bible occupied the position of authority. On the other, that of Geneva had gained a stronger hold on the affections- of the English peoj)le,* and to a large extent of the English clergy also. The Puritan party wished to dislodge the Bishops' Bible from its pre-eminence, and to make way for one more after the pattern of Geneva. The King and the Coiirt divines disliked the bolder tone of many of the notes of the latter version. Some few per- haps of the school afterwards de- veloped by Laud and Montagu on the one side, by Falkland and Chil- lingworth on the other, fretted under the yoke of the Calvinistic dogmat- ism which pervaded both. Accord- ingly when the Puritan petition, known, fi'om the supposed number of signatures, as "millenary," led to the Hampton Court Conference, the campaign was opened by Dr. Reynolds, President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, who, urging some special faults in the Bishops' * Of the Bisliops' Bible there were thirteen editions in folio, six in quarto, and only one in octavo. Of the Geneva version, 156S and 1011, there were sixteen in octavo, flfty-two in quarto, eighteen in folio. — Westcott, History of the English Bible, p. 149. GENERAL INTKODUCTIOIS^. 33 Bible (the passages selected, Gal. iv. 25, Pss. cv. 28, c%i. 30, were, it must be said, singularly unimpor- tant) pleaded for a new re^dsion. Bancroft, Bishop of London, made the somewhat pee^-ish answer "that if eveiy man's humour were to be followed, there would be no end of translating." The King, however, interposed. He saw in the task of re\dsion just the kind of work which met his tastes as a scholar. He saw in it also an opportunity for getting rid of the obnoxious Geneva Commentary. It was settled then and there, Bancroft withdrawing his opposition on this concession, that the forthcoming version should be issued As-ithout note or comment. Fifty-four scholars were selected (only forty-seven, however, are named) probably by the bishops who had most influence with the King, and arranged in six groups, to each of which a given portion of ihc Bible was assigned. Compara- tively few of the names on this list have now any special interest for the general English reader. Of those who are still remembered, we may name Andrewes, afterwards Bishop of Winchester ; Abbot, after- wards Archbishop of Canterbury; Overall, the author of the latter part of the Church Catechism ; Saravia, the friend of Hooker ; Sir Henry SaAdle, famous as the editor of Chrj'sostom ; Reynolds, who had, as we have seen, been the first to urge re-sasion. The king recom- mended the translators to the pa- tronage of the bishops, and invited cathedrals to contribute to the ex- penses of the work. As far as can be traced, the labour was, from first j to last, like that of the recent re- visers of the Authorised A'^crsion, a | labour of love, without payment, j or hope of payment, beyond the i 3 occasional hospitality of this or that college, which might, perhaps, oif er free quarters to a company that included one of its own members. After nearly three years of laboiu' the new Bible api)eared in 1611. It bore, as oiu" Bibles still bear, on its title-page, the claim to be "newly translated out of the original tongue ; and with the former translations diligently compared and revised," and to be "appointed to be read in churches." The latter announce- ment, confirmed as it has been by general acceptance, has led to the title of the "Authorised Ver- sion," which has since commonly attached to it. Singularly enough, however, there is nothing, as has been said above (note, p. 22), but the printer's title-page as the war- rant for this assumption of authority. A fi'csh revision was talked of imder the Long Parliament, lGo3, and a committrc! of scholars api)oiiited in 1656. They mot at the house of Lord Keeper AVhitelock, and the list included the names of Walton, the editor of the great Polyglot Bible, and Cudworth, the famous metaphysician, but nothing came of the Conference. Thej^rinciples on which the trans- lators were to act were definitely laid down for them in fifteen rules, probablv drawn up under Bancroft's direction: (1) The Bishops' Bible was to be taken as a basis, and altered as little as possible. (2) Xames of prophets and others were to be retained in their common form. This was directed against the plan which had been adopted in the Bishops' Bible. (3) The old ecclesiastical words were to be kept. "Church" was to be used instead of " congTcgation." This was against Tyndale aud lh(j versions that had followed him, with special 'U NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. reference to the Genevan. (4) Weight was to he given, where a word had different senses, to the Riithority of the ancient Fathers. (5) The received division of chapters was to he altered not at all, or as little as might he. (6) There were to he no marginal notes, expect such as were pm-ely verhal, alter- native renderings, and the like. (7) Marginal references should he given at discretion. The next six rules prescrihed the details of the work : the revision by one company of the work of another, and the like. The 14th pointed to Tyn- dale's translation, Matthew's Cover- dale's, Whitchui-ch's (the Great Bible), and the Geneva version, as to be followed where it was thought desirable. In their preface, written by Dr. Miles Smith — a far more interesting docmnent than the dedication which we find in all our Bibles — some further rules of action are stated as having guided them. They con- trast their careful work, extending through three years or more, with the seventy-two days of the legend of the Septuagint. They speak re- spectfully of previous English ver- sions. They profess to have con- sulted both ancient and modern translations : Chaldee, Hebrew, Sy- rian, Greek, Latin, Spanish, French (probably the Geneva version), Italian (probably Diodati's), German (certainly Luther's). They defend their practice of ^s^arying the ren- derings of Hebrew or Greek words, partly on the legitimate groimd that one English word will not always express the different mean- ings of the same word in the original, partly on the somewhat fantastic plea of fairness, that as many English words as possible might have the honour of being- admitted to the sacred volume. A careful comparison shows that in the New Testament their chief standards of comparison were Beza's, the German, and even the lihemish ^^ersion, from the last of Avhich, as stated above, they adopted many words and phrases,* and with which the direction to retain the old ec- clesiastical terms, at times brought them into close agreement. The ;:i-eneral acceptance which the Au- thorised Version met with, both from scholars and the great mass of readers, may fairly be admitted as evidence that the work was done carefully and well. The revisers were never satisfied, as those of Rheims or Douay sometimes were, with an absolutely unmeaning trans- lation. They a-\^oided archaisms to the best of their power, and with equal care avoided the "iuk-horn terms" of a pedantic scholarship. They folk wed the earlier English versions in the majestic simplicity which, as a rule, had characterised them from TjTidale onwards, and aimed, not misuccessf ully, at greater accuracy. Where they failed, it was chiefly through the circimi- stances under which they worked. In one respect their deliberate choice of a wrong method, in seeking j to A-ary the renderings of Greek or I Hebrew words as much, instead of ! as little, as i)ossible, has involved I them in many mistakes, leading to I a false emphasis or a false antithesis, I hindering the English reader from i seeing how one passage throws light upon another, and making the use of an English concordance of little or no value as a help to inter- pretation. For other defects they were, perhaps, less responsible. The text of the New Testament was as * Sec "Wc'itcott's History, p. 352. GEA'ERAL INTKODUCTION. 35 yet in an unsettled state, and Stephen's (or Etienne's) edition, which they took as their standard, was based on the later, not the earlier MSS. They had learnt Greek through Latin, and were thus led (1) through the comparative incompleteness of the Latin con- jugation to confound tenses of the Greek verhs, imperfect, aoiist, per- fect, pluperfect, which were really distinct; (2) through the absence of a Latin definite article, to pass over the force of the Greek article, or to exaggerate it into a demon- strative pronoun ; (3) through the imperfect analysis of the use of the Greek prepositions to give not un- frequently a sense, when the prepo- sition is used -with one case, which rightly belongs to it only when it is used with another. (4) The two centuries and a half which have passed since have natiu-ally rendered some words obsolete or obsolescent, have lowered or altered the mean- ings of others, and have enlarged the range of the English vocabulary so as to take in words which would be as legitimately at the disposal of the revisers now as any which were then in use were at the com- mand of the revisers of 1611. Mr. Aldis Wright's Blhle Word-Booli, and the papers by Canon Venables in the Bible Educator, on " Bible Words," may be consulted as au- thoiities on the subjects of which they treat. A few of the minor, but not un- important, details of the Authorised Version still remain to be noticed. (1) The two editions printed in .1611 were both in the Old English black letter. Roman type was used in the reprint of 1612. (2) All the editions contained the Apocrypha till 1629. (3) Printers, or the editors employed by printers, have from time to time modified, though without authority, the spoiling of the edition of 1611, so as to keep pace with the real or supposed im- provements of later usage. (4) The careful use of italics to indicate the use of words which, though not expressed in the original, were yet essential to the meaning, was, fi'om the outset, a special characteristic of the Authorised Version, This, too, has, from time to time, been modified by successive editors. The text printed in the present volume represents, in this respect, that of 1611, but the Cambridge edition of 1638 is said to be still more carefully edited. (5) The marginal readings and re- ferences of the edition of 1611 have in like manner been largely added to or varied by sulisequent editors, notably by Dr. Paris in the Cambridge edition of 1762, and Dr. Blayney, who superintended the Oxford edition of 1769. Use- fal as these are as suggesting possible alternative translations or the comparison of really parallel passages, they cannot be regarded as having the slightest claim to authority. j)roperly so called. Some few corrections of the version itself were also made by these or otha: editors, on theii- own responsibility, as, e.g., " about " for " above " in 2 Cor. xii. 12, "unto me" for " imder me " in Ps. xviii. 47. IMis- takes in printing have made some editions memorable — "-vinegar" for " vineyard " in Matt. xxi. 28 ; " not " omitted from the Seventh Commandment, in 1632; "right- eousness" (Rom. \i. 13), in 1653. (6) The marginal dates of the com- mon English Bibles, which first appear in Bishop Lloyd's Bible, in 1701, are also, it should be noted, though often helpful, altogether 36 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. without authority. They represent, as now printed, the chronology adopted by Archbishop Ussher, and are, like all such systems, open to correction, as research brings to light fuller or more authentic materials, or criticism corrects the conclusions of earlier scholars. In some cases, as, e.g., in assigning A.D. 60 to the Epistle of St. James, A.D, 96 to the Eerelation of St. John, A.D. 58 to the Epistle to the Galatians, the dates assigned assimie theories which many recent scholars have rejected. (7) The chapter- headings of oiu' printed Bibles have remained with but little alteration, but they, too, call for a careful re-sdsion. That the right of re- vision has been exercised, however, appears from the changes that have taken place in the heading of Ps. cxlix. from the form which it pre- sented in 1611, "The Psalmist exhorteth to praise God . . . for that power which He hath given to the Church to bind the consciences of men," to its present text, which omits the last six words. In many instances the headings assume, somewhat too decisively, the cha- racter of a commentary, rather than a summary. Thus, while Pss. x"\i., xxii., and Ixix. are dealt with in their piimaiy historical aspect, Pss. ii., xlv., xlvii., Ixxii., and ex. are referred explicitlv to "Christ's kingdom." "The Church" appears as the subject of Pss. IxxA-i., Ixxx., and IxxxA-ii., where it would have been histoii- cally truer to say Israel. Ps. cix. is referred to Judas as the object of its imprecations. The Song of Solomon receives throughout an elaborate allegorical interpretation. Isa. hii. is refeiTed specifically to " the scandal of the Cross," Isa. Ixi. to " the office of Christ," Mic. V. to " the birth and kingdom of Christ," and so on. Luke vii. as- sumes the identity of the " woman that was a sinner " with j\Iary Magdalene. In Acts \i. the Apostles are said to " appoint the office of deaconship to seven chosen men." In Acts XX. Paul is said to " cele- brate the Lord's Supper." Apart al- together from the question whether the interpretation in these and other like cases is or is not correct, it is clear that the headings go beyond the function which properly belongs to them, and trench upon the work of the commentator, which the re-sisers of 1611 deliberately re- noimced. That there was an ele- ment of loss in that renunciation, has been already stated, but wo may well believe that on the whole it has been well we have the Bible in its completeness, without the addition of any comments re- flecting the passing ecclesiastical or Calvinistic dogmatism character- istic of the early part of the scA'cn- teenth century, which would in all probability have been clothed, sooner or later, by popular aiid clerical feeling, with a fictitious authority, or even been invested by legal decisions, or Acts of Parliament, with a real one. It is well, in the long run, that every commentary on the whole or any part of Scripture should be sub- mitted freely to the right and the duty of private j udgment. GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 37 IV.— THE ORIGIN OF THE FIRST THREE GOSPELS. I. It is, of course, an important question whether we have in the four Gospels received hy the Chiueli as canonical the e^ddence of con- temporary writers — two of them claiming- to he eye-witnesses — or \siitings of a generation, or two generations, later, the after-growth of the second century, fathered upon authors whose names be- longed to the first. The question when the Gospels were ^vi-itten is, it may he admitted, one which can- not he answered precisely within a decade or so of years ; nor would it he right to overstate the argument by assei-ting that we have any evi- dence external to the New Testa- ment of the existence of the Gospels in their present form earlier than Papias {ob. a.d. 170), who names St. Matthew and St. ]\Iark, and Ire- na'us (a.d. 130—200) and TertuUian (a.d. 1 GO— 240), who name all four. The existence in a.d. 170 of a haimonised naiTative of the Gosj^el history of Tatian, known as the JJiatessaron {i.e., the Gospel as stated by the Four), and the men- tion of St. Luke in the MS. in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, knoAvn from the name of its first editor as the Muratorian Fragment (a.d. 150 — 190 ?), j)oint to the con- clusion that four Gospels beaiing the same names as those now re- ceived, and presimiably, till proof is given of the contrary, identical with them, were recogiiised and read publicly as authoritative docimaents in the middle of the second century. And, obviously, they occupied at that time a posi- tion of acknowledged superiority to all other like documents. Men inveiit reasons, more or less fan- tastic;, such as those which Irenauis gives [Cotitr. Hceres. iii. 11) — the analogy of the four elements, or the four winds— why there should be neither more nor less than four. It is scarcely too much to say that this reputation could hardly have been gained in less than half a century from the time when they first came to be generally known ; and so we are led to the conclusion that they must have been in ex- istence at a date not later than a.d. 100—120. II. An examination of the earliest Christian writings outside the canon of the New Testament is to some ex- tent disappointing. There are very few references to the Gospel nan-a- tives in the Epistles that bear the name of Clement, or Ignatius, or Barnabas. They assume the broad f)utlines of the Gospel history, the Crucifixion and Resiui-ection of Jesus as the Chiist. They contain echoes and fragmentary citations from the Sermon on the Mount, and other jjortions of oiu* Lord's ethical teaching which had most impressed themselves on the mind and conscience of His disciples; but it must be admitted that we could not infer from them that the writers had in their hands the Gospels as we have them. We may go further, and say that it is antecedently probable that their knowledge was more or less tradi- tional, and that the general accept- ance of the Gospels, and therefore, so far as their writings are con- cerned, even the existence of the NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Gospels, may have been of later date. On the other hand, it must be remembered that these letters are, in the strictest sense of the word, occasional, and not syste- matic. They are directed, each of them, to a special pm^pose, imder circumstances that did not natm-ally lead the writers to speak of the facts of the Gospel record — even of those of which, on any assumption, they must have had, at least, a traditional knowledge. III. A\^en we come to the writ- ings of Justin Martyr (a.d. 103 — 167), the case is altered. He, as ha-s-ing passed into the Chiu'ch of Christ from the schools of philo- sophy, was a man of wider culture than any Chi-istian writer since St. Paul. The cii-cimistances of his life led him iuto controversy with the Jews who questioned the claim of Jesus to be the Christ, and in his argument "svith them his references to the acts and words of Chiist are numerous and often of great length. It is true that he does not cite any Gospel by name, but mentions them generally as " the memoirs " or "records" that are "known as Gospels," and are read in the weekly meetings of the churches {Apol. i. 66), and that where he quotes fi'om these " memoirs " it is at times with such considerable variations of detail as regards their facts, and of expression as regards their teaching, that it has been urged by some ^^1iters — notably by the anonymous author of " Super- natm-al Religion" — that he prob- ably had in his hands some book other than any of the four which we now acknowledge. Against this it may be pleaded, however, that the habits of the age, and the special circumstances of Christian WTitei's, were uiifavo\rrable to accu- rate quotation. The Jewish Scrip- tures, in their Greek form, were collected into a volume, and could be bought in Alexandria, or perhaps in any great city, without difficulty ; but such Apostolical writings as those of which Justin speaks were scarcely likely to be multiplied by either the Jews or heathen scribes who supplied the stalls or shops of book- sellers ; nor is it probable that the Christian Chmch was at that time sufficiently organised to command booksellers of its owti. A treasured copy, in the hands of the bishop or elder of each Christian com- munity, read publicly at its meet- ings, was, we may well believe, in that early stage of the growth of the new society enough to meet its wants. The members of that society listened, and remembered and reproduced what they had heard, with the variations which, under such conditions, were in- evitable. And even if we were to admit, hypothetically, the con- clusion which has thus been drawn, the result would, after all, be neither more nor less than this — that there was in Justin's time a fifth Gospel in existence, agTceing in all material points with the four, or, at least, with three out of the four. To most men it would seem improbable that such a Gospel should have left no traces of its existence outside the quotations or references from which that exist- ence has been thus infen-ed, that it should have supplied the most scholarly of the early Christian writers with all his knowledge of the life and the teaching of the Christ, and then have vanished like a meteor. But if it did exist, then it would simply follow that we have, in the unknown Gospel sup- posed to be quoted by Justin, a GENERAL IXTRODUCTION. 39 fifth independent witness confinn- ing, at least in. substance, the records of the other four. TV. There are, however, writ- in2:s which even the most sceptical Clitics allow to be earlier than the Epistles of Clement and Ignatius. The Epistles of the Xew Testament are — excluding for the present the so-called AntUegmnena (2 Pet. ii. and iii., John, Jude) — documents of an antiquity that may well be called piimitive. They did not come together into a volume till jjerhaps the middle of the second century or later. The letters of each writer may he cited accord- ingly as giving a perfectly inde- pendent testimony. Let us ask, therefore, what e^-idence they supply as to the existence, either of the first three Gospels, or of a common nan-ative, written or oral, which they embody, each with variations of its own. For the present we limit the inquiry to those three. The fourth Gospel stands apai-t from them in a distinct position of its o-mi, and the e-sidence in favour of its ha-^-ing come from the Apostle whose name it bears will be found in the Introduction to it. Take, then, (1) the Epistle of St. James. Its contents point to its being, perhaj)S, the very earliest document in the New Testament. The absence of any reference to the controversy between the Judaisers and the followers of St. Paul leads naturally to the conclusion that it was wiitten before that contro- versy — prior, i.e., to the Council of Jerusalem of Acts xv. There is al)Solutely no gi'oimd for thinking, as men have thought, that he wi-ite3 either against St. Paul's doctrine that a man is justified by fnith, or against the per^'ersion of ; that doctrine by St. Paul's ful- ; lowers. The dead faith which he ; condemns is not a faith in Christ, ! as having atoned for sin, but the I mere confession of the primary I article of Jewish monotheism— j '• Thou believest that there is one I God" (Jas. ii. 19). Taking the I Epistle of St. James, therefore, as the earliest witness, what do we find there? Not, we must freely admit, any reference to the Gospel naiTative : but, on the other hand, a mind whose thoughts and mode of teaching had been manifestly f oimed on the model of the Sermon on the Mount. He, too, teaches by beatitudes (Jas. i. 12 ; Matt. v. 10, 11), and the one beatitude is an echo of the other. To him, also, God is emphatically the giver of all good things (Jas. i. 17 ; Matt. -vii. 11). He, too, dwells on the danger of hearing without doing (Jas. i. 22 ; Matt. A-ii. 24). To him the grass withering before the scorching sim and the hot wind of the desert is the type of all that is most fleeting in fortime or in character (Jas. i. 11; Matt. \i. 30; xiii. 6). He, too, connects the name of our Lord Jesus Christ with that freedom from "respect of persons" which even the Scribes acknowledged to be a leading feature in His charac- ter, and which, therefore, He would inculcate in those who professed to be His disciples (Jas. ii. 1 ; Matt, xxii. 16). He shares his Master's implied condemnation of the "gor- geous raiment " of those whom the world honours (Jas. ii. 2 ; Matt. xi. 8). To him, as to Christ, to keep the law " Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself," is the con- dition of entering into life (Jas. ii. 8; Matt. xix. 19; xxii. 40), and that law, as ha^'ing been thus con- firmed by the great King, is for 40 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. him the royal, the kingly law. He re-states the law that the merciful, and they alone, will obtain mercy (Jas. ii. 13; Matt. v. 7; vii. 1). He warns men against the risks of claiming- without authority the f imction of teachers, and forgc-tting that we all need the guidance of the one di^'ine Teacher (Jas. iii. 1 ; ]\latt. xxiii. 8). The same familiar illustration of the tree and its fruits is used hy him to set forth the relation of character and acts (Jas. iii. 12; Matt. xii. 16). To clothe the naked and to feed the himgry are with him, as with the Chi-ist, elements of the perfect life (Jas. ii. 15; Matt. xxv. 35, 36). He has the same word of stern re- proof for the "adulterous genera- tion " in which he lived (Jas. iv. 4 ; ]\[att. xii. 39), and which he reminds of the truth that th^y cannot he the friends at once of God and of the world (Jas. iv. 4 ; Matt. vi. 24). He knows that hiunility is the condition of true exaltation (Jas. iv. 10; Matt, xxiii. 12). He, too, speaks of the Father as One who, though willing to save, is able also to destroy (Jas. iv. 12; Matt. x. 28), and protests, in words that are almost an echo of our Lord's, against the far-reaching schemes of man's covctousness (Jas. iv. 13 — 16; Luke xii. 16—20). To him the coming of the Lord is the goal to which all things tend (Jas. v. 8 ; Matt. xxiv. 27). It is nigh, even at the doors (Jas. v. 9 ; Matt. xxiv. 33). He condemns, as his Lord had done, the rash use of oaths, and tells men, in the very words used by Christ, that their speech should be Yea, yea, and Nay, nay (Jas. V. 12; Matt. v. 34-36). He prescribes anointing with oil as a moans of healing the sick, even as our Lord had done (Jas. v. 14 ; Mark vi. 13). "With him, as in our Lord's miracles, the healing of the sick is associated with the forgive- ness of their sins (Jas. v. 15 ; Matt, ix. 2). It will hardly be contended that so continuous a sorios of paral- lelisms between the Epistle of St. James and the Gospel of St. ]\Iat- thew is purely accidental. But if it is not so, if there is evidence of a connection of some kind between them, then we have to choose be- tween the hypothesis (1) of both drawing from the common soiu'co of the cuiTcnt traditional know- ledge of our Lord's teaching ; or (2) of the Evangelist incorporating into his report of that teaching what he had leamt from St. James ; or (3) of St. James being a reader of a book containing the whole, or part, of what we now find in St. Matthew's Gospel. (See Intro- duction to St. Matthew. ) I turn to the First Epistle op St. Peter. The opening words attach to the *' blood of Christ " the same imj)ortance which He Himself had attached to it (1 Pet. i. 2; Mark xiv. 24). The writer takes up the words in which his Lord had bidden men watch with their loins gii-ded (1 Pet. i. 13 ; Luke xii. 35). He points the contrast between seeing and believing, even as Christ had pointed it (1 Pet. i. 8 ; John XX. 19). He has leamt to inter- pret the Prophets, as his Lord had taught him, as foretelling the sufferings that were appointed unto Christ ( 1 Pet. i. 2 ; Luke xxiv. 44, 45). He sees in the blood of Christ a ransom for many (1 Pet. i. 18; Mark x. 45), and knows that God has raised Him from the dead (1 Pet. i. 3). He teaches that there must be a new birth wi-ought in men by the divine word (1 Pet. ii. 23 ; John iii, 3, 5). Ho sees in GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 41 Christ the stone which the builders rejected (1 Pet. ii. 4, 7 ; Mark xii. 10), in the crisis through which Lsrael was passing, the time of its " \ imitation " (1 Pet. ii. 12; L\ike XX. 44), He remembers using the self-same imusual word which occurs in almost immediate se- quence in the Gospel record, how the calm recognition of the claims of civil rulers had " put to silence " (literally, muzzled) the ignorance of foolish men, and can therefore call on men to follow their Lord's ex- am j)le for His sake (1 Pet. ii. 15 ; Matt. xxii. 21, 34). He remembers also the mars'ellous silence of his Master at His trial before the San- hediin, and the livid scars left by the scourges of the soldiers (1 Pet. ii. 23, 24 ; Matt. xiv. 60, 61 ; xv. 15). Slaves were to recollect, when they were buffeted, that they were suiJering as Christ had suffered (1 Pet. ii. 20 ; Mark xiv. 65). It was by that suffering that the Good Shepherd, laying doAvn His life for the sheep (John x. 11), had drawn to Him the sheep that had gone astray, over whom He had yearned with an infinite compassion (1 Pet. ii. 25; Matt. ix. 36). He has learnt the lesson of not returning e^-il for e\il (1 Pet. iii. 9; Matt. v. 10). He knows the beatitude that had been pronounced on those who suffer for righteous- ness' sake (1 Pet. iii. 14 ; Matt. v. 10). He knows, too, that Jesus Christ, having preached to the " sj)irits in prison " (there is, at least, a possible connection here with Matt, xxvii. 52, 53), went into heaven, and is at the right hand of God (1 Pet. iii. 22 ; Mark x^i. 19). As if remembering the sin into which he fell because he had not watched imto pi-ayer, he urges others to watch ( 1 Pet. iv. 7 ; Mark xiv. 37). He had learnt, by a li^ang personal experience, how man's love, meeting God's, covers the multitude of sins ( 1 Pet. iv. 8 ; John xxi. 15 — 17). Revilings do but bring to his memory yet an- other lieatitude which he had heard from his Lord's lijjs (1 Pet. iv. 14; Matt. V. 10). He reminds men how his Lord had commended His spirit to the Father (1 Pet. iv. 19 ; Luke xxiii. 46). He \\Tites as being himself a witness of the sufferings of Christ (1 Pet. T. 1). He has learnt to see in Him the chief Shepherd, under whom he himself and all other pastors are called to serve (1 Pet. v. 4 ; John x. 14). His call to others to be " sober and watchful," because their adver- sary, the de^dl, was " like a roaring lion, seeking whom he might de- vour," speaks of the experience of one who had been told that Satan desired to have him that he might " sift him as wheat " (1 Pot. v. 8 ; Luke xxii. 31). The doubts which have from time to time been raised as to the Second Epistle of St. Peter prevent my laying much stress on the e^'idence which it supplies in this matter. My own belief is that the scale turns in favour of its genuineness. In any case, it is as early as any document later than the New Testa- ment TNoitings. Looking to it, then, we note the recog-nition of the dis- tinction between calling and election, which Peter had himself specially been taught (2 Pet. i. 10 ; Matt. xx. 16). The writer remembers how the Lord Jesus had shown him that the putting-off of his " tabernacle " should be quick and sudden (2 Pet. i. 14; John xxi. 18). He uses of his own "decease" the self-same word which had been used of that of Christ (2 Pet. i. 15; Luke ix. 42 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. 31). The vision of the brightness of the Transfiguration, and the voice from the excellent glory, are still living in his memory (2 Pet. i. 17, 18; Mark ^dn. 2—7). In this, as in the former Epistle, he has been taught to see lessons connected with the coming of Christ, which did not lie on the si;rface, in the history of Noah and the Flood, to ^-hich our Lord had directed men's attention (1 Pet. iii. 20, 21 ; 2 Pet. iii. 5—7; Matt. xxiv. 37). Here also, then, we have documents, one of wbich at least is acknowledged as belong- ing, without the shadow of a doubt, to the Apostolic age, and which aboimd in allusive references to what we find recorded in the Gos- pels. In this case it is, of course, more than probable that the writer spoke fronr personal recollection, and that we may have here the testimony, not of one who had read the Gospels, but of one fi-om whom the information which they embody had been, in part at least, derived. And, assuming the Second Epistle to be by him, we have there a direct intimation of his intention to pro- vide that that information should be embodied for those for whom he "WT^ote in some permanent form (2 Pet. i. 15). For the e^•idence which leads to the conclusion that the Second Gospel grew out of that intention, see Introduction to St. Mark. V. We pass to the Epistle to THE Hebrews, which, whether we assume, as seems to me most prob- able, the authorship of Apollos, or that of St. Paul, or one of his fellow-labourers, Barnabas, or Luke, or Clement, belongs also to the Apostolic age. The writer of that Epistle acknowledges the fact of the Ascension (Heb. i. 3; xii. 2). He distinguishes himself (Heb. ii. 3, 4), just as St. Luke does, from those who had actually heard the word of salvation from the lips of the Lord Himself, but he has heard from them of the Temptation and the Passion of the Christ (Heb. ii. 18), of His perfect sinlessness (Heb. iv. 15), of His tolerant sympathy for all forms of ignorance and error (Heb. V. 2), of the prayers and sup- plications, the strong crying and tears, of the garden and the cross (Heb. V. 7). The Messianic pro- phecy of Ps. ex., to which promi- nence had been given by our Lord's question in Matt. xxii. 42, becomes the centre of his argument. He Icnows, as one who has traced the descent from David, as given by St. Matthew and St. Luke, that our Lord had sprung out of Judah (Heb. vi. 14). The New Covenant, of which Christ had spoken as being ratified by His blood, fills the next great place Jn his argument (Heb. viii. 8 — 13; xiii. 14; Luke xxii. 20). He finds a mystical meaning in the fact that the scene of that blood-shedding was outside the gate of Jerusalem (Heb. xiii. 12; John xix. 20). To him, as to St. Peter, the name of Jesus, on which he most loves to dwell, is that He is, as He described Himself, the Great Shepherd of the sheej) (Heb. xiii. 20; Johnx. 14). VI. We pass, as next in order, to the Epistles of St. Paul, taking them, as is obviously more natural in such an inquiry, in their chrono- logical sequence. It is not without significance that the earliest of these, the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, oj)ens with a refer- ence to a Gospel of which St. Paul speaks as his (1 Thess. i. 5 ; ii. 2). It is, of course, true that he uses that word in its wider sense, not as a book, but as a message of glad GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 43 tidings; bnt then that message con- sisted, not in a speculative doctrine, but in the record of what the Lord Jesus had done, and suffered, and taught, and how He had been raised from the dead (1 Cor. xi. 23 ; xv. 1,3), and so the facts of the case suggest the conclusion that the name was given at a later stage — later, but how soon we cannot say — to the book, because the book so called embodied the substance of what had prcA-iously been taught orally. He knows that those whose faith in God exposes them to persecution are, in this respect, followers of the Lord, reproducing the pattern of His suf- ferings (1 Thess. i. 6). He warns men of a " wrath to come," such as the Baj^tist had proclaimed (1 Thess. i. 10 ; Luke iii. 7), and assumes the ResmTCction, the Ascension, the Second Coming from Heaven (1 Thess. i. 10 ; iii. 13), as ideas already familiar. The key-note of his preaching, as of that of the Gospel, is that men have been called to a kingdom of which Christ is the Head (1 Thess. ii. 12; Luke iv. 43). In words which reproduce the very accents of our Lord's teaching, he tells men that "the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night " (1 Thess. v. 2 ; Luke xii. 39). For him also the times of trouble that are to precede that coming are as the travail-pangs of the world's new bii-th (1 Thess. V. 3; Matt. xxiv. 1). The echoes of the voice that calls men, not to sleep, but to " watch and be sober," are ringing in his ears, as they had done in those of St. Peter (1 Thess. v. 6 ; Lxike xxi. 34—36). In the Second Epistle the coming of the Son of Man is painted more fully, as Christ Himself had painted it. Ho is to come with "the sound of a trumpet, and with angels of His might " (2 Thess. i. 7 ; ^latt. xxiv. 31 ; XXV. 31 ; Luke xxi. 27), and the sentence which He will then pass on the impenitent is characterised as " eternal " (2 Thess. i. 9 ; Iklatt. XXV. 46). He, too, has learnt, though as with a fresh revelation of details, that the day of the Lord is not, as men dreamt, at hand, that the end is not "by and by" (2 Thess. ii. 2; Luke xxi. 9). He appeals to a body of traditions — i.e., of oral teaching, which certainly included portions of the Gospel history and of the teaching of Chiist (2 Tliess. ii. 15 ; 1 Cor. xi. 23 ; xv. 1,2). The Epistles to the Church of CoKiNTH present the same general features as to the Coming of Chiist, the revelation of Jesus Christ from Heaven, the Resurrection, and the Judg-ment (1 Cor. xv. 20—28). Their gTeater fulness naturally pre- sents more points of contact with the Gospel history on which they rest. We meet with the names of Cephas (which we find in that form in John i. 43, and not elsewhere in the Gospels) and of the brethren of the Lord as familiar to that Chm-ch (1 Cor. i. 10 ; iii. 22 ; ix. 5). The command which Christ had given to His disciples to baptise aU nations is known and acted on (1 Cor. i. 14). The stoiy of the Cross is the theme of the Apostle's preach- ing (1 Cor. i. 18). Christ is to him the impersonation of the Di^ine Wisdom (1 Cor. i. 30 ; Luke ii. 40, 52 ; xi. 49). He employs the imagery, which Christ had employed, of the Wise Builder who erects his fabric on a firm foundation (1 Cor. iii. 10; Luke vi. 48). He knows the lessons taught by the parable of the Steward (1 Cor. iv. 2 ; Luke xii. 42), and by that of the Unpro- fitable Servant (1 Cor. iv. 7 ; Luke 44 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. xvii. 10). The riile of the Sennon on the Mount for those who suffer persecution is his rule also (1 Cor. iv. 12, 13 ; Luke vi. 27, 28). He illustrates the spread of spiritual influence for good or evil by the same imago that gives its distinctive character to the parable of the Leaven (1 Cor. v. 5; Gal. v. 9; Luke xiii. 20), and connects this with the sacrifice of Chi-ist as the true PassoA^er, on the day of that Feast (1 Cor. v. 7; Luke xxii. 15). He has received the thought that the saints shall judge the world (1 Cor. vi. 2; Matt. xix. 28), and on that ground urges men to submit now to injustice (1 Cor. \i. 6, 7 ; Luke ^i. 29, 30), His thoughts of the holiness of maiTiage rest on the same grounds as those of Jesus (1 Cor. ^d. 16; Matt. xix. 5, 6); and he, too, has learnt to see in man's body a temple of the Eternal Spirit (1 Cor. ^d. 20; John ii. 21). Outward freedom and slavery are looked on by him as nothing com- pared with the true freedom of the spirit (1 Cor. vii. 22, 23 ; John viii. 36). He regards the life of the im- married, when the choice is made for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake, as higher than that of the married (1 Cor. vii. 32; Matt. xix. 12). The special danger of over-anxiety about earthly things is to him known by the same word that our Lord had used (1 Cor. vii. 32—34 ; Luke X. 19). The very adverb which he employs to express fi-ee- dom fi'om it is taken from St. Luke's account of Martha as *' cumbered " about much serving (1 Cor. vii. 35 ; Luke x. 40). He too echoes, in Adow of the troubles that were coming on the earth, the beatitude pronounced on the wombs that never bare (1 Cor. vii. 40 ; I/uke xxiii. 29). With him, also, it is not that which goes into the mouth that affects our accei)tanco with God (1 Cor. Adii. 8 ; Mark A-ii. 18) ; and that which he seeks to aA'oid in eating or drinking is the offending others (1 Cor. viii. 13; Luke xvii. 1). His thoughts of the name, the function, the rights of an Apostle, are based ujjon our Lord's commission delivered to the Tweh^e and to the Seventy (1 Cor. ix. 4 — 14 ; Luke ix. 3 ; x. 7). He refers the last to the express com- mandment of Christ (1 Cor. ix. 14; Luke X. 7), and yet rises beyond those rights to the higher law of giAdng without receiAing (1 Cor. ix. 18 ; Matt. x. 8). He uses the same imusual word for persistent " wearying " that St. Luke had \ised (1 Cor. ix. 27; Luke XA'iii. 5). The narratiA'e of the Last Supi)er, Avith all the symbolic significance of its words and acts, with all the association.^ of the events that came before and after it, is assmned as part of the elementary knowledge of CA'ery Christian (1 Cor. x. 16, 17; xi. 23—26; Luke xxii. 19—23). His accoimt of the appearances of our Lord after His E.esun'ection, though manifestly indej)endent, in- cludes some of those recorded in the Gospels (1 Cor. xv. 3—7; Luke xxiv. 34 — 36) ; and his teaching as to the "spiritual body" of the Resiu-rection agrees with the phe- nomena which they report (1 Cor. XA^ 42 — 44 ; Luke xxiv. 36 ; John XX. 19). His Master's law of veracity in speech is his law also (2 Cor. i. 18 ; Matt. v. 37), as it had been that of St. James. Our Lord's formula of asseA^eration, Hebrew as it was, is his formula (2 Cor. i. 20 ; Luke iv. 24, et al.). His thoughts of his mission as a minister of the New Covenant are based on our Lord's words (2 Cor. iii. 6 ; Luke GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 45 xxii. 20). The words in which he speaks of the believer as " trans- figured" from glory to glory, are manifestly an allusive reference to the history of Christ's transfigura- tion (2 Cor. iii. 18; Matt. xvii. 2). He looks forward to the manifesta- tion of all secrets before the judg- ment seat of Christ (2 Cor. v. 10 ; Rom. xiv. 10 ; Matt. xxv. 31), and, almost as in Christ's own language, ho states the purpose of His death (2 Cor. V. 15; Gal. i. 4; Mark x. 45). He thinks of Him as being made sin for us — i.e., as being num- bered with the transgressors (2 Cor. V. 21 ; Mark xv. 28), and dwells on the outward povei-ty of His life (2 Cor. Aiii. 9 ; Luke ix. 51), and its inward meekness and gentleness (2 Cor. X. 1 ; Matt. xi. 29). We turn to the Epistle to the Galatians. There the Apostle's knowledge of the higher truths of the Gospel has come to him, as it came to Peter, not by flesh and blood, but by a revelation from the Father (Gal. i. 12, 16; Matt. xvi. 17). References to external facts are, however, not wanting. The names of James, Cephas, and John are mentioned as already familiar to his Galatian converts (Gal. ii. 9). He echoes the very syllables of the prayer of Gethsemane (Gal. iv. 6 ; Rom. viii. 16 ; Mark xiv. 36). He mentions the birth of Christ ("made of a woman") in a way which at least suggests an acquaintance with St. Luke's account of the Incarna- tion (Gal. iv. 4; Luke i. 31). He sums up all duties of man to man in the self- same law which Christ had solemnly affirmed (Gal, v. 14 ; Rom. xiii. 9 ; Luke x. 27). His list of the works of the flesh reads like an echo of oui- Lord's list of "the things that defile a man" (Gal. V. 19—21; Mark vii. 21, 22). In the Epistle to the Romans we have comparatively few of these references, but the gTcat facts of the birth from the seed of Da-\id (Rom. i. 3), and the Resmrection and Ascension of Christ are assumed throughout (Rom. viii. 34; Eph. i. 20). The command to meet cursing with blessing is repeated (Rom. xii. 14 ; Luke vi. 28) ; as is also that of paying tribute to whom tribute is due (Rom. xiii. 7 ; Luke xx. 25). He has learnt the lesson that no- thing that goes into the mouth can defile a man (Rom. xiv. 14; Mark vii. 18). In Rom. xvi. 25 he seems even to point to the existence of " prophetic writings," or " scrip- tures," as containing the substance of the gosj)el which he preached ; and if we adopt the ^dew that ho refers here, not to the older pro- phets, but to contemporary writings (as St. Peter apparently does in the "prophetic word" of 2 Pet. i. 19), then we have a coincidence confii-ming St. Luke's statement that there were many such A^Tritings anterior to his Gospel (Luke i. 1), and explaining St. Paul's use of tho term "scripture" as applied to a quotation from that Gospel ( 1 Tim. V. 8 ; Luke x. 7). The Epistles of the First Im- prisonment — i.e., Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians— speak of Christ as "the beloved" of tho Father (Ejjh. i. 6; Luke ix. 35). " Apostles and prophets " are joined together, as Christ had joined them, and in close connection with the Wisdom of God as sending them (Eph. iii. 5, 10; iv. 11; Luke xi. 49). The parable of the Bridegroom and the Bride is recognised and developed (Eph. v. 25 ; Matt. xxii. 1 ; xxv. 1 ; Luke xiv. 16), and our Lord's citation from Gen. ii. 24 recited (Ex)h. v. 31; Mark x. 7). 46 NEW TESTAMENT INTEODUCTIONS. The ^vi-iter knows that there is no respect of persons with the Lord Jesus (Eph, vi. 9 ; Cor. iii. 25; Matt. xxii. 16). He takes up and expands the thought of the " whole armour," the "panoply" of God, which is mightier than the " pan- oply" of evil (Eph. -s-i. 13; Lukexi. 22). He sees that the true redemp- tion or deliverance of men is f ovmd in the forgiveness of sins (Col. i. 14; Luke i. 77; iii. 3). He ex- presses the perfect law of the be- liever's life in saying that all per- sonal or corporate acts should be done in the name of the Lord Jesus (Col. iii. 17; 1 Cor. v. 4; Matt. xviii. 20). That name is above every name, because He who bore it, having been in the f oim of God, had emptied Himself of that glory, and had come to be in the likeness of man, and even in His man- hood had humbled Himself still further, and become obedient imto death, even the death of the cross (Phil. ii. 6—9; Luke i. 32; ii. 51). The Pastoral Epistles — 1 Timo- thy, 2 Timothy, Titus — cany on the evidence. It is with him one of the faithful sayings, which are as the axioms of Christian doctrine, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners (1 Tim. i. 15; Luke V. 32), to give Himself as a ransom for all men (1 Tim. ii. 6 ; Matt. XX. 28). The earliest type of the Church's creed includes the Incarnation, the Visions of Angels, the Ascension, as they are recorded bv St. Luke (1 Tim.' iii. 16; Luke xxii. 43; xxiv. 4, 51 ; Acts i. 10). He lays down as the rule of dis- cipline for the ti-ial of offenders, that which, though previously ac- knowledged, had yet, in a specially solemn manner, been re-affinned by Christ (1 Tim. v. 19 ; Matt, xviii. 16). He dwells on the good con- fession which Jesus Christ had witnessed before Pontius PUate (iTim. ^d. 13 ; Luke xxiii. 3). He speaks of the far-off judgment, in Christ's own words, as simply "that day" (2 Tim. i. 18 ; Matt. Aii. 22). He refers once more to his own Gospel as witnessing both to the Eesun-ection of Chiist and His Descent from David (2 Tim. ii. 8). He states again, almost in the very words of Christ, the law of retribu- tion according to which He will deny hereafter those that deny Him now, and will cause those that endure to be sharers in His king- dom (2 Tim. ii. 12; Luke ix. 26). Baptism is for him the washing of a new birth, and that by the work- ing of the Spii-it (Tit. iii. 5 ; John iii. 5). What has been said of the Second Epistle of St. Peter holds good of this last group of the Epistles that bear St. Paul's name. If they are not aciially by him, they are yet unquestionably docimients that carry us back to a period not later than the close of the Fii'st Century or the very begimiing of the Second. VII. The examples that have thus been collected are, it is be- lieved, sufficient to show that the Epistles of the New Testament aboimd in references, not only to the great facts and doctrines of the Faith, but to the acts and teaching of Christ as recorded in the Go.spels. And it must be remembered that there was nothing in the circum- stances of the case to lead the writers to more than these inci- dental and allusive references. They were waiting, not the Com- mentaries or the Sermons which belonged to a later age, but Epistles called for by special necessities, and not naturally suggesting, any more than analogous documents do now, a reference to the details of GENEEAL IXTRODUCTION. 47 the Gospel history ; and therefore the fact that the allusions are as numerous as they are, may fairly be accepted -as a i)roof that their memories were saturated, as it were, with the acts and the words of the life of Jesus. These fonned the basis of the oral instruction aiven to every convert (Luke i. 3). They were jjart of the traditions of every Church, of the Gospel as preached by every Apostle and Evangelist. I do not say that they prove the existence of the first three Gosj)els as written books, but they jjrepare the way for all the special evidence — external and in- ternal — which may be adduced on behalf of each of them, and show that the}' represent what was the current teaching of the Apostle's age. It is jjrobable enough, look- ing to the literary activity of that time in all the cities of the empire, that there were, as St. Luke says (chap. i. 1), and as Papias implies (see Introduction to St. Matthew), many waiters who undertook the task of embodying these floating ti'aditions in -vNaiting. If out of these only three have survived, it is a natural inference that they were recognised as the most accu- rate or the most authoritative. VIII. And it is at least a pre- sumption in favour of the Gospels with which we are now dealing that they are ascribed to persons whose names were not of them- selves clothed with any very high authority. A later writer, com- piling a (Gospel for Jewish Chris- tians, would hardly have been likely to select the publican-Apostle, the object of scorn and hatred alike to his own countrymen and to the Gentiles, instead of St. Peter or St. Andrew ; or the subordinate attendant on the Apostles, whose help St. Paul had rejected because he had shown himself wavering ; and faint-hearted (Acts xii. 13 ; XX, 38) ; or the physician whose name just occui-s incidentally in the salutations of three of St. Paul's later Epistles (Col. iv. 14 ; ' Philem. verse 24; 2 Tim. iv. 11). j And yet, when we know the names, I and track out the history of the I men, we see that in each case they j explain many of the phenomena of the books to which they are severally attached, and funiish many coincidences that are both j interesting and e\-idential. In the case of one Gospel, that of St. Luke, I there is besides this, so close an agree- ; ment between its vocabulary and that of St. Paul, that it is scarcely i possible to come to any other con- ' elusion than that the one Mi-iter was intimately acquaiiited with the , other. It may be added that whether from the sceptical point of view, or that of those who accept the first three Gospels as a real re- cord of our Lord's words, there is ; prima facie CA-idence that they took : their present form before the de- 1 struction of Jerusalem in a.d. 72. I The warnings of the gTcat pre- I diction of Matt, xxiii., Mark xiii., I Luke xxi., as to " the abomination ! of desolation," and " Jerusalem ; compassed with armies," the counsel ; that men should " flee to the moun- ; tains " regardless of what they left behind them, the expectation sug- gested in them of the coming of the Son of Man immediately after the tribulation of those days, all indicate, on either hypothesis, a time of anxious and eager watching looki of those thinsi-s that were coming on the earth, which exactly coiTesponds with the period between the persecution \inder Nero 48 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. and the invasion of Titus, and does not coiTespond to any period either hefore or after. There had not been time when the Gospels were written for men to feel the douht and disappointment which showed themselves in the question, " AVhere then is the promise of His coming?" (2 Pet. iii. 4). IX. The book known as the Acts of the Apostles is so manifestly the sequel to the Gospel of St. Luke that it can hardly be put in evi- dence as an independent witness. On the other hand, it contains elements of evddence, reports of speeches, and the like, that are in- dependent. It shows (Acts XX. 25) that in the churches of Asia IMinor, in the very region in which Papias afterwards wrote on the " sayings " or " oracles " of the Christ, the "words of the Lord Jesus" were recognised as at once familiar and authoritative, and that among those words were some that are not found in any of the extant Gospels. A series of coincidences, obv'iously imdesigned, with the Epistles of St. Paul, in regard to facts, as seen, e.g.^ in Paley's KorcB Paidince, and yet more in respect of style and phraseology, as above stated, makes it all but certain that the two wT-iters were contemporary. The fact that the last incident recorded in the Acts is St. Paul's arrival at Kome makes it, prima, facie, prob- able that the book was wi-itten shortly after the expiration of the two years of his sojourn there, with the mention of which the book concludes— i.e., about a.d. 65. But if so, then the Gospel to which it is a sequel could not well have been later, and thus the former conclusion gains an additional con- firmation. X. The elements of agreement and of difference in the first three Gospels fall in, it is obvaous, with the Adew just given of their origin and history. It is scarcely prob- able, though we are not justified in assuming it to be impossible, that any notes of our Lord's dis- courses, or parables, or shorter savings, were taken at the time, or that records of His miracles were then and there reduced to writing. But in the East, as else- where, the memory of men is often active and retentive in prox^ortion to the absence of written aid. Men recite long poems or discourses which they have learnt orally, or get into the way of repeating long narratives with comparatively slight variations. And so, when the Church was enlarged, first in Palestine and afterwards at Anti- och and the other churches of the Gentiles, new converts would be instructed freely in the words and acts of the Master from whom they took the name of Chi-istians. As the Church spread beyond the limits of Judaea, as it came to in- clude convei-ts of a higher culture, as it spread to countries where those who had been eye-witnesses were few and far between, there would naturally be a demand for documents which should preserve what had first been communicated by oral tradition only, and that demand was certain in its turn to create the supply. It was natural that each of the three great sections of the Church — that of the Hebrew section of the circumcision, repre- sented by James, the Bishop of Jerusalem; that of Hellenistic Judaism mingling with the Gen- tiles, as represented by St. Peter; that of the more purely Gentile churches that had been founded by St. Paul — should have, each of GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 49 them, in the Gospels of St. Mat- thew, St. Mark, and St. Luke respectively, that which satisfied its wants. Each of those Gospels, as will he seen, had its distinctive features — St. Matthew conspicuous for the fullest report of discourses, St. Mark for graphic and vi-sdd detail, St. Luke for a wider range of topic and of teaching, as the work of one who had more the training of a skilled historian, and who, though not an eye-witness, based his record upon fuller and more directly per- sonal inquiries. For the circum- stances which led to the composition of the foirrth Gospel, and the position which it occupied in rela- tion to the Three, see Introduction to St. John. XI. The difference in tone and phraseology between the Gospels and the Epistles may fairly be urged as evidence of the earlier date, if not of the books themselves, yet of the teaching which they embody. (1) Throughout the Gos- pels the term by which our Lord most commonly describes Himself is the " Son of Man," and it occurs not less than eighty-four times in all. It expressed at once our Lord's fellowship with our hmnanity, and His specially Messianic character as fulfilling the -vision of Dan. vii. 13. The faith of the disciples after the Resun-ection and Ascension naturally fastened, however, on the higher truth that the Lord Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God; and the term so familiar to us in the records of the Gospels is not found in one solitary passage through the whole body of the Epistles, and the only examples of its use outside the Gospels are in Acts-voi. 56, Rev. i. 13. In the latter of these two passages it is doubtful, from the absence of the article, whether it is used in the same distinctive sense as in the Gospels, or as meaning simply " a son of man." The broad distinction thus presented can hardly be ex- plained except on the hypothesis that the Gospel report of our Lord's teaching is faithful, and at least substantially accurate, unaffected by the j)hraseology and theology even of the earliest periods of the Church's history. (2) Hardly less striking is the contrast between the two groups of books as regards the use of another term — that of the Church, or Ecclesia — as describing the society of Christ's disciples. In the Acts and Epistles it meets us at every turn, 112 times in all. In the Gospels we find it in two passages only, Matt. xrvi. 18; xvii. 17. Here also we may point to the fact as a proof that the reports of our Lord's teaching as presers^ed in the Gospels were entirely unaffected by the thoughts and language of the Apostolic Church, and bear upon them the face of originality and genuineness. (3) The absence of any reference in the Gospels to the controversies of the first century is another argu- ment of like nature. We speak, and within due limits legitimately enough, of the characteristic ten- dencies and aims of St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. Luke, of their connection with this or that Apostle or school of thought. But if tendencies and aims had pre- vailed over honesty and faithfid- ness in reporting, how strong would have been the temptation to put into our Lord's lips words that bore more or less directly on the questions which were agitating men's minds — on the necessity or the nullity of circumcision, on the justification by faith or works, on eating things 50 !SnEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. sacrificed to idols, on the reverence due to bishops and elders ! All these things are, it need hardly he said, conspicuous by their absence. They are after-growths, which the teaching of Chi'ist recorded in the Gospels does not even touch. The only controversies which it knows are those with Pharisees and Sad- ducees. The wiiters of the Gosj)els must have dealt faithfully with the materials which they foimd ready to their hands, and those materials must ha^'e been collected while the words and acts of Jesus were yet fresh in the memories of those who saw and heard them. XII. It is indirectly a further argument of the early date of these three Gospels that so little has come down to us, outside their contents, as to the words and acts of Jesus. It lies in the nature of the case, as is, in xjart, seen by the success which attended the gleaning of which we have just spoken by St. Luke, in part also by the bold hyperbole of St. John's language as he dwelt on the things that Jesus had said or done (John xxi. 25), that there must have been much that has found no permanent record. The Apocryphal Gospels — few of them, if any (with the possible exception of the Acta Pilati and the Descent into Hades, known as the Gospel of Nicodemus), earlier than the fourth centmy — give little else but frivolous and fantastic legends. Here and there only are found frag-ments which may be authentic, though they lie outside the limits of the Canonical Gospels. Such as they are, it is interesting and may be profitable to gather up even these fragments so that nothing may be lost ; but the fact that these are all, may fairly be ascribed to the prestige and authority which attached to the Four that we now recognise, and to these only. I give accordingly, in conclusion, the following sayings, reported as having been among the sayings of the Lord Jesus : — (1) Quoted by St. Paul in Acts XX. 35, " It is more blessed to give than to receive." (2) An addition to Luke vi. 4, in Codex D, " And on the same day Jesxis saw a man working at his craft on the Sabbath-day, and He said tmto Him, 'Man, if thou knowest what thou doest, then art thou blessed; but if thou knowest not, then art thoii accursed, and art a transgressor of the Law.' " There seems no reason why we should not receive the saying as authentic. Its teaching is in har- mony with om- Lord's repoiied ' words and acts, and it brings out with a irarv'ellous force the distinc- tion between the conscious trans- gTession of a law recognised as still binding, and the assertion of a higher law as superseding the lower. (3) Quoted by Origen (in Joann. xix.), "Be ye trustworthy money- changers." The word is the same as that used in the parable of the Talents (Matt. xxv. 27), and may well have been suggested by it. The saying appears to imply a I two-fold parable. The disciples of j Christ were to he as the money- I changers {a) in their skill to ! distinguish the counterfeit coin j from the true — to know, as it I were, the ring of what was stamped I with the King's image and super- I scription from that which was I alloyed and debased; and {b) in the I activity with which they laboured, I and the wisdom which guided theii' ! labours, so that their Lord, at His GENERAL INTRODUCTION. 51 coming, might receive His own with usury. (4) An addition in Codex D, to Matt, XX. 28, "But ye seek (or, perhaps, taking the verb as in the imperative, seek ye) to increase from little, and from greater to he less." (5) From the Epistle of Barna- bas, c. 4, " Let us resist all iniquity, and hold it in abhorrence." (6) From the same, c. 7, "They who wish to see INIe, and to lay hold on jNIy Kingdom, must receive Me by affliction and suffering." (7) From the Gospel of the He- brews, qiioted by Clement of Alex- andria {Strom, ii. 9, § 45), " He that wonders [i.e., apparently, with the wonder of reverential faith] shall reign, and he that reigns shall be made to rest." (8) From Clement of Alex.andria (Strom, ii. 9, § 45), " Wonder thou at the things that are before thee." This and the preceding passage are quoted by Clement to show that in the teaching of Christ, as in that of Plato, wonder is at once the begin- ning and the end of knowledge. (9) From the Ebionite Gospel, quoted by Epiphanius {Hcer. xxx. 16), "I came to abolish sacrifices, and unless ye cease from sacrificing, the wi-ath (of God) will not cease from you." (10) Quoted by Clement of Alex- andria [Strom, iv. 6, § 34) and Origen {de Oratione, c. 2), " Ask great things, and small shall be added to you : ask heavenly things, and there shall be added unto you earthly things." (11) Quoted by Justin [Dial. c. Try ph. c. 47) and Clement of Alex- andria [Quis dives, c. 40), "In the things wherein I find you, in them will I judge you." (12) From Origen [Comm.m.^ex. iii. p. 778), "He who is nigh \mto Me is nigh unto the fire : he who is far from Me is far from the kingdom." Ignatius [ad Smyni. c. 4) has a like saying, but as a quotation : "To be near the sword is to be near God." (13) The Pseudo - Clement of Rome [Ep. ii. 8), " If ye keep not that which was little, who will give yovi that which is gxeat ? " (14) From the same (as before), " Keep the flesh piu'e, and the seal without stain." (The "seal " prob- ably refers to Baptism as the sign of the Covenant.) (15) From Clement of Alex- andria, as a quotation from the Gospel according to the Egvptians [Strom, iii. 13, § 92), and the Pseudo-Clement of Eome [Ep. ii. 12). Salome, it is said, asked onr Lord when His kingdom shoidd come, and the things which Ho had spoken be accomplished; and He answered, " When the two shall be one, and that which is without as that which is within, and the male with the female, neither male nor female." Another like saying is given by the Pseudo-Linus, " Un- less ye make the left as the right, and the right as the left, and that which is above as that which is below, and that which is behind as that which is before, ye know not the kingdom of God." In the first of these we may trace a feeling analogous to that expressed by St. Paul in Gal. iii. 28 ; 1 Cor. ^ii, 29. (16) Origen (in Matt. xii. 2), " For them that are infinn was I infirm, and for them that hunger did I himger, and for them that thirst did I thii'st." (17) Jerome (in Eph. v. 3), " Never be ye joyful, except when ye have seen your brother (dwell- ing) in love," 52 NEW TESTAMENT INTBODUCTIONS. (18) Ignatius {ad Smyrn. c. 3). Our Lord, after His ResuiTection, said to Peter, " Take hold, handle ]\Ie, and see that I am not a bodi- less demon." This is obviously a reproduction of Luke xxiv. 39 — the peculiarity being- the use of the word " demon " for " spirit." (19) The Clementine Homilies, xii. 29, " Good must needs come, but blessed is He through whom it comes." (20) Clement of Alexandi-ia {Strom. V. 10, § 64), "My mystery is for Me, and for the sons of My house." The Clementine Homilies (xix. 20) gives another version, " Keep My mysteries for Me, and for the sons of My house." (21) Eusebius {Theophania, iv. 13), "I will choose these things to Myself. Very excellent are those whom My Father that is in heaven hath given Me." (22) Papias (quoted by Irenseus, V. 33, 3), "The Lord said, speaking of His kingdom. The days will come in which vines shall spring- up, each having ten thousand stocks, and on each stock ten thousand branches, and on each branch ten thousand shoots, and on each shoot ten thousand bunches, and on each bunch ten thousand grapes, and each grape when pressed will give five-and-twenty measures of wine. And when any saint shall have laid hold on one bunch, another shall cry, ' I am a better bunch, take me ; through me bless the Lord.' " This is followed by a like statement as to the productiveness of ears of corn, and then by a question from Judas the traitor, who asks, " How shall such products come from the Lord ? " and who receives the answer, " They shall see who come to Me in these times." The above extracts are taken from Dr. Westcott's Introduction to the Gospels, App. C. In some of them, as has been said above, there is no internal difficulty in receiving the words as they stand, as not imworthy of the Teacher to whom they are ascribed. In others, as notably in (15) and (22), what- ever nucleus of truth there was at first has been encrusted over with mystic or fantastic imaginations. None, of course, can claim any authority, but some, pre-eminently perhaps (2), (3), and (10), are at least suggestive enough to be fruit- ful in deep thoughts and sahitary warnings. V.-THE HAEMONY OF THE GOSPELS. I. The Christian Church found itself, as we have seen, in the middle of the second centm-y in possession of the four Canonical Gospels, and of these alone, as authentic records of the words and acts of its Lord. Each was ob- viously but a fragmentary memoir. They were almost as obviously, though in part, derived from common sources, independent of each other. It was natui-al, as soon as they came to be read and studied by men with anything like the culture of historians, that they should wish to combine what they found separate, and to construct, as far as might be, a continuous- narrative. So, as we have seen, Tatian, of the Syrian Church,. GENERAL IXTRODUCTTON. 53 compiled his Biatessaron {circ. a.d. 170), a book which, though, now altogether lost, was ouce so popular that Theodoret {Hcer. i. 20) states in the fifth, centuiy that he had found not fewer than 200 copies in the churches of his own diocese; and about half a century later a lite work was undertaken by Ani- monius of Alexandria. The his- torical mode of study fell, however, for many centuries into disuse, and it was not till the reTival of learn- ing- in the fifteenth and sixteenth, centuries that attempts, more or less elaborate, were made, tirst by Gerson, the famous Chancellor of the University of Paris {ob. a.d. 1429), to whom some have attri- buted the authorship of the De Tmitatione Christ i, and Osiander, the friend of Luther (a.d. 1561), to place all the facts recorded in the four Gospels ia their order of chronological sequence. Since that time Harmonies have multiplied, and while, on the one hand, they h.ave often helped the student to see facts in theii- right relation to each other, they have, on the other, it may be feared, tended to perplex him by their divergent methods and consequently discordant con- clusions, II. It may be admitted that the four Gospels do not lend themselves very readily to this process. That of St. John, which is most precise in its notes of time, as connecting well-nigh every incident which it records with a Jewish feast, is the one which stands most apart, with only here and there a connecting- link from the other three, confining itself almost exclusively to our Lord's ministry in Judaea, as they confine themselves to His work in Galilee. The two which have so much in common, St. Matthew and St. Mark, that the one has been thought, though wrongly, to be but an abridgment of the other, differ so much in their arrangement of the facts which they record that it is clear either one or both must have been led to adopt an order which was not that of actual sequence. St. Luke, though aim- ing, more than the others, at chronological exactness (Luke i. 3), was dependent on the reports of others. Probably the very mode in which facts and sayings were for several years ti'ansniitted orally and separately made it often difii- cult to assign to each event its proper place ia the series. The assimiption, on which some have started, that the order ia each Gospel must be accejjted as free from the possibility of error ia the order of its iacidents, has led to an artificial and arbitrary miiltiplica- tion of similar events, such as would at once be dismissed as un- tenable ia dealing with any other histories. Men have found in the Gospels three blind men at Jericho, and two anointings at Bethany. The coimter-assumption that no two events, no two discourses in the Gospels could be like each other and yet distiact, has led to equally arbitrary and fantastic curtailment of the facts. Men have assimied the identity of the feeding of the Five and of the Four Thousand ; of the anointing which St. Luke records in chap, vii., in the house of Simon the Phari- see, with that which the other Gospels record as taking place in the house of Simon the leper (Matt, xxvi. 6 — 13; Mark xiv. 3 — 9 ; John xii. 1 — 11) ; of the cleansing of the Temple in John ii., at the com- mencement of our Lord's ministry, with that which the other Gospels 54 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. relate as occurring at its close (Matt. xxi. 12— 17; Mark xi. 15— 19; Lukexix. 45—48). III. Admitting, however, these elements of difficulty and uncer- tainty, it yet remains true that they are more than balanced by the advantage of being able to connect one Gospel with another, and to read the naiTati^'es of the first thi-ee in their right re- lation to those of the fourth. If difficulties present themselves, so also do coincidences, often of great significance and interest. It is believed, therefore, that it will be a gain for the readers of this volume to have, ready at hand for reference, such a harmonised table of its contents. That which follows is based, though not without varia- tions here and there, made in the exercise of independent judgment, upon the arrangement of the Synopsis Evangelica of the great German scholar Tischendorf, as that in its turn was based upon a like work of Wieseler's. It has been thought expedient to give the results rather than to discuss the -siews which have been maintained on each -^dmi that has been thought open to dis- cussion by this or that writer. It is not pretended that what is now presented is throughout free from uncertainty ; and where the uncer- taiaty exists, it will be indicated in the usual way by a note of inteiTogation — (?) . IV. It will be expedient, how- ever, to state briefly what are the chief data for the hannony that follows, both in relation (A) to external harmony, and (B) to the internal arrangement of the Gospel narrative that follows : — A. — (1) Luke iii. 1 fixes the beginning of John the Baptist's ministry in the fifteenth year of Tiberius. This may be reckoned, either from the death of Augustus (a.u.c. 767), or from a.u.c. 765, when he associated Tiberius with himself as sharing the imperial power. The latter calculation is the one generally adopted. As our Lord is stated to have been at that time " about thirty years of age," this would place His birth in a.u.c. 752 or 750. (2) The narrative of Matt, ii.l shows the birth of Jesus to have preceded the death of Herod the Great, which took place shortly before the Passover of a.i'.c. 756 or B.C. 4. (3) John ii. 20 fixes the first Passover in our Lord's ministry as forty-six years from the beginning of Herod's work of reconstruction, on which he entered in a.u.c. 734 — i.e., in A.u.c. 780 ; and this agi-ees with St. Luke's statement as to His age at the commencen. 3nt of His ministry. Under (B) the chief points are those which are common to all four Gospels. (1) The baptism of Jesns ; (2) the imj)risonment of the Baptist ; (3) thef eedingof the Five Thousand ; (4) the last entry into Jerusalem, followed by the Crucifi.xion. In addition to these, as notes of time peculiar to the Gospels that con- tain them, we note (1) St. Luke's second-fii-st Sabbath, which, how- ever, is for us too obscure to I be of much service as a landmark, and the successive feasts men- tioned by St. John, sc, (2) the Passover of chap. ii. 13; (3) the j unnamed Feast of chap. v. 1 ; (4) the Passover of chap. vi. 4, coincid- ing with thp feeding of the Five Thousand, and therefore important in its bearing on the other Gospels ; (5) the Feast of Tabernacles in chap. ; (6) the Feast of the Dedication in chap. x. 22; and, GENEEAL INTRODUCTION. 55 lastly, (7) the final Passover (chap. xii. 1), in common with the other three. The last-mentioned Feast, however, Avhile it serves, on the one hand, to connect the history with that of the other Gospels, introduces a new difiiculty. It cannot he questioned that the im- pression naturally left hy Matt. xxvi. 17—19, Mark xiv. 12—16, Luke xxii. 7 — 13, is that the meal of which our Lord partook with the disciples was the actual Pass- over. It can as little he questioned that the impression naturally left hy John xiii. 1, 29, xAiii. 28, is that the Passover was eaten hy the Jews on the evening after the Cru- cifixion. The question is hardly important except as hearing upon the trustworthiness or authority of the Gospel nan-atives, hut the vie^v which commends itself to the pre- sent writer as most prohahle is that which assumes our Lord and the disciples to have eaten the actual Passover at the same hour as the majority of the other Jews were eating it, and that the priests and others who took part in the pro- ceedings against our Lord postponed their Passover, under the pressiu^e of circumstances, till the afternoon, not the evening, of Friday (John xviii. 28). That Friday, it may he noted, was the Preparation, not for the PassoA'er as such, hut for the great Sahhath of the Paschal week. A further, hut minor, difficulty presents itself as to the hour of the Crucifi^on. J^Iark x^'. 26 names the " third hour " — i.e., 2 a.m. ; and the " sixth hour," or noon, is fixed hy the first three Gospels as the time when the mysterious darkness hegan to fall upon the scene (!Matt. xxvii. 45 ; Mark xv. 33 ; Luke xxiii. 44). St. John, on the other hand, names •'about the sixth hour" (xix. 14) as the time when Jesus was con- demned hy Pilate. Here, howcA'er, the explanation lies almost on tho surface. St. John used the Roman reckoning, and the Thi-ee the Jew- ish ; so that their " early in the morning" and his "about 6 a.m." came to the same thing. V. A word ought, perhaps, to he said in explanation of the fact that we place the birth of Jesus, not as might have been expected, in a.d. 1, but in B.C. 4. The mode of reckoning by the " year of our Lord" was first introduced by Dionysius the Little, a monk of Rome, in his Cyclus PaschaUs, a treatise on the computation of Easter, in the first half of the sixth century. Up to that time the received computation of events through the Western portion of Christendom had been from the supposed foimdation of Rome (b.c. 754), and events were marked accordingly as happening in this or that year Anno JJrbis Conditce, or hy the initial letters a.u.c. In the East some historians continxied to reckon from the era of Seleucidte, wliich dated from the accession of Selcucus Nicator to the monarchy of SjTia in b.c. 312. The new computation was naturally received by Christendom (it first appears as a date for historical events in Italy in the sixth centurj^), and adopted without adequate inquiry till the sixteenth century. A more careful examination of the data presented hy the Gospel history, and in particular by the fact that the birth of Christ preceded the death of Herod, showed that Dionysius had made a mistake of four years, or perhaps more, in his calculations. The 56 NEAV TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. received reckoning had, however, taken too firm a root to be dis- turbed by re-dating all e-sents in history since the Christian era ; and it was accordingly thought simpler to accept it, and to rectify the error, as far as the Gospel history was concerned, by fixing the birth of Christ at its true date, B.C. 4. VI.— CHEONOLOGICAL HAEMONY OF THE GOSPELS. 6. Birth of John the Baptist, June (?), October (?) ; birth of Jesus, December (?). 4. Census tinder Quirinus or Cy- renius ; birth of Jesus, January (?), April (?) ; Presentation in the Tem- ple; Flight into Egypt, March ; death of Herod, Just before the Passover ; return of Joseph and Mary to Nazareth (?), (Matt. ii. 19—23). 3. Augustus assigns Judsea to Archelaus, Galilee to Anti- pas ; birth of Apollonius of Tyana {?). 2. A.D. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Birth of John the Apostle (?). Birth of Seneca {?). Birth of St. Paul {?). Death of Hillel ; deposition of Archelaus ; Judcea a Roman province. Insurrection of Judas of Galilee. First visit of Jesus to the Temple (Luke ii. 41—62) ; Pass- over, 10. 11. 12. 13. A.D. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Death of Augustus; Tiberius^ Emperor. Tiberias built by Antipas; death of Livy and Ovid. Jews expelled from Italy. Death of Joseph (?). Pontius Pilate appointed Pro- curator of Judaea. Preaching of John the Baptist, January (?), or in the pre- vious AutiTmn (?), (Matt, iii. 1—12; Mark i. 1—8; Luke iii. 1—18). Baptism of Jesus (Matt. iii. 13 — 17; Mark i. 9—11; Luke iii. 21, 22). The Temptation in the wilder- ness (Matt. iv. 1 — 1 1 ; Mark i. 12, 13; Lukeiv. 1—13; Johni. 19—34). Call of Peter, Andrew, John, Philip, and Nathanael (Johni. 35—51). The marriage at Cana (John ii. 1-11). Passo^'er in Jerusalem (John ii. 13 — 26) ; Nicodemus (John iii. 1 — 21) ; Jesus baptises in Judaea (John iii. 22—36) ; John Baptist im- prisoned (Matt. xiv. 3 — 6 ; GEXEEAL TXTHODUCTION. 57 Mark ^-i. 17 — 20 ; Luke iii. 19, 20) ; Jesus retiirns thi'ouo-li Samaria (John iv. 1—42') into Galilee (Matt. iv. 12; Marki. 14; Luke iv. 14). 26. Jesus again at Cana : healing of the son of the king's officer of Capemaiun (John iv. 43—54). — The fii-st sermon at Nazareth ; Day of Atonement (?) ; October (?) ; settlement at Capernaum. (Luke iv. 16 — 30). 27. Feast of Passover, March (?) ; Pentecost, May, a.d. 26 (?) ; Tabernacles, Octo- ber, A.D. 26 (?) ; or Purim, February, a.d. 27 (?), most probably the last, at Jeru- salem ; the cripple at Beth- esda (John v. 1 — 9). — Jesus begins His public ministry in G-alilee (Matt, iv, 17 ; -Mark i. 14, 15). — Call of Peter, Andrew, James, and John (Matt. iv. 18— 22 ; Mark i. 16—20 ; Luke V. 1 — 11 ?). — Miracles at Capemaimi (Matt. viii. 14—17; Marki. 29— 34; Lukeiv. 31—41). — Mission journey through Gali- lee, including Chorazin (?), Bethsaida (?), Matt. iv. 23 ; Mark i. 38, 39 ; Luke iv. 42—44). — Leper healed (Matt. -siii. 1 — 4 ; Mark i. 40—45; Luke v. 12—15). — Capernaum : paralytic healed (Matt. ix. 1 — 8 ; Mark ii. 1—12 ; Luke v. 18—26). — Capernaum : call of Levi- Matthew (Matt. ix. 9— 17; Mark ii. 13—22; Luke V. 27,28). — Near Capernaum: second-first Sabbath, March (?), April (?), (Matt. xii. 1—8 ; Mark ii. 23—28 ; Luke^-i. 1—5). 27. Capernaiun: the withered hand healed on the Sabbath (Matt. xii. 9 — 1 3 ; Mark iii. 1—6; LukcA-i. 6—11). — Choice of the Twelve Apostles (Matt. X. 2—4 ; Mark iii. 16—19; Lukevi. 14—16). — The Sermons on the Mount (Matt, v., vi., vii.) and on thePlaia (Lukevi.26— 65). — Capernaum : centurion's servant healed (Matt. viii. 5—13; Luke vii. 1—10). — Nain: widow's son raised to life (Luke vii. 11—17). — Messengers sent by John the Baptist (Matt. xi. 2—19; Luke vii. 18—35). — House of Simon the Pharisee ; the woman that was a sioner (Luke ^-ii. 36 — 50). — Journey through Palestine, fol- lowed by devout women (Luke viii. 1—3). — The charge of casting out devils bv Beelzebub (Matt. xii. 22—37; Mark iii. 22—30; Luke xi. 14—26). — Visit of mother and brethren of Jesus (Matt. xii. 46 —50 ; Mark iii. 31 — 35 ; Luke viii. 19—21). — The fii-st teaching by parables (Matt. xiii. 1—53; Mark iv. 1 — 34 ; Luke ^'iu. 4 — 18; xiii. 18—21). — Sea of Galilee : the tempest calmed (Matt. viii. 23—27; Mark iv. 35—41; Luke Aiii. 22—25). — The Gadarene demoniac (lilatt. ^•iii. 28—34 ; Mark v. 1— 20 ; Luke ^iii. 26—39). — Daughter of Jairus raised to life (Matt.ix. 18— 26; Mark V 22—43 ; Luke viii. 40—56). 58 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. 27. Nazareth : second discourse in the synagogue (Matt. xiii. 54— 58 ; Mark vi. 1-6). — Renewed j oumey through Gali- lee (Matt. ix. 35—38 ; Mark vi. 6). — Mission of the Twelve Apostles (Matt. X. 1—42 ; Mark vi. 7—13; Lukeix. 1—6). — Execution of John the Baptist, March (?), (Matt. xiv. 6— 12; Markvi. 21—29). — Herod the Tetrarch hears of Jesus (Matt. xiv. 1, 2 ; Markvi. 14—16 ; Lukeix. 7—9). — Return of the Twelve to Beth- saida ; feeding of the Five Thousand ; Passover (Matt. xiv. 13—21 ; Mark vi. 30—44; Lukeix. 10— 17; John Ad. 1—14). — Sea of Galilee : Jesus walks on the waters (Matt. xiv. 22— 33 ; Mark ^n.. 45—52 ; John vi. 15—21). — Gennesaret : works of healing (Matt. xiv. 34—36; Mark vi. 53—56). — Capernaum : Sabbath after Passover ; discom^se on the Bread of Life (John vi. 22—65). — Phariseesfrom Jerusalem charge the disciples with eating with unwashed hands (Matt. XV. 1—20; Mark A-ii. 1—23). — Coasts of Tyre and Sidon : daughter of S3a^o-Phoeni- cian woman healed (Matt. XV. 21— 28 ; Mark vii. 25 —30). — Deaf and dumh (Matt., xv. 29— 31; Mark vii. 31—37). — Feeding of the Four Thousand (Matt. XV. 32—38; Mark viii. 1—9). 27 Pharisees and Sadducees de- mand a sign from heaven (Matt. xvi. 1—4; Mark viii. 10—12). — Bothsaida : hlind man healed (Ikfark viii. 22—26). — Ceesarea Philippi : Peter's con- fession (Matt. x-sd. 13—28; Mark^dii. 27— ix. 1 ; Luke ix. 18—27 ; John vi. 66— 71 ?). — Hennon (?) ; Tahor (?) : the Transfiguration (Matt, xvii. 1—13; Mark ix. 2— 13; Lukeix. 28—36). — Base of Hemion (?) : demoniac healed (iNlatt. xvii. 14— 21 ; Mark ix. 14—29 ; Luke ix. 37—43). — The Passion foretold (IVIatt. xvii. 22, 23 ; Markix. 30— 32; Lukeix. 43—45). — Capernaum (?) : payment of didrachiua, or Temple-rate, April (?), May (?), (Matt, xvii. 24—27). — Rivalry of disciples, and con- sequent teaching (Matt. xA-iii. 1—35; Markix. 33— 50 ; Luke ix. 46—50). — Journey through Samaria ; new disciples ; Jei-usalem : Feast of Taberxacles, October (Matt. viii. 19— 22; Lukeix. 51— 62; John vii. 1—53). — Jerusalem: the woman taken in adultery (John vii. 53 — viii. 11). — Jerusalem: discourse in Temple; blind man healed at Siloam (John viii. 21 — 59 ; John ix. 1—41). — Jerusalem : the Good Shepherd (Johnx. 1—18). - Mission and return of the Seventy (Lukex. 1—24). — Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke X. 25—37). GENERAL IXTliODUCTION. 59 27. Bethany : Jesus in the honse of Martha (Luke x. 38—42). — Disciples taught to pray (Luke xi. 1—13). — Two blind men healed (INIatt. ix. 27—31). — Demoniac healed; subsequent teaching (Matt. ix. 32—31 ; xii. 38 — 45; Luke xi. 14 — 36). — Peraea (!-) ; Galilee (?) ; teaching on various occasions (Luke xi. 37— xiii. 21). — Jerusalem : Eeast of Dedica- Tiox, December 20 — 27 (John X. 22-39). 28. January : Jesus on the east side of Jordan (John x. 40—42). — Jesus begins to prepare for the journey to Jerusalem ; message from Herod (Luke xiii. 22—35). — East side of Jordan : teaching, -including parables of the Lost Sheep, the Lost Piece of Money, Prodigal Son, Unjust Steward, the Eich Man and Lazarus, the royal iaw, the perfect law of freedom (Jas. i. 25 ; ii. 12), and the corrupt traditions and casuistry of the scribes (Matt, v., vi, xxiii.). It uses the distinctly Hebrew formula of " the kingdom of heaven,"* where the other Evan- gelists speak of "the kingdom of God." It records the rending of the veil of the Temple, the earth- quake and the signs that followed it, which, at the time, could hardly have had any special significance except for Jews (Matt, xxvii. 51 — 53). It reports and refutes the explanation which the Jewish priests gave at the time he wrote, of the marvel of the emptied sepulchre (Matt, xxviii. 11 — 15). It dwells more than the others do * The phrase occurs thirty-two times in St. Matthew, and nowhere else in the New Testament. ST. MATTHEW. 65 on the aspect of the future king- j dom which represents the Apostles j as sitting on twelve thrones judg- \ ing the twelve tribes of Israel (IVIatt. XX. 28). Such features were naturally to he looked for in a Gospel intended for Israelites. "We may add that they were also na- tural in the Gospel of the publican. Foremost among the emotions of one who was called from the receipt of custom, would be the joy that he too was now, at last, recognised as a child of Abraham. To him it would be a welcome task to con- trast the higher and purer doctrine of the Lord who had called him, with that of the Pharisees who ^had scorned and thrust him out. We may, perhaps, even trace the influence of his experience as a collector of customs, in the care ' with which he brings together his ' Master's warnings against the vain ' and rash swearing, and the false .'distinctions as to the validity of '^different oaths (Matt. v. 34—37; xxiii. 16 — 22) which, common as they were in all times and places, were sure to be loudest and least trustworthy in disputes between the publican and the payers of an ad valorem duty. There was, however, another aspect of the publican character. The work of St. Matthew had brought him into contact with those who were known as the " sinners of the Gentiles " (Gal. ii. 15). He had called them to share his joy in the first glow of his con- version (Matt. ix. 10). The new consciousness of being indeed one of a chosen and peculiar people passed, not, as with the Pharisees, into the stiffness of a national ex- clusive pride, but, as a like con- sciousness did afterwards in St. Paul, into the sense of universal brotherhood. And so he i^ careful to record that visit of the Magi in whom Christendom has rightly seen the first-fruits of the calling of the Gentiles (Matt, ii. 1 — 12). He dwells, if not exclusively, yet emphatically, on the far-off pros- pect of men coming from east and west, and north and south, and sitting do\\Ti with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob (Matt, viii. 11). He records the parable which represents the servants of the great King as sent forth to gather guests for the marriage feast from the '■'by-ways" of the Gentile world (Matt. xxii. 10). He sets forth the law of compassionate judgment, w^hich shall make the doom of Tyre and Sidon more tolerable than that of Chorazin and Bethsaida (Matt. xi. 21—24), and take as its standard, when all the Gentiles are gathered round the tlirone of the Judge, not the spe- cific truths revealed in Christ, but the gTcat laws of kindness which are stamped everywhere, even when neglected and transgressed, upon the hearts and consciences of those who have known no other revela- tion. Lastly, it is in St. Matthew that we find recorded the full commis- sion, anticipating the Gospel as St. Paul afterwards preached it, which bade the disciples not to circumcise, but to baptise— to baptise, not con- verts from Israel only, but "all the Gentiles," the outlying people of the world, of every race and speech. It follows from what has now been said that the chief aspect in which the fonn of the Son of Man is presented to us in St. Matthew's Gospel is that of the King who fulfilled the hopes of Israel — a King, not tyrannous and proud, but meek and lowly; 66 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. coining, not with chariots and horses, "but on an ass's colt, hear- ing the cross hefore He wears the crown, and yet recei"sdng, even in unconscious infancy, tokens of His sovereignty, and in manhood giv- ing proof of that sovereignty hy His power over nature, and men, and the forces of the unseen world. Seen from this point of view, each portion of the Gospel is part of the great portraiture of the ideal King. The Sermon on the Mount, while it is, in part, the voice of the true Teacher, the true Eahhi, as con- trasted with those who were un- worthy of that title, is yet also the proclamation hy the King, who speaks, not as the Scribes, hut as one ha^dng authority, of His royal LaAv (Jas. ii. 8), of the conditions of His kingdom (Matt. vii. 29). The parables of chaps, xiii. and XXV. are brought together with a fulness and profusion found in no other Gospel, because they bring before us, each of them, some special aspect of that kingdom. If he alone of the Evangelists men- tions, as coming from our Lord's lips, the word for the Christian society {Ecclesia) which, when the Gospels were written, was in uni- versal use, we may see, in the care that he took to record those few words as bearing witness to the true relation of that society to its King and Lord, his sense of the reality of the kingdom, Christ had built that Church on Himself as the Eternal Rock, and the gates of hell should not prevail against it (Matt. x^i. 18). Where it was, there He would be, even to the end of the world (Matt, xxviii. 20). The play of fancy which led the men of a later age to connect the four Gospels with the four cherubic symbols may have had much in it that was arbitrary and capricious, but it was not altogether wrong when, with a uniform consent, it identified the Gospel of St. ]\Iat- thew with the form that had the face of a man (Ezek. i. 10; Rev. iv. 7). Assuming the cherubic forms to represent primarily the great manifestations of Di^dne wisdom as seen in nature, that "face of a man" testified to the seers who looked on it that there was a Will and a Piirpose which men could partly comprehend as working after the manner of their own. Interpreted by the fuller revelation of God in Christ, it taught them that the Son of Man, who had been made a little lower than the angels, was crowned with glory and honour, sitting on the right hand of the Ancient of Days (Dan. viii. 13), Lord and King over the world of nature and the world of men, and yet delighting above all in the praises that flowed from the mouth of babes and sucklings (Ps. viii. 2; Matt. xxi. 16). ST. MARK. By the late Vert Rev. E. H. PLUMPTRE, D.D. I. The "Writer.— There is but one person of the name of Mark, or Marcus, mentioned in the New Testament, and, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, it may reasonably be assumed that the Gospel which bears his name is ascribed to him as being, directly or indirectly, its author. The facts of his life as they are gathered from the New Testament may be briefly put together. He bore also the Hebrew name of John, i.e., Joannes, or Jochanan (Acts xii. 12, 25 ; XV. 37). The fact that he took a Latin and not a Greek surname suggests the probability of some point of contact with Jews or others connected with Eome. As was natural, when he entered on his work among the Gentiles the new name practically superseded the old, and in the Epistles (Col. iv. 10; 2 Tim. iv. 11 ; Philem. verse 24 ; 1 Pet. v. 13) he is spoken of as " Mark " only. He was cousin to Barnabas, and was therefore, on his mother's side probably, of the tiibe of Levi (Col. iv. 10 ; Acts iv. 36). His mother bore the name of ]Mary, or JMiriam, and it may be inferred from the fact that her house served as a meeting-place for the disciples at Jerusalem (Acts xii. 12), that she, like her kinsman, was one of the prominent and wealthy members of the Apostolic Church. St. Peter speaks of him as his "son" (1 Pet. V. 13), and it is a natural inference from this that he was converted by that Apostle to the new faith, but whether this was during our Lord's ministry on earth or after the day of Pentecost must remain matter for conjecture. When Paul and Barnabas return from Jerusalem to Antioch (Acts xii. 25) he accompanies them, and this may be taken as evidence that his sympathies were at that time with the wider work which they were carrj^ng on among the Gen- tiles. So, when they were sent forth, on their first missionary journey, they chose him as their "minister," or attendant (Acts xiii. 5). His function, as such, was probably to provide for their personal wants in travelling, to assist in the baptism of new con- verts, and to arrange for their meeting to "break bread" in the Supper of the Lord. For some unrecorded reason, possibly want of courage, or home-sickness, or over-anxious care about the mother whom he had left at Jerusalem, he drew back at Perga in Pamphylia from the work to which they were sent, and returned home (Acts xiii. 13).* We find him, however, again * It was doubtless ou account of this desertion that we find the strange epithet of "poltroon" (kolobodactylos) connected with St. Mark's name by some early Christian writers (Hippol. Philosoph. vii. 30). He was, by those who took St. Paul's view of his conduct, like the sol- dier who cuts off his thumb in order to get free from service. The figurative epithet was afterwards the basis of a legend (Pre£ to St. Mark in Cod. Amiat.) that he had literally mutilated himself in order tq 68 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. at Antioch, after the council at Jerusalem, and he had so far re- gained his uncle's confidence that he was willing to take him once more as a companion in his mis- sionary lahours (Acts xv. 37 — 39). To that course, however, St. Paul would not agree, and the result was that the two friends who had so long heen fellow-workers in the cause of Christ were divided after a sharp contention. From this point onwards we get but few glimpses of the writer of the Gospel. He accompanied Bar- nahas (a.d. 62) in his work among the Jews and Gentiles of Cyprus (Acts XV. 39). About eight years later he was with St. Peter in the city on the banks of the Euphrates which still bore the old name of Babylon, and there must have met Silvanus, or Silas, who had taken his place as the companion and minister of St. Paul (I Pet. V. 12, 13). It is possible that this may have led to a renewal of the old intimacy between him and the Apostle of the Gentiles, and about four years later (a.d. 64) we find him with St. Paul at Pome, during the Apostle's first imprison- ment (Col. iv. 10; Philem, verse 24), and there, it may be noted, he must have met his brother Evan- gelist St. Luke (Col. iv. 14). He was then, however, on the point of returning to the Asiatic provinces, and contemplated a visit to Colossae (Col. iv. 10). Two years later (a.d. 66), accordingly, we find him at Ephesus with Timotheus, and the last mention of his name shows that St. Paul had forgotten his former want of steadfastness in the recollection of his recent services, avoid the responsibilities of the priest- hood. and wished for his presence onco again as being " profitable for ministering"* (2 Tim. iv. 11). To these facts, or legitimate inferences, we may now add the less certain traditions that have gathered round his name. Epi- phanius {Contr. Hcer. p. 314) makes him one of the Seventy whose mis- sion St. Luke narrates (x. 1), and says that he was of those who turned back when they heard the hard saying of John vi. 60, 66. Eusebius {Hist. ii. 15 ; vi. 14) states, on the " authority of the ancient elders " and of Clement of Alexan- dria, that he was with St. Peter at Rome, acting as his " interpreter," or secretary', and that he was sent on a mission from Rome to Egypt {Hist. ii. 16). There, according to Jerome {de Vir. illust. 8), he founded the Church of Alexandria, became bishop of that church, and suffered maxtyrdom at the hands of the people on the feast of Serapis, in the fourteenth year of Nero, A.D. 68, about three years after the death of St. Peter and St. Paul. In A.D. 815 his body was said to have been taken to Venice, and the stately cathedral in the Piazza of St. ]\Iark in that city was dedicated to his memory. Some recent com- mentators identify him conjectur- ally with " the young man with the linen cloth round his naked body" of Markxiv. 51. II. The Authorship of the Gospel. — St. Mark is named by Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis {circ. A.D. 169), on the authority of a certain "John the Presbyter," as writing down exactly, in his char- acter as Peter's interpreter, " what- ever things he remembered, but * This, rather than "for the ministry," is the sense of the Greek. ST. :maek. 69 ^not in the order in which Christ spoke or did them, for he was neither a follower nor a hearer of the Lord's, but was afterwards a follower of Peter." The statement is prohahle enough in itself (Euseh. Bist. iii. 39), and receives some additional weight from the fact that the city of which Papias was Bishop was in the same district as Colossae, which Mark, as we have seen, meant to \'isit (Col. iv. 10), In another pas- sage, above referred to, Eusebius {Hisf-. ii. 15; v. 8) speaks of him as haA-ing been asked to write by the hearers of St. Peter at Rome, and that the Apostle at first acquiesced in, and afterwards sanc- tioned, his doing so. The same tradition appears (a.d. 160 — 225) in Tertullian {Cont. JIarc. iv. 5). It receives some confirmation from the language of the second Epistle ascribed to St. Peter. The Apostle there promises that he Mill " en- deavour" that those to whom he writes may have these things {i.e., the facts and truths of the Gospel) in remembrance, that they might know that they had not " followed cunningly-de-vised fables," but were trusting those who had been eye- witnesses — at the Transfiguration and elsewhere— of the majesty of Christ (2 Pet. i. 15, 16). Such a promise seems almost to pledge the Apostle to the composition of some kind of record. Mark, we have seen, was with him when he wrote his first Epistle, perhaps also when he wrote the second, and it would be natui\al that he should take down from his master's lips, or write do\\'n afterwards from memory, what he had heard fi'om him. It may be added that the comparatively Bubordinate position occupied by St. Mark in the New Testament records makes it improbable that his name should have been chosen as the author of a book which he did not really write. A pseud- onATnous writer would have been tempted to choose (let us say) Peter himself, not Peter's attendant and interpreter. The Gospel itself, we may add,") supplies some internal evidence in^ faA-oiu^ of this hypothesis: — (l.)| It differs fi'om St. Matthew, with^ which to a gTcat extent it runs / parallel in the facts nan-ated, in ' giving at every turn graphic de- scriptive touches which suggest the thought that they must have come in the first instance from an eye-, witness. It will be enough to mention here a few of the more striking instances. Thus, e.f/., we have («) the "very early in the morning, while it was yet night" of i. 35, as compared with ''when it was day " in Luke iv. 42 ; (b) there being no room, "not so much as about the door," in ii. 2 ; (c) the " taking off the roof and digging a hole in it" in ii. 4; {d) the "making a path by plucking the ears of com" in ii. (e) the " looking round with anger " in iii. 5 ; (/) the " taking Him, even as He was, into the ship," and the " lying in the stei-n on the pillow " (iv. 36, 38) ; {r/) the accoimt of the manner in which the Gadarene demoniac had "burst asunder" his chains and "worn away" his fet- ters (v. 4), and how he was "in the movmtaias crying and cutiing himself with stones " (v. 5) ; {h) the "gTeen grass," and the "sitting in ranks and companies by him- dreds and by fifties " (\i. 39, 40) ; (i) the " exceeding white as snow so as no fuller on earth can whiten 70 NEW TESTAMENT INTEODUCTIONS. them " (ix. 3) ; (j) the " Jesus beholding him, loved him" of the young ruler (x. 21) ; (k) the " young man with the linen cloth round his naked body" (xiv. 51) ; and many others of a like charac- ter (2.) As pointing in the same direction, we may note the in- stances in which St. Mark, and he alone, reproduces the very syllables which our Lord uttered in Aramaic. Whether they were an exception to His usual mode of speech or not may be an open question, but as connected with His works of healing they had the character of words of power for those w^ho heard them, and so fixed themselves in their memories. So we have the Talitha cumi of v. 41, the Ephphatha of vii. 34, the Eab- BONi in the Greek of x. 51, the Boanerges of iii. 17, the Auba of xiv. 36, the Corban of vii. 11, and, though here in common with St. Matthew, the Eloi, Eloi, lama SABACHTHANI of XV. 34. (3.) So, too, in a few cases, St. Mark gives names where the other Gospels do not give them : Levi is the son of Alphasus (ii. 14) ; the ruler of the Synagogue, not named by St. Matthew, is Jairus (v. 22) ; the blind beggar at Jericho is Barti- mseus, the son of Timseus (x. 46) ; the mother of James and John is Salome (xv. 40) ; Simon the Cyre- nian is the father of Alexander and Eufus (xv. 21). (4.) Some have seen grounds for the inference thus suggested in St. Mark's omis- sion of the promise made to Peter in Matt. xvi. 17—19, and of his "weeping bitterly" after he had denied his Master, but the proof in this case seems somewhat pre- carious. III. The first readers of the Gospel.— The position which St. Mark occupied in relation both to St. Paul and St. Peter — his connec- tion with the former being re- sumed, as we have seen, after a long interval — would make it pro- bable that he would write with a special eye to Gentile rather than Jewish readers ; and of this the Gospel itself supplies sufficient evidence in the full explanation ol the customs of the Jews as to ablu- tions and the like in vii. 3, 4, in the explanation of the word Corban in vii. 11, perhaps also in his de- scription of " the river of Jordan " in i. 5. A closer study suggests the thought, in full agreement with the tradition mentioned above, that he WTote with a special view to Christians of the Roman Church. He alone describes Simon the Cyre- nian as the father of Alexander and Rufus (xv. 21), as though that fact had a special interest for his readers. T^ere is but one Rufus mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament, and he meets us in Rom. xvi. 13 as one who was jDro- minent enough in the church of that city for St. Paul to send a special message of remembrance to lum ; and it may be inferred, with some likelihood, that the wife or widow of Simon of Cyrene (ha\ang previously met St. Paul at Corinth, for some personal knowledge is im- plied in the words " his mother and mine ") had settled with her two sons in the imperial city, and had naturally gained a position of some importance. The very name of Marcus indicates, as has been said, some Latin affinities ; and it is noticeable, in this connection, that a larger number of words Latin in theii' origin appear in his Gospel than in any one of the others. Thus we have him giving the Latin centurio instead of the Greek ST. MAEK. 71 kKarovTapxns {hekatontarches) in XV. 39, 44, 45 ; the Latin speculator for "executioner" in vi. 27; ^^'fl!- batus for bed (this in common with John V. 8, 9, 10) in ii. 4, 9, 11, 12 ; quadrans for "farthing" in xii. 42 ; a verb formed from the Latin Jlagellumiox "scourging" (this in common with Matt. xxAoi. 26) in XV. 15 ; a noun formed from sex- tarius for " vessels " in vii. 4 ; Free- torium (this in common with Matt, xxvii. 27 and John xviii. 28) in XV. 16 ; the denarius in vi. 37, xii. 15, xiv. 5 (this, however, is common to all four Gospels) ; the legio (found also in Matt. xxvi. 53, Luke viii. 30) in V. 9 ; census (found also in Matt. xvii. 25, xxii. 17, 19) in xii. 14. rv. The cliaracteristics of the Gospel. — The distinguishing ) features of St. Mark's Gospel are, '^ it will be seen — (1) vividness and fulness of detail in narrating the events of the history ; (2) compres- sion or omission in dealing with our V, Lord's discourses. This may have ,'been owing partly to the object which he had in view, writing, it may be, for the instruction of catechumens, for whom he judged this method the most fitting, and partly to the idiosyncrasies of his own character. What we have seen of his life and work would prepare us to accept the latter as, to a great extent, an adequate explanation. One who had been chiefly a "minister" or "attend- ant" (the latter word is the more accurate rendering of the Greek of Acts xiii. 5) on the two Apostles may well be supposed to have been chiefly distinguished for his activity in service, for the turn of mind which observes and notes particu- lars, rather than for that which belongs to the student, and de- lights to dweU on full and deve- loped statements of the Truth. We may see in what he has left us, ac- cordingly, pre-eminently the Gospel of Service, that which presents our Lord to us as in the form of a servant, obedient even unto death (Phil. ii. 7, 8) ; and so far it forms the complement to that in which St. Matthew presents Him to us pre-eminently in His character as a King. Even the characteristic iteration of the ever - recurring " immediately," " anon," " pre-i sently," " forthwith," " by-and-by," "straightway" — all representing the self-same Greek word, occur- ring not less than 41 times — may not unreasonably be connected with his personal experience. That had been, we may believe, a word con- stantly on his lips in daily life, the law and standard of his own ser- vice, and he could not think of his Lord's work otherwise than as ex- hibiting the perfect fulfilment of that law, a work at once without haste and without pause. So, too, in another point in which he stands in singular contrast to St. Matthew, the almost entire absence of any reference, except in reporting what had been said by our Lord or otlii^rs, to any prophecies of the Old Testa- ment — there are but two such re- ferences in the whole Gospel (i. 2, 3 ; XV. 28), as rising out of his own reflection — may be explained in part, perhaps, by the fact that he was writing not for Jews, but for Gentiles, to whom those pro- phecies were not familiar, and also by the fact that his own life in its ceaseless round of humbler service led him to be less than others a student of those proj)hecies. As- suming the genuineness of the latter of the two passages just referred to (it is absent from nearly aU the best 72 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. MSS.), we may, perhaps, trace the connection of thought. Words from that 53rd chapter of Isaiah had heen quoted hy the Apostle to whom he ministered (1 Pet. ii. 22, 23), at a time when he was with him, in special connection with the work of servants and the duty of ohedience, and so his mind had been called to those words, but there does not appear to have been in him, as there was in St. Matthew, a delibe- rate purpose to ti'ace the fulfilment of prophetic words in the circum- stances of our Lord's life and work. He was content to paint the scenes that passed before his mind clearly and vividly, and to leave the teach- ing which the facts embodied to do its work on the minds of his readers. V. Relation to St. Matthew and St. Luke. — The Gospels of St. Mark and St. Matthew have so much in common, sometimes with each other only, sometimes with St. Luke also, that it is clear that they must have drawn more or less from a common source. Nothing, however, can be more against the whole tenor of internal evidence than the hj^oothesis that St. Mark epitomised from St. Matthew, or that St. IMatthew expanded from St. Mark. The narrative of the second Gospel is in almost every instance fuller than that of the first, and its brevity is obtained only by the absence of the dis- courses and parables which occupy so large a portion of the other. On either of these assumptions the per- plexing Yariations in the order of events (comp. e.g.^ Matt. viii. with Mark i. 4, 6) are altogether in- explicable. What is, with our scanty data, the most probable explanation is, that the matter common to both represents the substance of the instruction given orally to disciples in the Church of Jerusalem and other Jewish- Chi'istian communities coming, directly or indirectly, under the influence of St. Peter and St. James, as the Apostles of the Circumcision (Gal. ii. 9). The miracles that had most impressed themselves on the minds of the disciples, the simplest or most striking parables, the narratives of the Passion and Resurrection, would naturally make up the main bulk of that instruction. St. Matthew, the publican Apostle, and therefore conversant, as has been said before, with clerkly cul- ture, writing for his own people, closely connected with James the Bishop of Jerusalem, would natu- rally be one exponent of that teach- ing. St. Mark, the disciple and "interpreter," or secretary, of St. Peter, would as naturally be another. That they wrote inde- pendently of each other is seen, not only in the details above noted, the addition of new facts, the graphic touches of description, but from variations which would be inexplicable on any other assump tion; such, e.g., as Mark's "Dal- manutha" (viii. 10) for Matthew's " Magdala" (Matt. xv. 39), " Syro- Phoenician woman " (vii. 26) for " Canaanite " (Matt. xv. 22), " Levi the son of Alphseus " (ii. 14) for " Matthew " (Matt. ix. 9). Short as the Gospel is, too, there is one parable in it (iv. 26—29), and one miracle (vii. 31 — 37), which are not found in St. Matthew. It is re- markable, moreover, that there are some incidents which St. Mark and St. Luke have in common, and which are not found in St. Matthew : that of the demoniac in chap. i. 23-27, Luke iv. 33—37; ST. MARK. 73 the journey through Galilee (i. 35 —39, Luke iv. 42—44) ; the pursuit of the disciples (i. 3G, 37, Luke iv. 42) , the prayer of the demoniac (v. 18, Luke viii. 38) ; the com- plaint of John against one that cast out devils (ix. 38, Luke ix. 49) ; the women bringing- spices to the sepulchre (xvi. 1, Luke xxiv. 1). Of these phenomena we find a natu- ral and adequate explanation in the fact that the two Evangelists were, at least at one period of their lives, brought into contact with each other (Col. iv. 10, 14, Philem. verse 24). It is probable, as has been said above, that neither wrote his Gospel in its present form until the two great Apostles whom they served had entered on their rest ; but when they met each must have had the plan formed and the chief materials collected, and we may well think of them as comparing notes, and of the one, whose life had led to less culture, and whose temperament disposed him to record facts rather than parables or dis- courses, as profiting- by his contact with the other, and while content to adhere to the scope and method which he had before marked out for himself, adding here and there what he leamt from his fellow-worker whose "praise was in the Gospel" (2 Cor. viii. IS). ST. LUKE, By the late Very Eev. E. H. PLUMPTEE, D.D. I. The "Writer. — But one per- son bearing the name of Luke, or, in its Greek form, Lucas, appears in the New Testament ; and of him the direct notices are few and meagre. He is named as being with St. Paul during his first im- prisonment at Rome, and is de- scribed as "the beloved physician" (Col. iv. 14). He is still with him, stress being laid on his being the only friend who remained, when the Apostle's work was drawing to its close (2 Tim. iv. 11). Beyond these facts all is inference or con- jecture. Both conjecture and in- ference are, however, in this case, full of interest, present many un- expected coincidences, and, by the convergence of many different lines of circumstantial evidence, raise the probabilities which attach to each taken separately into some- thing not far from certainty as to their collective result. The name itself is suggestive. It does not appear as such in any classical writer, or on any Greek or Latin inscription. Its form, howev' er, shows that it is a contrac- tion from Lucanus, as Apollos is from Apollonius, or Silas from Silvanus, and not, as some have thought, another form of Lucius.* * It follows from this that the Evange- list cannot be identified, as some have thought, with Lucius of Cyrene, who is mentioned as prominent among tlie pro- phets and teachers at Antiocli (Acts xiii. 1), or the Lucius who is named as a kins- man of St. Paul's (Rom. xvi. 21). If that identification had been possible, the This name, again in its turn, was not a common one, and we naturally ask what associations were con- nected with it. Its most probable etymology points to its being de- rived from the region of southern Italy known as Lucania. Lucas, or Lucanus, would be a natural name for a slave or freedman, having no family name as his own, who had come, or whose father had come, from that region. Assuming, for the present, St. Luke's author- ship of the Acts, we find in the supposition that this was the origin of his name an explanation of the obvious familiarity with Italian tojiography shown in his mention of PuteoH, Appii Forum, and the Three Taverns, in Acts xxviii. 13 — 15. The name Lu- canus, was, however, borne at this time by a writer, M. Annieus Lucanus, who stands high in the list of Latin poets, as the author of the Pharsalia, an epic which takes as its subject the great struggle for power between Julius Caesar and Pompeius. As he was born, not in Italy, but in Spain (at Corduba, the modem Cordova), the name with him must have had another than a local significance. Was there any link of association connecting the two men who bore a name which was, as we have seen, far from a common one ? We traditional fame of Cyrene for its School of Medicine (Herod, iii. 131), would have had a special interest in connection with St. Luke's calling. ST. LUKE. 75 are here in a region of conjecture ; but on the assumption that there was some such link, we have a probable explanation (1) of the favour shown to St. Luke's friend and companion, the great Apostle of the Gentiles, by the uncle of the poet, J. Annaeus Gallio, the Pro-consul of Achaia (Acts xviii. 14 — 17), and (2) of the early tra- dition of a friendship between St. Paul and another uncle, the Stoic philosopher, Seneca, issuing in the correspondence of fourteen letters, which, in the time of Jerome \de Vir. Illust. c. 12) and Augustine {Epist. cliii. 14), was read with interest, and often quoted as a fragment of Apostolic literature. The letters that are now extant under that name are, in the judg- ment of well-nigh all critics, spurious ; but the fact that a writer in the third or fourth cen- tury thought it worth while to compose such a correspondence, implies that he was able to take for gi'anted a general belief in the friendship which it pre-supposes ; and the many coincidences of thought and language between the Apostle and the Philosopher (as seen, e.g., in the "Essay on St. Paul and Seneca," in Dr. Light- foot's Commentary on the Epistle to the Fhilipjnans) are at least striking enough to suggest, if not inter- course, at least some derivation from a common source. Seneca was, it must be remembered, offi- cially connected with the court of Nero during St. Paul's imprison- ment ; and when the fame of the prisoner and of his doctrine was spread through the whole Prseto- rium (Phil. i. 13), and congrega- tions of discij)les were to be found even among the slaves of the Im- pel ial household (Phil. iv. 22), it was not likely that a man in his position should remain ignorant of the teacher whose influence was sjDreading so widely. If the friend and companion of the prisoner bore the same name as the nephew of the philosopher, that coincidence would help to attract attention. If, as the coincidence itself sug- gests, there had been any previous connection between the two, w^e have an hypothesis into which all the facts of the case fit in with an almost surprising symmetry. The poet Lucan, we may note, was born A.D. 39. The date of St. Luke's birth we have no materials for fixing, but the impression left by the facts of the case is that he was about the same age as St. Paul,* and therefore older than the poet by thirty or forty years. Was the one named after the other ? .*.nd does this imply a connection of the whole family with the be- loved physician ? This, it is ob- vious, would give an additional support to the superstructure of inferences alreadv raised. + * St. Paul, e.g., never speaks of him as he does of younger disciples, like Timothy or Titus, as his "child," or " son," in the faith. t Lucan, as has been said above, was bom at Cordova. Now, it is remarkable that when St. Paul was planning an extended journey with St. Luke as his companion, Spain, and not Rome, was to be its idtimate goal (Rom. xv. 28). That country had a large element of Jews in its population in the third and fourth centuries, and it is probable that they had settled there, as in Cyrene and Carthage, from an early period of the Dispersion. Cordova, as one of the chief seats of Roman culture, was certain to attract them, and we find it at a later period one of the chief seats of mediaeval Rabbinism, with a fame already traditional. Another point of some interest stUl remains to be n oticed . The poet was a f eUow-pupU with Persius, under one of the great Stoic teachers of the time, L. Annaeus Cornutus 76 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. The incidental mention of St. Luke's name in Col. iv. 14, places us on more solid ground. He is emphatically distinguished from " those of the circumcision " — Mark and others who are named in Col. iv. 10, 11. He was, i.e., a Gentile by birth, and this fact, it is obvious, is important on all the ciuestions affecting his relations with the Apostle of the Gentiles, and the aim and characteristic features of his writings. The fact that he was " a physi- cian" suggests other inferences. That profession in the early daj^s of the Empire was filled almost exclusively by freedmen, or the sons of freedmen (the Libertini of Acts vi. 9), who, shut out more or less completely from military or official life, were led to devote themselves to science, or art, or literature. The well-known list of the members of the household of the Empress Livia, the wife of Augustus, compiled from the Co- Itimbarium,* a sepulchre which was opened at Rome, in a.d. 1726, pre- sents many examples of names with the word mcdicus attached to them ; among them may be noted that of Tyrannus, which appears in Acts xix. 9 as that of the owner of the "school" or lecture-room at Ephesus, in which St. Paul received his disciples. Where, we ask, was one who made choice of (the name is that of the gens of Seueca and Gallic), and Persius, as may be in- ferred from a remarkal)le description of a feast on Herod's birthday in Sat. v. 180— 185, had at least some points of contact with Jewish life and thought. * The word means literally "a dove- cote," and was applied to the sepulchre as consisting mainly of what we should call *• pigeon-holes," in each of which stood a small bin containing the ashes of the dead. that profession likely to seek for his education ? The answer to that question leads us into yet a new region of coincidences. On the one hand, the town of Crotona, in Southern Italy, had a reputation of some centuries' standing for its School of Medicine (Herod, iii. 131), and this would fall in with the hypothesis of the Evangelist's Lucanian origin. On the other, of all the medical schools of the time, there was none that stood higher in reputation than that erf Tarsus, and few that stood so high. The leading physicians of the time, Aret^us the Cappadocian, Dios- corides of Anazarba in Cilicia, Athena3us of the Cilician Attaleia, could hardly have received their training elsewhere. Within a few miles of Tarsus, at .35ga3, on the coast of Cilicia, was a great Temple of iEsculapius, which, as resorted to by sick persons from all countries who came to consult the priests of the Temple (the Asclepiadae, i.e., the guild or brotherhood of ^sculaj^ius), of- fered the nearest analogue to a modern hospital, as a place for observation and practice. If Tarsus were thus the place, or one of the places, to Avhich Luke went to gain his professional know- ledge and experience, we have again what explains many of the facts, more or less perplexing, in the Apostolic history. There is no record of St. Paul's first meeting with him, or of his conversion to the faith. If, with almost all in- terpreters of repute, we see in the sudden use of the first person plural in Acts xvi. 10 a proof of companionship then beginning be- tween the writer of the book and the Apostle whose labours he nar- rates, the naturalness with whicb ST. LUKE. 77 it comes in must be admitted as prima facie evidence of previous j acquaintance. But there were ! other names at that time connected , with Tarsus which have an interest , for the Christian student. All that we read in the Acts suggests ' the thought that the Cypriot Jew, ' the Levite, Josos Barnahas, the Son of Consolation, received his | education at Tarsus, and there learnt to love and honour the tent- maker Eabbi, for the reality of whose conversion he was the first to vouch (Acts ix. 27), to whom he turned when his work pressed hard on him, as the fellow-labourer most like-minded with himself (Acts xi. 25), the separation from whom, when they parted, brought with it a bitterness which is hardly in- telligible, except on the assump- tion of a previous affection that was now wounded to the quick (Acts XV. 39). Not altogethei', again, without some points of con- tact with St. Luke, is the fact that the great geographer Strabo, a native of Cappadocia, whose full description of Tarsus {Geogr. xiii. p. 627) is obviously based upon personal observation, may have visited that city about a.d. 17, and on the supposition, either of actual contact, or of the attention called to his writings among the students of what we may well call the University of Tarsus, we may legitimately trace his influence as working indirectly in the uniform accuracy of all the incidental geo- graphical notices that occur in St. Luke's Gospel and in the Acts. At Tarsus also, at or about the same period, was to be seen another conspicuous character of the time, the great wonder-working impostor, Apollonius of Tyana, whose life was afterwards published as a counterfeit and rival parallel to that of Christ, and in whom St. Luke might have seen the great prototype of all the " workers with curious arts," w4th their books of charms and incantations, whom he describes as yielding to the mightier power of St. Paul (Acts xix. 11, 12). St. Luke's character as a physi- cian may be considered from three distinct points of view, each of which has a special interest of its own. (1) As influencing his style and language ; (2) as aifecting his personal relations with St. Paul ; and (3) as gi\ing him opportunities for acquiring the knowledge which we find in the books commonly ascribed to him. Each of these call for a special, though brief, notice. (1.) The differences of style in . St. Luke's Gospel as compared with / the two that precede it, the proofs / of a higher culture, the more > rhythmical structure of his sen- tences, which are traceable even by the merely English reader, in such passages, e.g., as chap. i. 1 — 4, are in the Greek original con- spicuous throughout, the only ex- ceptions being the portions of his Gospel which, like chaps, i., from verse 5, and ii., are apparently translations from a lost Hebrew or Aramaic document. The use of technical phraseology is, in like manner, traceable in his mention of the " fevers (the word is plural in the Greek), and dyscnter^^" of which Publius was healed at Melita (Acts xxviii. 8) ; in the " feet " not the common TroSey, podes, but the more precise ^dcreis, baseis) " and ankle bones " of Acts iii. 7 ; in the " scales " that fell from St. Paul's eyes (Acts ix. IS) ; in the "trance," or, more literally, ecstasy ^ 78 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. connected with. St. Peter's vision (Acts X. 9, 10), as brought on by the Apostle's exposure to the noon- tide sun after long-continued fast- ing ; in the special adjective used for "eaten of worms," in Acts xii. 23 ; in his notice of the " virtue," or healing power, that flowed forth from our Lord's body (chap. viii. 46) ; and of the sweat in "clots," or "drops like as of blood," that issued from it in the Agony of G-ethsemane (chap. xxii. 44). *) (2.) It is noticeable in tracing the connection of St. Paul and St. ' Luke, that on each occasion Avhen the one joins the other for a time, it is after the Apostle had suffered in a more than common degree from the bodily infirmities that / oppressed him. When they met ; at Troas, it was after he had been detained in Gralatia by " the in- '.^ firmity of his flesh" (Gal. iv. 13). ■; When the one joins the other in the voyage to Jerusalem, it is after St. Paul had had " the sentence of death" in himself, had been "dying daily," had been " delivered from so great a death," had been " carry- ing about in his body the dying of the Lord Jesus" (2 Cor. i. 9 ; iv. 10—12, 16). From that time St. Luke seems scarcely to have left his friend, except, perhaps, for short intervals ; and the way in which St. Paul speaks of him as " the beloved physician," makes it almost a matter of certainty that it was by his ministrations as a physician that he had made him- self "beloved." The constant companionship of one with St. Luke's knowledge and special cul- ture was sure, sooner or later, to affect St. Paul's thoughts and language, and traces of this in- fluence ^re to be found in many of the Epistles. Most of these are naturally more manifest in the Greek than in the English words ; but we may note as examples the frequent use of the ideal of "health" as the standard of life and teaching, as seen in the phrases "sound," or better, healthy^ " doctrine " {yyiaivovcri) of 1 Tim. i. 10; vi. 3; 2 Tim. i'. 13; and in the " doting," or better, diseased^ of 1 Tim. vi. 4 ; in the spread of error being like that of a gangrene or cancer (2 Tim. ii. 17) ; in the word for " puffed up," which im- plies the delirium of a fever of the typhus type (TU(/)co0ets, typhotheis) in 1 Tim. iii. 6 ; vi. 4 ; 2 Tim. iii. 4 ; in the conscience seared, or better, cauterised, till it has become callous (1 Tim. iv. 2) ; in the malady of " itching ears " (2 Tim. iv. 3) ; ;in the " bodily exercise " or training (literally, the training of the gym nasium) that profiteth little (1 Tim. iv. 8) ; in the precept which en- joined on Timothy, as a means of keeping his mind in a state of equilibrium and purity, unconta- minated by the evil with which his office brought him into contact, to " drink no longer water " only, but " to use a little wine, for his stomach's sake and his often in- firmities" (1 Tim. V. 23); in the judgment that a reckless disregard of the body is of no value as a remedy against what is technically called fulness (not " satisf ving ") of the flesh (Col. ii. 23). ^ These words are, in almost all cases, characteristic of the Greek of Hippocrates and other medical writers, and the same may be said of the Greek words used by St. Paul for "dung" {a-KvfiaXa — skybala, Phil. iii. 8), for " occa- sion " {acpopfiT] — aphorme, 1 Tim. v. 14), for " gazing " or " looking ST. LUKE. 79 earnestly " (ot.T€viC(^v, 2 Cor. iii. 7 — 13 : the word is used twelve times l)y St. Luke, and, with the above exceptions, bv him onlv), for "charge" (1 Tim. i. 3, 18), for "contention" {i.e., paroxysm) in Acts XV. 39. (3.) It is obvious tha't in the East, then as now, the calling of a phy- sician was a passport to many social regions into which it was otherwise difficult to find access. A physician of experience arriving in this or that city, would be likely to be- come acquainted, not with the poor only, but ^ath men of official rank and women of the higher class. How far, and in what special way this helped St. Luke to obtain the information which he wanted for his Gospel, will call for inquiry further on. Here it will be enough to note that such chan- nels of information were sure to be opened to him. If, on the data that have been given, it is reasonable to suppose that St. Paul and St. Luke had met at Tarsus, it is almost a matter of certainty that their friendship was continued at Antioch. Here the tradition, given by Eusebius {Hist. iii. 4), that St. Luke was a resident in the latter city, agrees with the natural inference from the promi- nence which he gives to the Chris- tian society there as the mother of all the Gentile churches (Acts xi. 19—30), from his knowledge of the names of its pastors and teachers (Acts xiii. 1 — 3), from the fukiess with which he relates the early stages of the great controversy with the Judaisers (Acts xv. 1 — 3, 22 — 35). From Antioch, however, accepting as before the natural conclusion from the change of pro- nouns, he must have gone to Troas (Acts xvi. 10), and probably begun or continued there his labours in the gospel, which at a later time won St. Paul's glowing praise 2 Cor. viii. 18).* Thence he went with St. Paul to Philippi, and, as far as we can judge, remained there during the whole period of the Apostle's work at Corinth and Ephesus, the- friend and guide of Lydia and Euodia and Syntyche and the other women who laboured with him in the gospel (Phil. iv. 2, 3), until after a visit to Corinth (2 Cor. viii. 18), he joined him again, and the Apostle returned from his winter sojourn in that city, Philippi, was with him once more at Troas, sailed with him to Miletus, and so to Tyre and Ptole- mais and Ca^sarea, went up with him to Jerusalem, and remained with him or near him during his two years' imprisonment under Felix or Festus (Acts xx. — xxvi.). Then came the voyage to Italy, narrated with the graphic precision of an eye-witness, and throughout in the first person plural (Acts xxvii. 1 — 44) ; then the shipwreck at Melita, and the arrival in Italy, and the companionship of two years (broken, perhaps, if we assume Luke, as seems probable, to be the "true yokefellow" of Phil. iv. 3, by a short visit to Philippi) of the first imprison- ment at Rome (Col. iv. 14 ; Phi- lem. verse 24). Then came the last unrecorded missionary joirney * There are, it is believed, no sufficient reasons for rejecting the reference of this passage to St. Luke. It is not meant that St. Paul speaks of his gospel as a book, but the physician was an Evangelist in the primitive as well as the later sense of the word (Acts xxi. 8 ; Eph. v. 11 ; 2 Tim. iv. 5), and no one was so likely to have been chosen by St. Paul to be one of the representatives of the Macedonian churches, 80 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. of St. Paul in Spain, Asia, Mace- donia, Achaia,* during which St. Luke probably continued with him ; and then we find him, the last clear glimpse we get, still at the side of his friend and master, when all others were proving time-serv- ing and faithless (2 Tim. iv. 10). Beyond this we have nothing defi- nite. Tradition, not earlier than the fourth century (Epiphanius, II(Br. 51), says that he preached in Italy, Gaul, Dalmatia, and Mace- donia ; that he was a painter as well as physician, and was specially famous for seven portraits of the Virgin : that he lived to the age of eighty-four ; that he was crucified at Elsea on an olive tree, in the Peloponnesus ; or, according to another story, died a natural death in Bithynia. His bones are re- lated to have been brought to Con- stantinople from Patras in Achaia by order of the Emperor Constan- tine, and to have been deposited in the Church of the Apostles. A tomb has, however, been dis- covered by ]Mr. "Wood, bearing the * The route of the Apcstle may be inferred partly from his plans (Piiil. ii. 24 ; Philem. verse 22), partly from the re- ference to Asia in 2 Tim. i. 15, Macedonia (1 Tim. i. 3), Corinth (2 Tim. iv, 20). I have ventured to suggest Spain as also probable. It is hardly likely that St. Paul would have abandoned the strong desire which he expresses in Rom. xv. 24. And if there was, as has been shown to be probable, a personal connection be- tween Luke and the family of Cordova, there Avoiild be fresh motives for his going there. Clement of Rome, it may be mentioned, speaks of St. Paul as having travelled to tlie farthest boundary of the West {Epist. ad Cor. c. 5), a phrase which would hardly have been used by a Roman writer of Rome itself. The tradition as to an evangelising journey into Spain became, as the years passed on, more and more definite, and was accepted by Epiphanius, Chrysostom, Jerome, and Theodoret. name of St. Luke among the ruins of Ephesus. II. The Authorship of the Grospel. — The two earliest wit- nesses to the existence of a Gospel recognised as written by St. Luke are (1) Irenceus, and (2) the early list of sacred books known as the Muratorian Fragment. The former, dwelling on the necessity of there being neither more nor less than four Gospels, as there are four ele- ments, four cardinal points, and the like, names St. Luke's as one of the four. Pressing the analogy of the four symbolic figures of the Cherubim, he compares the Gospel which he names as Luke's to the calf, as representing the priestly, sacrificial side of our Lord's work. "As such," he says, "it began with Zacharias burning incense in the Temple" {Adv. Hcer. iii. 11). In another paosage he speaks of "Luke, the companion of Paul," as having " written in a book the gospel which the latter preached " {Adv. Hcer. iii. 1). The Muratorian Fragment, which has suffered the loss of its first sentences, and so fails to give direct evidence as to St. Matthew and St. Mark, begins accordingly with St. Luke, men- tioning, however, his Gospel as the third. What follows is interesting, though being, like the whole frag- ment, in the language of an ob- Auously illiterate scribe, and pre- sumably a translation from a Greek original, it is at once corrupt and obscure. The nearest approach to j an intelligible rendering would be j as follows : — " Luke the physician, ' after the ascension of Christ, when St. Paul had chosen him, as being zealous of what was just and right {juris studiosus), wrote in his own name, and as it seemed good to ST. LUKE. 81 him (ex opinione, apparently with an implied reference to chap. i. 2). Yet he himself did not see the Lord in the flesh, and did what he did as he could hest attain to it, and so he began his narrative from the birth of John." The passage is every way important, as showing (1) the early identification of the writer of the third Gospel with Luke the physician ; (2) the absence of any early tradition that he was one of the Seventy ; (3) the fact that the first two chapters were part of the Gospel as known to the writer of the Fragment, or of the still older document which he translated. Papias, who names St. Matthew and St. Mark, is silent, as far as the fragments of his writings that remain show, as to St. Luke. Justin, who does not name the writer of any Gospel, speaks of the " records of the Apostles, which are called Gospels," as having been written either by Apostles themselves, or by those who followed them closely (using the same Greek word here as St. Luke uses in chap. i. 2), and cites in immediate connection with this the fact of the sweat that was as great drops of blood {Dial. c. Tryph. c. 22). It seems all but certain from this that he had read the narrative of chap, xxii, 44 as we have it, and that he ascribed the authorship of it to a companion of the Apostles. So Tertullian, who recognises four Gospels, and four only, speaks of ' ' John and Mat- thew as Apostles, of Luke and Mark as helpers of the Apostles {Cont. Marc. iv. 2) ; and Origen (in Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi. 25) speaks of the Gospel according to St. Luke as being " cited and approved by Paul," referring apparently to the expression " according to my Gospel" (E,om. ii. 16; xvi. 25; 2 Tim. i. 8), and to "the bi-other whose praise is in the Gospel," in 2 Cor. viii. 18, 19. III. The Sources of the Gospel. — The question. Where did the writer of this Gospel col- lect his information, is obviously one of special interest. In St. Matthew, we have, accepting the traditional authorship, personal re- collection as a groundwork, helped by the oral or written teaching previously current in the Church. In St. Mark we have substantially the same oral or written teaching, modified, as seems probable, by the personal recollections of St. Peter. St. Luke, on the other hand, dis- claims the character of an eye- witness (chap. i. 2), and confesses that he is only a compiler, claiming simply the credit of having done his best to verify the facts which he narrates. St. Paul, to whom he specially devoted himself, was, as far as personal knowledge went, in the same position as himself. Where, then, taking the facts of St. Luke's life, as given above, was it probable that he found his ma- terials ? (1.) At Antioch, if not before, the Evangelist would be likely to come in contact with not a few who had been " eye-witnesses and^ ministers of the word." Those who were scattered after the persecution that began with the death of Stephen (Acts xi. 19), and the proj^hets who came from Jerusalem with Agabus (Acts xi. 28), the latter probably forming part of the company of the Seventy, must have included some at least of persons so qualified. At Antioch, too, he must have met with Manaen, the foster- 82 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. brother of the Tetrarch, and may- have derived from him much that he narrates as to the ministry of the Baptist (chap. iii. 1 — 20), our Lord's testimony to him (chap. vii. 18 — 34), the relation between Herod and Pilate, and the part which the former took in the history of the Crucifixion (chap, xxiii. 5 — 12), the estimate which our Lord had passed upon his character (chap, xiii. 32). That acquaintance served probably, in the nature of things, to introduce him to a knowledge of the other members of the Herodian family, of whom we learn so much from him, and, of the Evangelists, from him only (chap. iii. 1; Acts xii. 1 — 25; xxv. 13; xxvi. 32). (2.) During the years of St. Luke's work at Troas and Philippi, there were, we may presume, but few such opportunities ; but when he accompanied St. Paul on his last journey to Jerusalem, they must have been multiplied indefi- nitely. Mnason of Cyprus, the old disciple (a disciple from the beginning, as the word signifies, Acts xxi. 16), must have had much to tell him. During St. Paul's stay at Caesarea there was ample time for him to become acquainted with the current oral, or as his own words imply, written, teaching of the churches of Palestine, which formed the groundwork of what is common to him and the first two Gospels, as well as with the many facts that connect themselves with that city in the narrative of the Acts. We cannot, however, think of a man of St. Luke's culture, bent upon writing a history be- cause he was not satisfied with the *' many " fragmentary records that he found already in circulation, resting at Caesarea during the two years of St. Paul's imprisonment without pushing his inquiries further. We may think of him accordingly as journeying in re- gions where he knew our Lord had worked, most of which lay within two or three days' easy journey, while yet there was little record of His ministrj^ there, and so collect- ing such facts as the raising of the widow's son at Nain (chap. vii. 11 — 17), the appearance of the risen Lord to the disciples at Emmaus (chap. xxiv. 13 — 35), the full record, peculiar to this Gospel, of His ministry and teaching in Per^a. (3.) The profession of St. Luke as a physician, probably also the cha- racter that he had acquired as the guide and adviser of the women who formed a kind of sisterhood i at Philippi, would naturally give' him access to a whole circle of eye- witnesses who were not so likely to, come within the range of St. Mat- thew and St. Mark. He alone men^^ tions the company of devout women who followed Jesus during part, at least, of His ministry (chap. viii. 2, 3), and as he gives the names of the chief members of the company, it is natural to infer that he M'as per- sonally acquainted with them. So far as they were sharers in the feelings of other women, we may believe, with hardly the shadow of a doubt, that they would dwell espe- cially on all that connected itself with the childhood and youth of the Lord whom they had loved with such devout tenderness, that the bereaved mother whom St. John had taken to his own home (John xix. 27) — sometimes, perhaps, in Galilee, sometimes in Jerusalem — would be the centre of their re- verential love. From them, there- fore, as those who would be sure to treasure up such a record, St. Luke ST. LUKE. 83 may well have derived the narrative — obviuusly a translation from the Hebrew or Aramaic of Palestine — which forms the introduction to his Gospel (chaps, i. and ii.), and which is dastinct in character and style from the rest of his Gospel. But informants such as these would be sure to treasure up also the special instances of our Lord's tenderness and sympathy for women hke them- selves, and it is accordingly not more than a legitimate inference from the facts of human nature to trace to them such narratives as that of the woman that was a sinner (chap. vii. 36 — 50), of the contrasted charac- ters of the two sisters at Bethany (chap. X. 38 — 42), of the woman who cried out, " Blessed is the womb that bare thee ..." (chap, xi. 27),* of the daughters of Jeru- salem who met their Lord on His way to Calvary (chap, xxiii. 27 — 29), of those, again, who had come up from Galilee, and who stood afar off beholding His death upon the cross (chap, xxiii. 49), and of their buying spices and ointment for His entombment (chap, xxiii. 56). On the whole, then, everything tends to the belief that St. Luke's statement that he had carefully traced to their sources, as far as he could, the facts which he nar- rates, was no idle boast ; that he had many and ample opportunities for doing so ; and that he did this, as we have seen above, with the culture and discernment which his previous training was hkely to have imparted. It is obvious, however, * It will be noted that our Lord's words (chap, xxiii. 29), " Blessed are the barren, and the Avombs that never bare, an'l the paps that never gave suck," seem intended to remind those who heard them of the far- different benediction Avhich one of them had once uttered. that coming, as he did, into the field of inquiry some thirty, or at least twenty, years or so after the events, many of the facts and say- ings would reach him in a compara- tively isolated form ; and though there is an obvious and earnest endeavour to relate them, as he says, " in order," it might not always be easy to ascertain what that order had actually been. And this is, in part at least, the probable explanation of the seeming disloca- tion of facts which we find on com- paring his Gospel with those of St. ^latthew and St. Mark. (Comp. Matt. viii. 1 ; ix. 1, with the his- tory of the same events in St. Mark and St. Luke.) IV. The First Readers of the Gospel.— St. Luke's record differs in a very marked way from the other three in being addressed, or, as we should say, dedicated, to an individual. Who and what Theo- philus was, we have but few data- for conjecturing. The epithet " most excellent " — the same word as that used by TertuUus in ad- dressing Felix (Acts xxiv. 3) — im- plies social or official position of some dignity. The absence of that epithet in the dedication of the Acts indicates, perhaps, that the Evan- gelist had then come to be on terms of greater familiarity with him. The reference to Italian lo- calities of minor importance, as places familiar to the reader as well as writer, in Acts xxviii. 12 — 14, suggests the conclusion that he was of Latin, probably of Eoman, origin ; the fact that the Gospel was written for him in Greek, that he shared the culture which was then common to well nigh all educated Romans. He was a convert, ac- cordingly, from the religion of 84 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Rome to that of Christ, though he may, of course, have passed through Judaism, as a schoolmaster leading him to Christ. The teach- ing which he had akeady received as a catechumen had embraced an outline of the facts recorded in the Gospel (chap. i. 3), and St. Luke wrote to raise the knowledge so gained to a standard of greater completeness. The name, it may be noted, was, like other names of kindred meaning, such, e.g., as Timotheus, not an uncommon one. Among St. Luke's contem- poraries, it was borne by one of the Jewish high priests, the brother-in- law of Caiaphas (Jos. Ant. xviii. 4, § 3), who probably was responsible for St. Paul's mission of j^ersecution to Damascus, and by some official at Athens.who was condemned for per- jury by the Areopagus (Tacit. Ann. ii. 55). Beyond this all is conjec- ture, or tradition which dissolves into conjecture. He is said to have been, by this or that eccle- siastical writer, an Achygan, or an Alexandrian, or an Antiochian ; he has been wildly identified, by some modern critics, with one or other of the two persons thus named ; it has been held by others that the name (= " one who loves God") simplj^ de- signated the ideal Christian reader whom St. Luke had in view. It is, however, reasonable to infer that the Gospel, though dedicated to him, was meant for the wider circle of the class of which he was the representative, i.e., in other words, that it was meant to be especially a Gospel for the educated heathen. It will be seen in what follows, that this view is confirmed by its more prominent characteristics. V. The Characteristics of the Gospel. — (1.) It has been said, not without some measure of truth, that one main purpose of the Acts of the Apostles was to reconcile the two parties in the Apostolic Chuich which tended to arrange themselves, with more or less of open antagonism, under the names of St. Peter and St. Paul, by showing that the two Apostles were substantially of one mind ; that the former had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles (Acts X. 48), and had consented to the great charter of their free- dom (Acts XV. 7) ; that the latter had shown his reverence for the ceremonial law by twice taking on himself, wholly or in part, the vow of a Nazarite (Acts xviii. 18; xxi. 26). Something of the same catholicity of purpose is to be found in the Gospel which bears St. Luke's name. It was obviously natural that it should be so in the work of the filend of one who be- came as a Jew to Jews, and as a Greek to Greeks (1 Cor. ix. 20). Thus we have the whole history of the first two chapters, and the genealogy in chap, iii., obviously meeting the tastes, in the first instance, of Jewish readers on the one side, and on the other the choice of narratives or teachings that spe- cially bring out the width and uni- versality of the love of God, the breaking down of the barriers of Jewish exclusiveness, the reference to the widow of Sarepta and Naaman the SjTian (chap. iv. 26, 27), the mission of the Seventy as indi- cating the universality of the King- dom (chap. X. 1), the pardon of the penitent robber (chap, xxiii. 43), the parables of the Good Samari- tan (chap. X. 30 — 37), of the Lost Sheep, the Lost Piece of Money, and the Prodigal Son (chap, xv.) ; midway between the two, the story ST. LUKE. 85 of ZacchEeus, the publican, treated as a heathen, and yet recognised as a son of Abraham (chap. xix. 9). (2.) In the Acts, again, especially in the earlier chapters, we note a manifest tendency in the "svi-iter to dwell on all acts of self-denial, and on the lavish generosity which made the life of the Apostolic Church the realisation, in part at least, of an ideal communism (Acts ii. 44, 4-5 ; iv. 32, 37; vi. 1. ; ix. 36). So in the Gospel we recognise, over and above what St. Luke has in common with others, a principle of selection, leading him to dwell on all parts of our Lord's teaching that pointed in the same direction. The parables of the Eich Fool (chap. xii. 16—21), of the Rich Man and Lazarus (chap. xvi. 19—31), of the Unjust Steward, with its direct and immediate appli- cation (chap. xvi. 1 — 14) ; the coun- sel to the Pharisees to *' give alms," and so to find a more than cere- monial purity (chap. xi. 41) ; to His disciples to sell what they have and to seek for treasures in heaven (chap. xii. 33) ; the beatitudes that fall on the poor and the hungry (chap. vi. 20, 21), are all instances of his desire to impress this ideal of an unselfish life upon the minds of his 1 eaders. Even in his account of the Baptist's teaching, we find him supplying what neither St. Matthew nor St. Mark had given — the counsel which John gave to the people — '* He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none" (chap. iii. 11). In this also we may recognise the work of one who was like-minded with St. Paul. He, too, laboured with his own hands that he might minister to the necessities of others (Acts XX. 34), and loved to dweU on the pattern which Christ had set when, " being rich, He for our sakes be- came poor" (2 Cor. viii. 9), and praised those whose " deep poverty had abounded to the riches of their liberality" (2 Cor. viii. 2). He, too, had learnt the lesson that a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things that ' he possesseth (chap. xii. 15), and had been initiated into the mystery of knowing how, with an equal mind, to be full and to be hun- gry, to abound and to suffer need (Phil. iv. 12). He, too, warns men against the deceitfulness of riches, and the hurtful lusts springing from them that plunge men in the abyss of destruction (1 Tim. vi. 9, 17). Lastly, we cannot fail to note, aa we read his Gospel, the special stress which he, far more than St. Matthew or St. Mark, lays upon the prayers of the Christ. It is from him we learn that it was as Jesus was " praying " at His baptism that the heavens were opened (chap, iii. 21) ; that it was while He was praying that the fashion of His countenance was altered, and there came on Him the glory of the Transfiguration (chap. ix. 29) ; that He was "praying" when the disciples came and asked Him to teach them to pray (chap. xi. 1) ; that He had prayed for Peter that his faith might not fail (chap. xxii. 32). In the life of prayer, no less than in that of a self-chosen poverty, His was the pattern-life which His disciples were — each in his measure and according to his power — to endeavour to reproduce. VI. Relations to St. Mat- thew and St. Mark. — It would [ be a fair summary of the account I of the Gospel of St. Luke thus I given, to say that it is in its uni- I vei-sality, its tenderness, its spirit I of self-sacrifice, pre-eminently the NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Gospel of the Saintly Life, presenting to us that aspect of our Lord's ministry in whicli He appears as the great Example, no less than the great Teacher. In other words, since He is represented as at once holj^, undefiled, and sepa- rate from sinners (Heb. vii. 2G),and as able to have compassion on their infirmities (Heb. iv. 15), it is the GOSPEL OF THE SON OF MAN as the great High Priest of humanity in the human phase of that priesthood. It follows with a marvellous fitness upon the Gospel of St. Matthew, that brings before us the portraiture of the true King and the true Scribe — upon that of St. INIark, in which we may trace the lineaments of the true Servant of the Lord. It prepares the way for that of St. Jokn, which presents the Incarnate Word as manifesting His Eternal Priesthood in its sacrificial and mediatorial aspects. In its per- vading tone and spirit, it is, as we have seen, essentially Pauline. In its language and style, however, it presents not a few afiinities with an Epistle, the Pauline authorship of which is at least questionable, and which not a few have seen reason to look upon as the work of Apollos — the Epistle to the Hebrews. On this ground chiefly many critics, beginning with Cle- ment of Alexandria (about a.d. 200), a man of wide and A^aried culture, have held that Epistle to have been the work of St. Luke, elaborating and polishing the thoughts of St. Paul (Euseb. Eist., vi. 14). It has, he says, speaking as a critic of style, "the same complexion" as the Acts. Other considerations, it is believed, outweigh the arguments based on that fact; but the resemblance is Bufficient to indicate that there were some afiinities connecting the two writers, and the most natural is that which supposes them both to have had, directly or indirectly, an Alexandrian training, and to have formed their style upon the more rhetorical books of the later Hel- lenistic additions to the canon of the Old Testament, such as the Pjooks of Maccabees as the model of his- torj^, and the Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus for that of the more systematic treatment oJ doc- trine. The points of resemblance between the Book of Wisdom and the Epistle to the Hebrews are indeed so numerous as to have suggested to the present writer the thought of identity of authorship.* It is, of course, obvious to remark that many of the facts referred to are found also in the other Gospels, and formed part of the current oral teaching out of which the first three Gospels grew. Admitting this, how- ever, it is clear that the history of Apollos brought him specially within the range of those who were likely to be conversant with St. Luke's teaching ; and if we suppose him to have any written record before him, it is far more likely to have been the third Gospel than either the first or second. The two men, who were friends and companions of the same Apostle, were, at any rate, likely to have met and knowoi each other, and if so it would not be strange that, with like character and like culture, there should be a reciprocal influence between them. Traces of that influence are to be found, it is believed, in the refer- ences in the Epistle to some of the passages which, though common to * The facts that bear upon St. Luke's work, as the writer of the Acts of the Apostles, are naturally reserved for the Introduction to that Book. ST. LUKE. 87 the other Gospels, are yet specially j (Heb. v. 7, 8) ; to His endurance of characteristic of this Gospel ; to the j the cross, despising the shame (Heb. xii. 2) ; His endurance also of the contradiction of sinners (Heb, xii. 3); to His being the Mediator of a new covenant (Heb. xii. 24), the great Shepherd of the sheep (Heb. xiii. 20). temptations of the Son of Man as giving Him power to sympathise with sinners, though Himself wdth- Qut sin (Heb. iv. 15) ; to His prayers and supplications and strong crying ST. JOHN. By the Ven. Archdeacon WATKINS, D.D. I. Life of the Apostle John. — Uur sources of information for the life of the Apostle John are, (1) the Four Gosjiels themselves; (2) the Acts of the Apostles, with references in the Epistles ; (3) the traditions which have come to us in the history of the early Church. (1) From the Gospels we know that St. John was the son of Zebedee and Salome. The father is mentioned only once in the narrative (Matt. iv. 21, 22 ; Mark i. 19, 20), hut the name occurs frequently as distin- guishing the sons. He had " hired servants " (Mark i. 20) ; and John's own connection with the family of the high priest (John xviii. 15), and the committal of Mary to his care (John xix. 27), may also point to a position removed at least from the necessity, hut not from the practice, of labour, which was cus- tomary among Jews of all classes (Matt. iv. 21)^ Of Salome we know little more. It has been assumed above that she was the wife of Zebedee, and the I mother of St. John ; and the as- sumption is based upon a com- parison of Matt. XX. 20 ; xxvii. 56 ; Mark xv. 40 ; xvi. 1 . It has also been frequently'- assumed that she was the sister of Mary, the mother of our Lord, mentioned in John xix. 25 ; and although this cannot be regarded as proved, it is the most probable interpretation. It would follow from this that St. John was the cousin-german of our Lord. Salome was also one of the band of women who ministered unto the Lord of their substance (Matt, xxvii. 56 ; Luke viii. 3) ; and this falls in with the general impression which the narrative gives of the position of the family. She was present at the Crucifixion (Mark XV. 40), and was one of those who brought spices for the embalmment (Mark xvi. 1). In one other pas- sage she is mentioned, and there she appears as asking for her two sons the position of honour in the Messianic kingdom (Matt, xx. 20 et seq.). Her prominence as com- ST. JOHN. 89 parod with her hiis"band, and the title " mother of Zebedee's child- ren," makes it prohahle that she outlived him, and that the in- fluence of the mother, whose zeal and love for her sons are illustrated in her ambitious request for them, was that which chiefly moulded the earlier years of the beloved Apostle. Another member ot the house- hold is known to us — James, who is usually mentioned first, and was presumably the elder of the pair of brothers. At the time of his death he was, however, known to St. Luke as " James the brother of John" (Acts xii. 2), and the same writer inverts the order of the names in the same chapter (Luke ix. 28 [? reading-], 52). In Acts i. 13, too, the better reading is Fcter and John and James. The home of the family was on the shores of the Lake of Galilee, at Bethsaida, according to the usual conclusion from Luke v. 9 and John i. 44 ; or, perhaps, at Caper- naum, which was not far from Bethsaida (Mark i. 29). The sons of Jonas were com- panions of the sons of Zebedee when they are first mentioned, and had probably been friends in boy- hood and youth. Whether the home was at Bethsaida or Caper- naum, the Apostle was by birth a Galilean, as were all the Twelve, with the exception, perhaps, of Judas Iscariot (Acts li. 7). He belonged, then, to the free, in- dustrious, and warlike people of the North — a people who were despised by the more cultured inhabitants of Jerusalem, and upon whom the yoke of Judaism pressed less hea^aly than it did upon the dwellers in Judaea. Removed from the influence of Scribes and Pharisees on the one hand, he would on the other hand grow up in contact with men of alien races and creeds, who were found in large numbers in. the populous cities of Galilee. The union of Jewish and Greek charac- teristics which mark the man would be thus formed insensibly in the boy. We know too little of the family life in Galilee eighteen centuries ago to be able to realise with any fulness and certainty how the years of the Apostle's boyhood and youth were spent ; and yet there are certain bold lines which can be distinctly traced. Up to the age of six he, like other Jewish child- ren, would be taught by his parents at home, and then sent to one of the public schools, which, in the period after the Captivity, had been established in every town and important village in Judaea and Galilee. We Imow that after the fall of Jerusalem Tiberias became the seat of the most famous rabbinic school, and it is probable that there were already established on the shores of the sea of Galilee the seminaries of doctors who had been themselves trained at Jerusalem. The lad would have gone to one of these higher seminaries at the age of sixteen, and would thus have been fitted for the work which, in the providence of God, lay before him, though he was not technically trained at the feet of a rabbi, and was therefore classed among the "unlearned and ignorant" (Acts iv. 13). At the age of twelve or thirteen, John would have been taken up, as we know that Jesus was, to keep the feasts at Jerusalem. The holy city, bound up with prophecy and psalm ; the temple, the centre of every highest hope and thought 90 NEW TESTA :\IENT INTRODUCTIONS. which, at mother's knee or at the feet of the teacher, had heen in- stilled into his mind, now burst in all the glory of its reality upon this Galilean hoy. What Oxford and Cambridge are to English schoolboys, or Eome to the pilgrim from distant lands, all this, and a thousand times more than all this, was the city of Zion to the Jewish pilgrim. Well may it be that the gorgeous ritual of the temple so impressed itself upon the receptive youthful mind as to furnish the imagery in which the Visions of the Apocalj^se were afterwards to be clothed. These visits would be repeated three times each year, and form the great events in the year's course. The caravans, the pilgrim-songs, the discom^ses of rabbis and teachers, the ritual of the feasts themselves, would all leave their mark upon the opening mind, and lead to question and answer as to what these things meant. In the intervals between the feasts, there would be the regular synagogue services and instruc- tions, the converse with teachers and friends, the daily task in his father's trade, the growth and development of character in and through all these outer circum- stances. The most prominent thought of the times, the subject on which men were ever musing and speak- ing, was the expectation of the Messiah. Probably every well- trained Jewish boy expected that the Messiah would come before his own life would end. Together with this expectation of the ISIes- siah there were hoj)es of freedom from the oppression of Rome ; and the deep feeling of the masses frequently found vent in open in- surrection. One remarkable attempt to throw off the hated yoke, which w\as for a time successful — when Judas the Gaulonite, and Sadoc the Pharisee, ruled the whole country — must have occurred when John was yet a boy, and his spirit must have been fired by the cry of their watchword, " God only is our Lord and Master." (Comp. Jos. Ant. xviii. 1.) And so the years went on. Boy- hood passed into youth, and youth into manhood. The study of the law and the prophets, the singing of psalms, the utterance of prayers, the feelings and hopes of his countiymen, must, with successive years, have brought a new mean- ing. The dreams of childhood and visions of youth grew into the deeper thoughts and fuller hopes of manhood. Such was the relation of John's mind to the preparation of the past and to the hopes of the future, when the Baptist appeared as the herald of the coming King, and passing from Judgea northwards through the Jordan Valley, cried A\'ith a voice which, like a trumpet- blast, awoke men from their spirit tual slumber, " Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." Among those who flocked to this new teacher were the sons of Zebedee and the sons of Jonas. The first chapter of this Gospel leads to the thought that they were pi-ominent among the Forerunner's disciples; and to the heart of no one, it may be, of all who heard him did his burning words come with greater power than to that of the young follower whose na,me was in the after-history to eclipse his own. For days, or weeks, or months, perhaps, the spirit of John the Baptist was leading the spirit ST. JOHN. 91 of John the son of Zebedee onward from Old Testament prophecy to Him in whom Old Tostaxnent pro- phecy was to he fulfilled. Neither knew, indeed, that the fulfilment was so near at hand until the Baptist saw the Messiah coming to be baptised, and the disciple heard the cry, " Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world." On the following day the words so full of meaning were again spoken, and a pair of dis- ciples, of whom Andrew was one, and John almost certainly the other, passed from the discipleship of the Baptist to that of the Messiah Himself. They " remained with Him that day," the crisis of the life, in which its whole current was changed. The next period of the life is one with which we are familiar from the Gospels themselves, and one which, therefore, needs but a brief treatment here. John seems at once to have followed Jesus ; to have been present, and perhaps even to have been a central fiigure, at the marriage at Cana (chap. ii. 5) ; to have gone thence with Him to Capernaum and Jerusalem (chap. ii. 12, 22) ; to have been with Him on the retui-n to Samaria; and then probably for a time to have gone back to his ordinary life, learning in the calmness of its retirement the meaning of the lessons which the words and deeds of Jesus had suggested to his mind. From that retirement he is again called, and perhaps the call was repeated (comp. Matt. iv. 18 and Luke V. 1 — 11), to be a fisher of men and an Apostle of the Chui-ch of Christ. With James his brother, with Simon and Andrew his friends, he is always named in the first gronp of the Apostles ; and with James and Simon he forms the band of three who are the nearest friends and companions of the earthly Hfe of Christ. They alone are with Him in the presence of death (Mark v. 37); in the ]\Iount of Transfiguration ; in the garden of Gethsemane. Peter and John follow Him ■s\dthin the high priest's house at the trial (chap, xviii.) ; John at least was present at the Crucifixion; and both ran together to the sepulchre. From the call to the Apostleship to the close of the human life of Christ, the story of the life of St. John is bound up with the outer events of the life of his Master. Following in His steps; hearing, and, with greater receptive power than any other hearer, grasping the truths that Christ taught ; seeing, and, \rith greater spu'itual intuition than any other witness, reading the signs that Christ did ; loving with fuller love, and therefore more fully loved; he was preparing to be prominent among witnesses to, as he had been prominent among those who were witnesses of, the works and teaching and love of Christ. But his character is not repre- sented as simply receptive. He who gave to Simon the name of Peter to mark him out as the rockman of the Church, gave to James and John, as marking out some characteristics in them, the title "Boanerges" or "Thunder- sons." (Comp. Mark iii. 17.) If " Son of Perdition " was the name of him in whom there was the special characteristic marked by "perdition" (comp. chap. x^di. 12), and "Son of Exhortation" that of him who had this special gift (comp. Acts iv. 36), theu 92 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. "Sons of Thunder" marks out some force of character — sudden, impulsive, vehement, as the thun- der's roU. Of this we find traces in the earlier Gospels. These sons of Zebedee, seeking with their mother the chief places in the Messianic kingdom, declare that they are ready to face all the dangers and difficulties before them ; to di'ink of His cup ; to be baptised with His baptism (Matt. XX. 20—24; Mark x. 35—41). They forbad those who cast out devils in Christ's name, and would call fire from heaven to consume those who received not their Lord (Luke ix. 49 — 54). Of the spirit of the Elijah of the Old Testament they had learnt in the school of the Elijah of the New Testament, and had carried, perhaps, something of the Baptist's stern denunciation of sin, and of his hardness of life and manner, into the work of Chi'ist. But if this is the character of John as di'awn in the earlier Gos- pels, it is not that which is drawn in the Fourth Gospel itself. There he is the son of love, gentleness, receptivity, rather than the son of thunder ; and these are the aspects of his character which have for the most part impressed themselves on Christian art and thought. The difference has often been noted, and for the most part noted by those who have drawn from it the inference that the two pictm-es can- not represent the same man, and that the later is the ideal of an after age. But the picture of the natural man taken in the fire and vigour of 5'outh may furnish but few points of resemblance with that which represents him in the mel- lo^v ripeness of age. Great minds are wholly changed by half a cen- tury of expansion and growth ; and experience would seem to show that the earnest, forceful, impulsive character is that which ripens into calm and gentle love. If the youth represents love bursting forth in active strength, the old age repre- sents love passively resting in being loved. The pictures, it should be remembered also, are drawn from different stand-points. The former is from without, representing the character in youth, as seen in its manifestations by others ; the lat- ter is from within, representing the character at the close of life, as the writer knew himself, and knew himself to be receptive of the love of Christ. (2) For the next period of the life of St. John our only authori- ties are the Acts of the Apostles and their letters. Here, as in the Gospels, he is closely connected with St. Peter. They are named together a.nong those who were " in the upper room" (chap, i. 13) ; the}^ go up to the Temple together (chap. iii. 1), and are together be- fore the Sanhedrin (chap. iv. 13, 19) ; they are sent together on the mis- sion to Samaria (chap. viii. 14). Both are in Jerusalem after the Herodian persecution, in which James was killed with the sword (chap. xii. 2), and are at the first great council (chap. xv. 6 ; comp. Gal. ii. 9). These scanty notices give all that we know of a period which must have extended over some twenty years. While James was the first bishop of the Jeru- salem Church, and Peter was the leader of Christianity among the Jews, it can hardly be that St. John was living a life of retire- ment. Other missions, like that to the Samaritans, may in part have occupied this interval ; or he may have carried on a work less promi- ST. JOHN. 93 nent, but not less useful, than thati of St. Peter and St. James in Jerusalem itself ; or lie may have returned to Galilee to do a like work there. ^Vherever he dwelt,' ne doubtless regarded the solemn committal of the Vu'gin Mary to his care (chap. xix. 26) as binding while she lived. If we may accept the traditions which place her death in the year a.d. 48 as approximately true, it may account for the fact that St. John is not mentioned with St. Peter and St. James as in Jeru- salem during St. Paul's first visit after Jiis conversion, about a.d. 38 (Gal. i. 18, 19); but he is so men- tioned, and is regarded as one of the " pillars of the Church," at the visit to the council in a.d. 51 (Gal. u. y). In connection with this residence at J erusalem, extending, it may be, over many years, we have to bear in mmd that while Galilee is the scene of the narrative of the earlier Gospels, J erusalem is specially that of the Foiu'th. It assumes a minute acquamtance with persons and places which could be possessed only by one who had resided in the city. (Comp. pp. 99, 100 {b).) (3) Passing to the later period of the Apostolic life, we are left without any certain guide. He is nowhere mentioned in the New Testament after the Jerusalem council in a.d. 51. It would seem probable that he was not there during St. Paul's visit of Actsxxi., but the argument from silence ought never to be pressed, nor should it be forgotten that St. Luke records the visit only in so far as it concerned St. Paul. AYe may with greater reason infer that he was not at Ephesus when St. Paul bade farewell to the elders of that city (Acts XX.), nor yet when he I jwrote the Ephesian Epistle and the jlater Pastoral Letters. It may be, ; [indeed, that he had left Jerusalem, but had not yet arrived at Ephesus. A work of which we have no record is suggested by some j\lSS. of the First Epistle, which assert that it was wiitten to the Parthians, and a tradition of such work seems to have been knowTi to Augustine. It is, however, more probable that the Apostle continued in Jerusalem until the destruction of the city, and that he was then borne on the westward-flowing current of Chris- tianity to the city of Ephesus, which from the middle of the first to the middle of the second century, was its most important centre. (Comp. § III. p. 18.) Ephesus was the link between the east and the west, between the mystic philosophies of Asia and the schools of Greece. More than any other city it had a charm for St. Paul, who had preached in it and the surrounding towns during three years, and had planted there Churches, which he saw flourish under his care, but in the midst of which he saw also seeds of future eiTor. (See Acts xix.; xx. 29, 30.) From the Book of Revelation we may infer that, in addition to Ephe- sus, the surrounding Churches of Smyrna, and Pergamos, and Thy- atira, and Sardis, and Philadelphia, and Laodicea were the special ob j ects of the Apostle's care, and that in one of the persecutions which f eU upon the early Church he was banished to the island of Patmos. Eetuming from Patmos to Ephesus after the accession of Xerva, if we may accept the early tradition, he con- tinued there to an extreme old age, combating heresies and teaching the truth. u NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. The old age of St. John became the centre of legends, partly based upon fact, and partly ideal, which the early Christians loved to tell, and many of which have come down to our own day. They thought of his life as charmed, so that poison could not affect it, nor any foi-m of death destroy it ; they told — and it was not, Clement of Alexandria says, a story, but a true account — how the old man pursued a lost convert, whom he had committed to the charge of a bishop in Asia Minor, and regained him in the robber's den ; how, like the Jewish high priest, he wore upon his head the plate of gold inscribed with ' ' Holiness to the Lord ; " how he, with something of the spirit of earher days, flew from the bath in which the heretic Cerinthus was, lest it should fall upon him ; how he was borne into the church when all power to mo^-e was gone, and, as if echoing the farewell words of Christ, which he himself had heard, said, " Little children, love one another, little children, love one another ; " and how, when asked why he always said this one thing, the old man replied, " Because this is the Lord's command, and if this is done, all is done." Cassian [Collat. xxiv. c. 2) relates an anecdote, which may be given as an illustration of the impression of the Asiatic Church with regard to the character of the Apostle. *' The blessed Evangelist was one day gently stroking a partridge, when a young man, returning from hunting, asked in astonishment how a man so illustrious could spend his time in such a manner ? ' What have you got in your hand?' re- plied the Apostle. ' A bow,' said the young man. ' Why is it not strung ? ' ' Because if I carried it strung always it would lose the elasticity which I shall want in it when I draw the arrow.* ' Do not be angry, then, my young friend, if I sometimes in this way unstring my spirit, which may otherwise lose its spring, and fail at the very moment when I shall need its power.' " But space would fail to enter on a field so tempting and so full of beauty as the traditional history of the old age of St. John. Uncertain as we have found the history to be, we cannot expect to have any exact knowledge of the time of his death. Irenseus speaks of him as alive after the accession of Trajan (a.d, 98) ; Jerome places the death at sixty-eight years after the Cruci- fixion. He "lived, then, until near the close of the first century, or, it may be, that he lived on into the second cen'.ury; and if we accept the tradition that he was some years younger than our Lord, we have to think of him — the martyr in will, but not in deed — as sinking peacefully to the grave, beneath the weight of more than fourscore years and ten. [For the matter of this section, comp. Godet, Introduction, Histo- rigue et Critique, 1876, pp. 35 — 75 (translated in Clark's Library) ; Liicke, Commentar, 1840, vol. i., pp. 6 — 40 ; Neander, Flantinr/ of Chrintianity (Bohn's Library) ; Stan- ley, Sermons and Essmjs on the Apos- tolic Age; Macdonald, Life and Writings of St. John, 1876 ; Trench (Francis), Life and Character of St. John, 1850 ; Plumptre, Article " John the Apostle," in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, vol. i., pp. 1103 et seq. ; Archbishop Tait, " St. John's Connection with Chris- tian History and Evidence," Good ST. JOHN. 95 Words, July, 1868; Miss Yonge, The Fupils of St. John the Divine.] II. Authorship of the Gos- pel. — The evidence for the author- shij) of any writing consists of two distinct branches, of which one (1) traces the external history of the writing, and the other (2) is based upon the contents of the writing itself. (1) The writing which everybody now understands by " The Gospel according to St. John" has borne this title through the whole history of the Chiirch, and during by far the greater part of that history has borne it without question. From the last quarter of the second cen- tury to the last quarter of the eighteenth century the writing was received with almost one consent, as the authentic witness of the Apostle John; but this period of clear and unbroken reception was preceded by one of twilight, in which it is diihcult to trace the | lines of evidence, and has been followed by one of destructive criti- cism, extending to our own day. It is believed that to every new investigator who iraites competence with candour, the light of the second century becomes more and more clear in the evidence it sup- plies of the reception of the Gospel as St. John's ; and that the chief result of the criticism which would destroy, has been to bring out a criticism of defence which has made the external evidence of the Johannine authorship more con- clusive than it has ever been before. The evidence adduced for the reception of the Gospel as by St. John, at the close of the second century, comes from every quar- ter of the Church. Irenaeus at Lyons, himself a disciple of Poh'- carp, who was a disciple of St. John ; Tertullian at Carthage, writing against the heretic Mar- cion ; Clement at Alexandria ; the Muratorian Fragment at Eome ; the Peshito version from Syria ; the Old Latin from Africa — all are witnesses speaking with a voice the meaning of which cannot be doubted, and the authority of which cannot be impeached. Following the line of evidence backwards through the earlier de- cades of the century, we meet with a fragmentary iiteratui-e ; and the value of the e-\udence depends upon considerations such as how far we have a rational ground to expect that in Apologies, Letters, Homi- lies, Apocalyptic Visions, there would be references to a writing like the Fourth Gospel ; how far such references are actually found ; how far the literary habits of the age justify us in saying that a re- ference is or is not a quotation; how far it is likely that a Gospel which is confessedly much later than the others, and was pos- sibly for years known only to a limited circle, should, in com- parison with these, have influenced the scanty literature of the next age. To discuss this question is, ob- viously, far beyond the limits of the present sketch, and requires an acquaintance with languages and a literature, which can hardly be within the reach of those for whom the present pages are meant. The result to which the opinions of the most competent scholars seems to be tending is, that we have in the literature of the earlier part of the second centuiy fully as much reference to the Fourth Gospel as we could reasonably ex- pect it to fui'nish ; and that a full and fair examination of that litera- >s^EW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. ture, even as it has come down to us, must pronounce it to be in support of the Johannine author- ship. Upon this point, those of us who are ordinary readers must be content to accept the witness of experts ; and there are few students ot English Divinity who will doubt that the writer of the following words sjDeaks with an authority- such as few can pretend to : — * ' If the same amount of written matter — occupying a very few pages in all — were extracted ac- cidentally from the current theo- logical literature of our day, the chance, unless I am mistaken, would be strongly against our finding so many indications of the use of this Gospel. In every one of the writers, from Polycarp and Papias to Polycrates, we have observed phenomena which bear witness, directly or indirectly, and with different degrees of distinct- ness, to its recognition. It is quite possible for critical ingenuity to find a reason for discrediting each instance in turn. An objector may urge in one case that the writing itself is a forgery ; in a second that the particular passage is an interpolation ; in a third, that the sujoposed quotation is the original, and the language of the Evangelist the copy ; in a fourth, that the incident or saying was not deduced from this Gospel, but from some apocryphal work con- taining a parallel narrative. By a sufficient number of assumptions, which lie beyond the range of verification, the evidence may be set aside. But the early existence and recognition of the Fourth Gospel is the one simple postulate which explains all the facts. The law of gravitation accounts for the various phenomena of motion, the falling of a stone, the jet of a fountain, the orbits of the planets, and so forth. It is quite possible for any one who is so disposed to reject this explanation of nature. Provided that he is allowed to pos- tulate a new force for every new fact with which he is contronted, he has nothing to fear. He will then — ' Gird the sphere With centric and eccentric scribbled o'er Cycle and epicycle, oib iu orb,' happy in Jiis immunity. But the other theory will prevail, never- theless, by reason of its simplicity.'* (Prof. Lighttoot, in Contemporary Revieiv, Feb., 1876.) important as these results of modern scholarship are, the results attained by the greatest thinkers and scnolars at the close of the second century itself are of still greater importance. We have seen above that inhere was a general consensus of independent testimony to the acceptance of tlie Gospel by St. John. The evidential value of this fact cannot be over-estimated. Men like Irengeus, and Tertullian, and Clement, were neither morally dishonest nor intellectually incap- able. They had to deal, moreover, with opponents who would quickly have exposed deceit and detected error. They and their opponents were intellectually, as well as phy- sically, the children of the second century ; their own lives went back far into it ; they were re- moved by one generation only from the probable date of St. John's death ; they had means of inquiry which we have not, and evidence upon which to base their judgment which has been for the most part lost ; and it is scarcely too much to say that, had it been wholly lost, the convictions based upon this ST. JOHX. 97 evidence would have remained ir- resistible. The evidence of the Versions is of the same nature, showing that the translators ac- cepted this Gospel as an undoubted portion of the sacred canon. We find that the moment the historic mists which hang over the second century pass away, the reception of the Gospel stands out in the clear light as an undoubted fact. The light did not create this reception, but made visible that which was there before. The Gospel continued to be re- ceived, not without here and there an objection, but without any of historic importance, until the close of the eighteenth centuiy, when Edward Evanson published TJie Dissonance of the Four generally received Evangelists, and the Evi- dence of their Authenticity Examined (Ipswich, 1792, 8vo). The object was to show that the Fourth Gospel was from a Platonist of the second century. Evanson was answered in the following year by Dr. Priestley and David Simpson, and for a time the scene of the controversy was shifted from English ground. The seed sown, took root on the Continent, where it brought forth a host of smaller works, and notably the Von Gottes Sohn der Welt Heiland of Herder (Pdga, 1797), in which the author seeks to show that St. John de- scribed an ideal, not an historic Christ. The well-known Intro- ductions of Hug (1st ed., 1808) and Eichhom 1st ed., 1810) seem to have produced a strong reaction, and during the next decade the older opinion was again triumphant in Germany. In 1820 there ap- peared at Leipzig Bretschneider's famous Prohahilia, in which he endeavoured to show the inconsist- , encies between the Fourth Gospel and the earlier three, and to prove that the writer was not an eye- witness, nor a native of Palestine, nor a Jew, and therefore not St. John. The work was more thorough than any of its precursors, and sent a shock tlirough the whole theological world. There were, of course, many replies, and in the following !year Bretschneider him- self seems to have departed from his positions, and stated that his object was to promote the truth by discussing the subject. Once again came the reaction ; and now, indeed, German thought, led by Schleier- macher, and sending forth Liicke's Commentary (1st ed., 1820; 2nd ed., 1833 ; 3rd ed., first part, 1840), which is still a classical work on the subject, was in danger of the other extreme of exalting the Fourth Gospel at the expense of the earlier three. This school maintained its ascendency until 1835, when another shock was sent through Europe by the " Life of Jesus " of David Friedrich Strauss {Das Lehcn Jesu, hritisch hearbeitet,^ Tubingen, 1835 — 6). The position of Strauss himself with regard to the Fourth Gospel was simply negative. He denied, that the Gospel was by St. John, but did not venture upon the harder task of finding another author. But disciples are bolder than their master, and the Tubingen school did not long shrink from a positive hypothesis. Differing on other points, Baur, 1844, Zeller, 1845, and Schwegler, 1846, agreed that the Fourth Gospel belonged to the second half of the second century. Later investigations have again led to a reaction, and the Gospel is now confidently asserted to be the product of the first half NEW TESTAMENT INTEODUCTIONS. of tlie centui-y. To take but two representative names — Hilgenf eld {Einleltimg, Leipzig, 1875) does not now doubt that tbe Gospel was written between a.b. 132 and 140, and Keim [Jesu von Kazara, 1875) would now, with equal confidence, give about a.d. 130 as its date. The last phase of the history again leads us to English ground, and cannot yet have been forgotten by English readers. The author of Supernatural Re- ligion (London," 1st ed., 1874; 6th ed., 1875) could not pass over the question of the fourth Gospel, and concluded that "there is the strongest reason for believing that it was not Avritten by the son of Zebedee." English scholars have been no longer able to look at the ques- tion from without ; it has been brought home to them, and has demanded an answer at their hands. That answer has been, and is being given, and the apparent result is that to the author of no English work published during the j)resent generation will the seekers of truth have more cause to be thankful than to the anonymous author of Supernatural Religion^ who has led to inquiry upon this subject. (2) Passing to the wiiting itself, we have to ask what answer the Fourth Gospel gives to the honest inquirer about its authorship. The inquiry is a wide one, and depends ujion the careful study of the whole Gospel. Here we can only hope to point out the method in which the reader should pursue the inquiiy. (Comp. especially Sanday's Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, chap, xix.) The chief centres roimd which modern criticism has grouped her questions respecting the internal evidence are the following : — {a) Was the author a Jew ? — The line between the Hebrew and Greek languages — between Hebrew and Gentile modes of thought — is so definitely and clearly drawn that there ought to be to this ques- tion an imdoubted answer. The Gospel deals with the ministry of our Lord among the Jews, and it ought not to be difficult to say, with an approach to cer- tainty, whether or not the many Jewish questions which neces- sarily arise are treated as a Jew naturally would treat them, and as no one but a Jew possibly could treat them. This, like every ques- tion related to the authorship of the Fourth Gospel, has met with answers diametrically opposed to each other; and yet the evidence for an aflfirmative answer seems irresistible. 1. The evidence of style can carry no weight with one imacquainted with the Hebrew and Greek lan- guages ; but the best Hebraists do not doubt that the style of the Fourth Gospel, while much more Greek than that of the Apocalypse, is still essentially Hebrew. Even Keim admits this (Jesu von Nazara, vol. i. p. 116) ; and Ewald regards it as beyond question that the wiiter is a " genuine Hebrew, who carries in himself the spirit of his mother tongue" (Johanneischen Schriften, vol. i. p. 44). It is not, however, simply that individual expressions are Hebraic, but that the Hebrew spirit comes out in the whole tone and structure of the writing. 2. Still more important than the e-^iclf:^nce of style is that which comes fi-om the exact acquaint- ance with the cuiTent Hebrew ST. JOHN. 99 thoiights, into which a Gentile could not possibly have thrown himself. (Comp., as a few in- stances out of many, the thoughts ahout the Messiah in chaps, i. 19—28; iv. 25; vi. 14, 15 et al; ahout baptism, i. 25 ; iii. 22 ; iv. 2 ; about purification, ii. 6 ; iii. 25 ; xi. 55 et al. ; about the Samaritans, iv. 9, 22 ; about the Sabbath, v. 1 et seq. ; ix. 14 et seq. ; about circumcision, vii. 22 ; about the notion that a Rabbi may not speak with a woman, iv. 27 ; about the Jew's manner of burying, xi. 44 and xix. 40.) These thoughts meet us in every chapter. They How naturally from the Jewish mind, and could flow from no other. 3. Not less striking than the acquaintance with cuiTcnt Je-^dsh ideas is the knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures. The Fourth Gospel is, in this respect, almost as Hebrew as the first. There can be no need to quote passages; but there are some of special interest, because they show that the writer did not know the Old Testament through the Greek ■s-ersion (LXX.) only, but that he translated for his Greek readers from the original Hebrew text. (Comp. chaps, i. 29 ; xii. 13, 15, 38, and 40; xiii. 18; xix. 37.) 4. The prominence given to the Jewish feasts, and the way in which the writer makes them centres, and groups events and discourses around them, is one of the striking features of the Gospel. We have Passover (chaps, ii. 13, 23; ^i. 4; xiii. 1; x^-iii. 28) ; Tabernacles (vii. 2) ; Dedication (x. 22) ; " A Feast of the Jews" (? Purim, v. 1). The writer does not simply name these feasts, he also knows their history, and significance, and ritual. He is familiar with "the last day, the great day," of Tabernacles (vii. 37), and with the technical " Lesser Festival " ; ■svith the fact that Dedication was in winter (x. 42) ; and with the '' preparation " of the Passover (xix. 31). (Z») Was the author a native of Palestine ? — Attention is frequently arrested, in reading the Gospel, by the minute knowledge of places. It will be sufficient here to refer to chaps, i. 28 (Bethany beyond Jordan), 44 (Bethsaida), 46 (Xazareth); ii. 1 (Cana) ; iii. 23 (^non) ; iv. 5 (Svchar) ; V. 2 (Bethesda) ; Aoii. 20 (The Treasmy) ; ix. 7 (Siloam) ; x. 23 (Solomon's Porch), 40 (Bethany, comp. i. 28) ; xi. 54 (Ephraim) ; x^dii. 1 (Kedron), 15 (the high priest's palace) ; xix. 13 (Gabbatha), 17 (Golgotha) ; XX. 18 (Bethany near Jerusalem). There is constantly some ex- planation added to a name. It is translated for Greek readers; or the moment it is mentioned some incident connected with it, occurs to the w^iter's mind. Many of these examples show an exact acquaintance with the topography of Jerusalem, which must have been acquired before its destruction. The customs of the Temple are familiarly known (chap. ii. 13 — 17) ; and not less so are the haunts and habits of the fishermen on the Sea of Tiberias (chaps, vi. 17 — 21, 22—24 ; xxi. 6—11), or the syn- agogue at Capernaum (chap. xi. 17). The argument from these details is cumulative, and, taken as a whole, 100 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. must be acknowledged to be of very- great weight. Let the reader carefuUy note the incidental way in which all this accuracy comes out, and he will feel that it is not acquired, and that the one simple explanation is that it belongs to a writer who was born and had lived among the places he is writing of, and now dwells upon them with lo\dng memory. {c) i)id the author live at the time of our LorcVs ministry ? — The remarks upon Jerusalem imme- diately above have their bearing upon this question also; but that which is here specially important is to estimate the evidence which comes from the circle of thoughts in the midst of which the Gospel was written. How difficvilt it is at any iDcriod to realise the ideas of an earlier era every dramatist and writer of fiction knows. He may clothe his characters in the dress of their day, and sirrround them with the maimers and customs of the past, but imless they are in a consummate master's hands they -v^-ill think and speak in the present. The question then is, Does the writer of the Fomih Gosj)el think as well as speak the thoughts and words of the first centmy or not ? Now the fall of Jerusalem was a gTcat gulf across which the ideas of the Jews about the Messiah could not pass. "With it disappeared from the minds of that generation all hope for a temporal Messianic reign in Jerusalem, And yet this expectation rim.s like a thread through the whole textm-e of this Gospel. The inference is that the writer grew tip amidst this expectation — lived through the conflict between Jesus, who taught the spiritual nature of Messiah's kingdom, and the Jews, who could gTasp only the temporal — and narrated at the close of the centirry that in which he himself had taken part, and which with him smwived the destruction of Jerusalem. Other instances of this knowledge of the thoughts of the period are of frequent occiuTcnce. Comp., e.g., chaps, iv. 20, 21 (Jerusalem, the place of worsMp) ; ^ii. 1 — 13 (mur- muring among the people about Jesus) ; ix. 8 (the neighbours' re- mark about the blind beggar) ; X. 19 — 21 (division among the Jews) ; xi. 47 — 53 (consultation of the Sanhedrin) ; chap. xix. (the various phases of thought during the trial). [d) Was the author an Apostle ? — The Fom^th Gospel tells us much more of what passed in the Apostolic circle than we are able to gather from the whole of the three earlier Gospels. The writer of this Gospel is as familiar with the thoughts which were suggested at the time to the Apostles as he is with the thoughts of the Jews exemplified in the last section. Take, e.g., chap. ii. 20 — 22, where the -ttTiter records the saying of our Lord regarding the Temple, and how the disciples miderstood this after the resurrection. There are instances of the same kind of Imowledge in chaps, iv. 27 ; "sdi. 39 ; xii. 6 ; xiii. 28, 29 ; xx. 9, 20 ; and the reader may without difficulty note others. The minute knowledge of inci- dents in the relation between the Apostles and the Lord would seem to point exclusively to one of the Twelve as the writer, Comp. chaps, i. 38, 60 (Andrew, Simon, Philip, Nathanael, and the unnamed ST. JOHN. 101 disciple) ; vi. 5 — 7 (the question to Philip), 8 (Andrew's remark), 68 (Peter's question), 70 (the explana- tory remark about Judas) ; ix. 2 (the question about the man born blind) ; xi. 16 (the character of Thomas and the name Didymus, comp. xiv. 5 ; xx. 24, 28 ; xxi. 2) ; xii. 21, 22 (visit of the Greeks) ; xiii. (the Last vSupper) ; xviii. 16 (the exact position of Peter and the other disciples and the por- teress) ; xx. 3—8 (the visit to the sepulchre) . In several instances there is re- markable agreement between the character of Peter as drawn in the Fourth Gospel and that which is found in the Synoptists. More striking still, because inconceiv- able, except by one who drew it from the life, [is the character of our Lord Himself. As we try and think out the writer's representa- tion of the human life of Chi'ist, we feel that we are being guided by one who is not picturing to us an ideal, but is declaring to us that which was fi'om the beginning, which he had heard, which he had seen with his eyes, which he had looked upon, and his hands had handled of the Word of Life. (Comp. 1 John i. 3.) {e) Was the author an eye-witness ? — This question has in part been answered above ; but it will add strength to the' opinion which is probably fixing itself in the candid reader's mind if some of the in- stances of vivid picturing which Eenan and others have noticed in this Gospel are collected here. 1. With regard to persons, all that has been said of individual Apostles applies. Add to them Nicodemus (chap, iii.) ; INLartha and Mary (xi.) ; Malchus (xviii. 10) ; Annas, and Caiaphas, and Pilate (xviii.) ; the women at the cross fxix. 25) ; the Magdalene (xxi. 1). 2. The indication of places and of feasts given above apply also in answer to this question. 3. The writer knows the days and the houi'S when events oc- curred. He was there, and is writing from memory, and knows that it was about the tenth (i. 39), or seventh (iv. 52), or sixth hour (iv. 6; xix. 14). (Comp. chaps, i. 29— 35, 43; ii. 1, 13; iv. 40; xi. 6, 39; xii. 1). 4. We find running all through the Gospel an exactness of descrip- tion, a representation of the whole scene photographed, as it w^ere, upon the writer's memory, which is of greater weight than any num- ber of individual quotations. Let any one read, e.g., chap. i. 38 — 51, or ii. 13—17, or xx. 8— 10— and these are only instances chosen by way of illustration — and he will, as he thinks of them, see the whole picture before his mind's eye. The only explanation is, that the writer was what he claims to be — a wit- ness whose record is true (chap. xix. 35). (Comp. chaps, i. 14, 16, and xxi. 24.) In this respect the Fourth Gospel reminds us of that by St. Mark. (/) ^^^^^ ^^'^ author one of the sons of Zcbedee ? — Assuming that he was an eye-witness and an Apostle, we are sure that he was not Andrew, who is named in the Gospel four times, nor Peter (thirty - three times), nor Philip (twice), nor Na- thanael (five times), nor Thomas (five times), nor Judas Iscai-iot (eight times), nor Judas, not Is- cariot (once). Of the five other Apostles, Matthew is necessarily excluded, and James the son of Alphseus, and Simon the Canaanite 102 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. occupy too unimportant a position in the Synoptic narrative to bring them within the limits of our liypo- thesis. The sons of Zohcdee remain. Now, wliat is the relation of the Fourth Gospel to them ? AVhile they are promiiicnt among the members of the first Apostolic group in the Synoptists, and in the Acts of the Apostles, they are not even mentioned in this Gospel. In chap. i. 41 it is probable that both are referred to, but noilher of thorn is named. In chap. xxi. 2 they are, on any interpreta- tion, placed in an inferiority of order unknown to the earlier or later history, and are probably named last of those who were Apostles. This omission of names is not confined to the sons. It was so with the mother also. All we know of her comes from the earlier Gospels. We gather, indeed, from chap. xix. 25 that she was one of the women at the cross; but we have to turn to the parallel passages before we read of tSalome or the mother of Zcbedee's children. Such are the facts ; but if one of these brothers is the writer of this Gospel, then, and as far as wc now know, thus only arc the facts ex- plained and the conditions met. But if the author was one of the sons of Zfbedee, wo can go a st(>p further and assert that ho was St. John, for St. Janus was a martyr in the llerodian persecution (Acts xii. 1 ; A.D. 44). {{/) Was the author the " disciple tv ho III Jesus loved?" — (Chaps, xiii. 23 ; xix. 26 ; xx. 2 ; xxi. 7, 20. Comp. xviii. 15; xx. 2, 3, 4, 8.) The concluding words of tlie Gospel (chap. xxi. 24), as compared with verses 7 and 20, formally assert this identification. It may be granted that these words are not those of the writer, but an attes- tation on the part of the Ephesian Cluirch. Still they are part of the Gospel as it was first published, and are the words of one who claims to speak from personal knowledge. But admitting that the writer was the disciple whom Jesus loved, then we have the key to what seems an impossible omission of the sons of Zebedee in this Gospel. The writer deliberately omits ail mention of his own family, but his writing is the record of events in which he had himself taken part, and in this lies its value. His own personality cannot therefore be sup- pressed. Ho is present in all he writes, and yet the presence is felt, not seen. A veil rests over it— a name given to him, it may be, by his brethren, and cherished by him as the most honoured name that man could bear; but beneath the veil lives the person of John, the son of Zebedee and Salome, and the Apostle of the Lord. We have now found in the Gos- pel answers to the questions which have been so often asked, and very variously answered, during the last half-century. If the answers are taken as but small parts of a great whole, and the Gospel itself is carefully read and studied, the evi- dence will in all its fulness be such as cannut be gainsaid. In the spiiit of the strilcing words which we have quoted before (p. 96), it may be said that while here minute criticism thinks it may trace an error, or there some part of the evidence maj-^ be explained away — while various separate hypotheses may be invented to account for the various separate facts — the one postulate which accounts for the ST. .10 UN. 103 whole of the phenomena, and does vioJence to none, is that the Fourth Gospel is the work of the Apostle whose name it bears. Here the two lines of external and internal evidence meet, and if each points only with a high degree of probability, then both together must approximate to certainty. The indirect lino of argument may fairly be used as evidence which loads to the same results. The Fourth Gospel existed as a matter ot fact, and was accepted as hy St. Jolin, in the last quarter of the second century. If it is as- serted that the author was not St. John, we have a right to demand of the assertor that he should ac- count for tlie fact of its existence, and foi the fact of its reception at that time, as the work of tlie Apostle. This demand has never been met with evidence which would for a moment stand the test of examination. From one point of view the ar- guments we have now followed will to most readers seem satis- factory ; from another point of view they arc painful enough. The fact must be apparent to all that many men have followed out these same arguments to a wholly dillV'r- ent result. Among them are men of the highest intellectual culture, and with special knowledge of these special subjects ; men whose ability no one has a right to cpiestion, and whose honesty no one has a right to impeach. And yet (.ontradictory ri suits cannot both be true. If Lightfoot and Westcott, Ewald and Luthardt are right, then Strauss and 13aur, Kcini and llil- genfeld are wrong. Assertions like the following cannot be recon- ciled : — "The elaborate explau:itions, however, by which the phenomena of the Fourth Gospel arc reconciled with the assumption that it was composed by the Apostle John are in vain, and there is not a single item of evidence within the iirst century and a half which docs not agree with internal testimony in opposing the supposition."* " We have seen that whilst there is not one particle of evidence during a century and a half ai'ter the events recorded in the Fourth Gospel that it was composed by tho son of Zebedee, there is, on the contrary, the strongest reason for believing that he did not write it."t " That John is really the author of the Gospel, and that no other planned or interpreted it tiian he who at all times is named as its author, cannot be doubted or de- nied, however often in our own times critics have been pleast'd to doubt and deny it on grounds which aro wholly foreign to the suliject ; on the contrarj^ every argument, from every quarter to which we can look, every trace and record, combine together to render any serious doubt upon the ques- tion al)solutely impossible." (Ilein- rich Ewald, quoted by rrof(\ssor Westcott as " calm and decisive words," which " are simply true."|) " Those; who since the first dis- cussion of this question have been really conversant with it, never could have had, and never have had, a moment's doubt. As tho attack on St. John has become fiercer and tiercer, the truth during * Supernatural Religion, Ed. 6, vol. ii., p. 470. t Ibiil. p. 474. X Introductlnn to the Study of the Gospels, Ed. 3, p. X. The quotation and coiuinont arc repeated in Ed. 4, 1872. 104 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. the last ten or twelve years has been more and more solidly estab- lished, error has been pursued into its last hiding-place, and at this moment the facts before us are such that no man who does not will knowingly to choose error and reject truth can dare to say that the Fourth Gospel is not the work of the Apostle John."* In one case or the other the human intellect, honestly inquiring for the true, has been convinced of the false. Plain men may well ask, Which are we to believe, or how can we be certain that either is true ? The negative criticism has not shrunk from poisoning its arrows with the assertion that bigotry in favour of received opinions has closed the eyes of its opponents to the light of truth. It may sometimes be so ; but unless much of the criticism of the present day is strangely misread, there is a blinding bigotry which prevents men from seeing the truth of re- ceived opinions simply because they have been received. There are minds to which the " semper, ubique, et ab omnibus " marks out an opinion for rejection, or at least for cavil. And yet the world is wiser than any one man in it, and truth has been written in other languages than German, and seven- teen centuries of a belief which has borne the noblest results and com- manded the assent of the noblest intellects, will hold its ground against the changing moods of the last fifty years. The *' higher criticism" must not wonder if humbler minds withhold their as- * Ewald, iu GoUingm Gel. Anz., Aug. 5, 1863, reviewing Kenan's Vie de Jesus. Quoted by Gratry, Jesus Christ, p. 119, and by Professor Liddon, Bampton Lec- tures for 18(36, Ed. 7, p. 218. sent to its dicta, until it has agreed upon some common ground of faith which is not always shifting, and individual disciples have proved the depth of their own convictions by adhering to them. These com- batants in the battle between error and truth are men of war armed in the armour of their schools, but plain men will feel that they have not essayed this armour and cannot wear it ; and will go down to the battle with the moral Philistines who threaten Israel, trusting in the simple pebble of the old faith, and in the arm nerved by a firm trust in the presence of God. The Foiu'th Gospel foreshadows its own history. It tells of Light, Truth, Life, Love, rejected by the mere intellect, but accepted by the whole man ; and it has been with the historical as with the personal Christ represented in its pages. "Men leta-ned to know Him and to trust Mim before they fully understood what He was and what He did. The faith which in the Gospel stories we see asked for and given, secured, and educated, is a faith which fastens itself on a living- Saviour, though it can but little comprehend the method or even the nature of the salvation ... As it was with the disciples, so also it is with ourselves. The evidential works have their own most impor- tant, most necessary office ; but the Lord Himself is His own evidence, and secures our confidence, love, and adoration by what He is, more than by what He does." * For the many to whom the evi- dences as to the authorship of the Fourth Gospel must come as the * Bernard, " Progress of Doctrine lu the New Testament," 21ie Bariipton Lec- tures tor 1864, pp. 43, 44. ST. JOHN. 105 testimony of others, and to whom tne conflict of testimony must oftentimes bring perplexity, the ultimate test must He in the appeal o± the Gospel to the whole man. If the heart studies the Chiist as portrayed in this writing, it will neta no other proot of His divinity, but will bow before Him with the tontession, " Truly this was the Son o± God." ices; and it will feel also tiiat the penman was one who, iiiOifc deeply than any other of the bons of men, drank of the Spirit of Cnrist — that he was a disciple who Joved tlie Lord, a disciple whom Jtjsusioved; and it will feel that tlie voice of the Church is the voice of the heart of humanity, feehng as itselt feels and spealdng as itself speaks, that this wTiting is the Gospel of J esus Christ, and that it is the " Gospel according to St. John.^' [hoi the matter of this section tne student may conveniently refer to Liicke, Godet, and Liddon, as before; Luthardt, Si. John the Author oj tho First Gospel, English trans- lation, Clark, 1875, in which the Appendix on the literature, revised and enlarged bj^ Gregory, is a valuable and distinctive feature ; Button, Essays 'Theological and Literary, vol. i. pp. 144 — 276, 1871; Sanday, Aidhorshij) and Historical Character of the Fourth Gospel, Ib72; The Gospels in the Second Century, 1876 ; Westcott's Intro- duction, Ed. 4, 1872, and Canon of the Ntw Testament, Ed. 3, 1870 ; or in an easier form, Bible in the Churchy Ed. 2, 1866 ; Leathes, The IVitness of St. John to Christ, 1870, The Religion of the Christ, 1874; Eigbtfoot, Articles in the Contem- porary lieview, beginning in De- cembei, 1874; Article, ''The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel," ID Edinburgh ]ievicw,^aiii\iQxy, 1877; Articles on " St. John, and Modern Criticism," by Beyschlag, in Con- temporary Review, October and November, 1877: and on the other side, Supernatural Religion, Ed. 6, 1875, vol. ii. pp. 251—476; David- son, Introduction to the New Testa- ment, 1868, vol. ii. pp. 323 — 468; Tayler, The Fourth Gospel, Ed. 2, 1870.] III. Time when and Place wliere the Fourth G-ospel was written. — (1) If the Gospel was written by St. John, its date must be placed within the limits of the fu'st century. There is good reason for concluding that the last chapter is an appendix, coming chiefly from the hand of the Apostle himself, but that the closing verses (24 and 25) give the coiToborative testimony of others. The fact of an appendix, and the difference of its style from that of the earlier writing, jioints to an interval of some years, during which, it may be, the original Gospel was kno^vn to a limited circle before it was openly published. This appendix is, however, incorporated with the earlier writing in all the oldest copies and versions, and was prob- ably, therefore, thus incorporated during the lifetime of the Apostle. The beginning of the last decade of the first centui-y is a limit, then, after which the Gospel coidd not have been written by St. John. In fixing a limit before which it could not ha^-e been written, there is greater difficulty; but the following considerations point to a date certainly not earlier than A.D. 70, and probably not earlier than A.D. 80. (a) The absence of all reference to St. John in the Pastoral Epistles of St. Paul. 106 NEW TESTAIMENT INTRODUCTIONS. (b) The style, though, strongly Hebraic, is much less so than the Book of Revelation. It is Hebrew partly clothed in Greek, and for this development of thought and language we may assign a period of ten or twenty years. The rela- tion of the Epistles and the Apo- calypse to the Gospel belongs to the Introductions to those books ; but it will be foimd that the Gospel probably occupies a middle place, being considerably later than the Apocalypse and somewhat earlier than the Epistles. (c) The subject-matter of the Gospel, while representing a some- what later development of theology than that of the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians, points to a much earlier development than that which we find in the earliest of the Gnostic sj-stems at the beginning of the second century. {d) The references to the Jews, their customs, places, &c., are as to things at a distance and in the past, and needing explanation in the present. See, e.g., chaps, iv. 9 ; V. 1, 2 (comp. xi. 18) ; v. 16, 18 ; vii. 13, and the instances given before (pp. 98—100). The earliest historical evidence we have is that of Irengeus, who places the Gospel according to St. John after the other three, i.e., as he places the Gospels according to St. Mark and St. Luke after the deaths of St. Peter and St. Paul, not earlier than a.d. 70, and probably some years later. (See Eusebius, Eccles. Hist., v. 8.) The general voice of antiquity gave A.D. 85 or 86 as the exact year, and while we cannot regard this as authoritative, it falls in with the probabilities of the case. Without fixing the year thus definitely, we may regard the date as one which could not be much earlier than a.d. 80, or much later than A.D. 90, and conclude that the Gospel in its present form ap- proximates to the later, rather than to the earlier date. (2) The passage of Irenaeus above referred to gives us also a definite statement that the place from which the Gospel was written was Ephesus. "Afterwards, John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned on His breast — he again put forth his Gospel while he abode in Ephesus in Asia" {Against Heresies, iii. 1, Oxford Trans., p. 204 ; also Eusebius, Eccles. Hist., V, 8). This statement is confirmed by the whole tenor of tradition fi'om the second century downwards, and was never, seem- ingly, questioned until the com- mencement of the nineteenth century. Jt falls in -with the other scanty hints of facts in St. John's life, and is in entire har- mony with the standpoint of the Gospel. It will be unnecessary to weary the reader with proofs of that which hardly needs to be proved. The facts may be foimd in a convenient form in Luthardt, St. John the Author of the Fourth Gospel, Eng. Trans., pp. 115, 166; but even Davidson admits that " Liitzelberger and Keim push their scepticism too far in denying John's residence in Asia j\Iinor." Again, the indirect argument holds good. If Ephesus is not the place from which the Gospel was written, what other place can be named with any show of probability? The only city besides Ephesus in which we might have expected the thoughts of the Prologue is Alexandria; but there is not even the shadow ST. JOHN. 107 of a reason for connecting St. John with this city. IV. The Purpose wMcli tlie "Writer had in view. — Here, again, there are two lines of evidence which may guide our inquiries : (1) the statements of early writers, which may represent a tradition coming from the time of publication when the purpose was well known ; and (2) the indi- cations which may be gathered from the writing itself. (1) The earliest statement we possess is that of the Muratorian Fragment (see p. 121, and comp. Tregelles, Cation Muratorianus, 1867, pp. 1—21, and 32—35), which tells us that " The author of the Fourth Gospel was John, one of the disciples. He said to his fellow disciples and bishops who entreated him, ' Fast with me for three days from to-day, and what- ever shall be made known to each of us, let us relate it to each other.' In the same night it was revealed to Andrew, one of the Apostles, that John should relate all things in his own name with the recogni- tion of them all. And, therefore, though various elements are taught in the several books of the Gospels, this makes no difference to the faith of believers, since all things are set forth in all of them in one supreme spirit, about the birth, the passion, the resurrection, the conversation with the disciples, and His double advent, the first in the lowliness of humiliation which (? has been accomplished), the second in the glory of royal power, which is to come. What wonder, therefore, is it if John so con- stantly brings forward, even in his Epistle, particular (P phrases), say- ing in lus own person, ' What we have seen with our eyes, and heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, these things have we written unto you.' For he thus professes that he was not only an eye-witness, but also a hearer, and more than this, a writer in order, of all the wonderful works of the Lord." On this question the testimony of Irenaeus has a special value, from the fact that he was separated from the time of St. John by one generation only, and was directly connected, through Polycarp, with the circle in which the Gospel was first circulated. It may be well, therefore, to quote his words at some length : — "In course of preaching this faith, John, the disciple of the Lord, desirous by preaching of the Gospel to remove the error which Cerinthus had been sowing among men ; and long before him those who are called Xicolaitans, who are an offshoot of the knowledge [Gnosis'] falsely so called ; to confound them and per- suade men that there is but one God, who made all things by His word, and not, as they affirm, that the Creator is one person, the Father of the Lord another, and that there is a difference of persons between the Son of the Creator and the Chiist from the higher ^ons, who both remained impas- sible, descending on Jesus, the Son of the Creator, and glided back again to his own Pleroma; and that the Beginning is the Only Begotten, but the Word the true Son of the Only Begotten ; and that the created system to which we belong was not made by the First Deity, but by some Power brought very far down below it and cut off from communion in the things which are beyond sight and 108 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. name. All such things, I say, the Lord's disciple desiring to cut off, and to establish ia the Church the rule of truth, viz., that there is one God Almighty, who by His Word hath made all things visible and invisible ; indicating, also, that by the Word whereby God wrought Creation, in the same also He provided salvation for the men who are part of Creation ;— thus did he begin in that instruction which the Gospel contains [then follows chap. i. verses 1 — 5]." In the next section he quotes verses 10, 11, and 14 against Marcion and Valentinus and other Gnostics who held the Creation by angels or demi-gods. {Adv. Beer., fib. iii., chap, xi., Oxford Trans., j)p. 229 et seq.) In an earlier passage Irenaeus gives the following account of the heresy of Cerinthus : ' ' And a certain Cerinthus too, in Asia, taught that the world was not made by the First God, but by a certain Power far sej^arated and distant from the Eoj-alty which is above all, and which knows not the God who is over all. And bo added that Jesus was not born of a virgin (for that seemed to him impossible), but was the son of Joseph and Mary like all other men, and had more power thrin men in justice, prudence, and wisdom. And that after His bap- tism there descended on Him from that Eoyalty which is above all, Clirist in the figure of a dove, and that He then declared the unknown Father and did mighty works ; but that in the end Christ again soared back from Jesus, and that Jesus suffered and rose again, but Christ remained impassible as being spiri- tual" (lib. i., cap. XXVI., Oxford Trans., p. 77). In lib. iii., cap. iii., Oxford Trans., p. 208, IrenaBus relates the story of the Apostle flying from Cerinthus in the bath. This is repeated in Eusebius, iii. 28, Bagster's Trans., p. 131. Tertullian, Epiphanius, and Je- rome agree in the statement that the Gospel was written to meet the heresy of Cerinthus, but speak of the Ebionites instead of the Nicolaitans. Clement of Alexandria is quoted by Eusebius, as saying, " John, last of all, perceiving that what had reference to the body in the gospel of our Saviour was suf- ficiently detailed; and being en- couraged by his familiar friends and urged by the Spirit, he wrote a spiritual gospel \Eccles. Hist., lib. vi., cap. xv. , Bagster's Trans., pp. 247 — 8), and Eusebius himself says, "The three Gospels pre- viously \-ritten having been dis- tributed among all, and also banded to him, they say that he admitted them, giving his testimony to their truth ; but that there was only wanting in the narrative the ac- count of the things done by Chiist among the first of His deeds and at the commencement of the Gospel. For these reasons the Apostle John, it is said, being entreated to undertake it, wrote the account of the time not recorded by the former Evangelists, and the deeds done by our Saviour which they have passed by . . ." (lib. iii., cap. xxiv., Bagster's Trans., pp. 126, 127). We have in these extracts three points of view, distinct but not different, from which it was con- ceived that the writer undertook his work. His aim was didactic, to teach that which was revealed to him ; or it was polemic, to meet ST. JOHN. 109 the development of Gnosticism in Asia Minor, of which we find traces in the later Pauline epistles ; or it was historic, to fill up hy way of supplement those portions of the life of our Lord which earlier evangehsts had not recorded. In the later fathers and commentators, now one, now another, of these views is prominent. They do not exclude each other : to teach the truth was the sure way to make war against error ; to teach the truth historically was to represent it as it was revealed in the life of Him who was the Truth. We have to think of the Apostle as living on to the close of the first century, learning in the thoughts and experience of fifty years what the manifestation of Christ's life really was, and quickened by the presence of the promised Paraclete, who was to hring all things to his mind and guide him into all truth (comp. chap. xvi.). He lives among the speculations of men who have tried in their own wisdom to cross the gulf between God and man, and have in Ephesus developed a Gnos- ticism out of ' Christianity which is represented by Cerinthus, who was himself trained in Alexandria ; just as in this latter city there had been a Gnosticism developed from Judaism, which is represented by Philo. He feels that he has learnt how that gulf was bridged in the person of Jesus Christ; he re- members His acts and words; he kaows that in Him, and Him only, does the Divine and human meet ; and he writes his own witness at once, in the deeper fulness of its truth, instructing the Church and refuting heresy, and supplying the spiritual Gospel which was as a complement to the existing three. If we turn to the Fourth Gospel itself we find that each line of this three-fold purpose may be distinctly traced. The didactic element is apparent throughout. That the writer had before him, not only the instruction of the Church, but also the refutation of the errors of Gnosticism — and that not only in the special features connected with Cerinthus — is clear from the Pro- logue. We have seen how Irenteus applies this to Cerinthus, but the very term Aoyos (Logos) shows that the writer did not contem- plate his school only. There was an easy connection between Ephe- sus and Alexandria at the time, and we have an example of it in the teaching of Apollos in Acts x-^iii. 24. Now the distinctive tenets of all Gnosticism were that the Creator was not the Supreme God, and that matter was the source of all evil. In "all things were created by Him " we have the answer to one ; in " The Word was made flesh," the answer to the other. The writer gives in chap. xx. 21, a formal statement of his o\\ti pur- pose : " These are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Chi'ist the Son of God ; and that believing ye might have life through His name." It is usual to refer to these words as though nothing was further from the writer's thoughts than any polemic purpose. But in the passage quoted from Irenaeus, on the heresy of Cerinthus, it wiU be seen that the separation of the divine Christ from the human Jesus was a prominent tenet. This verse declares that the purpose of the Gospel was to establish the identity of the human Jesus and the Christ who is the Son of God, as an article of faith, that in that faith they might have life through His iiamd« no NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Eusebius gives no authority be- yond " they say " for the statement that St. John had seen the earlier Gospels, and it does not follow that he had seen them in their present form. That he could have done so is, a priori, imi^robable, and there is no evidence of any such circula- tion of them as would be implied. It is further improbable from the relation between the subject-matter of the Fourth Gospel as compared with the three ; it contains too much that is common to all to be regarded as a mere supplement ; it differs too much in arrangement, and even in details, to have been based upon a study of the others. Moreover it is in itself a complete work, and nowhere gives any in- dication that it was intended to be simply an appendix to other works. In seeking the origin of the Gospels we have the following general lines to guide us. There would be, probably, in the first generation after the life of Christ an oral Gospel, in which all the chief events of His life and the chief discourses were preserved. In different churches different parts would be committed to writing, and carefully preserved, and compared with similar writings elsewhere. Such documents would form the basis of the Synoptic Gospels. Such documents doubtless existed at Ephesus, and John had access to them ; bui it is to his personal remembrance of Christ's life and work, and his residence in Jeru- salem, and his close union with the Virgin Mary, that we are to trace his special information. Mary, and his own mother Salome, and Mary IMagdalene, and Nicodemus, and the family of Bethany, and the Church at Jerusalem, are the sources from which he would have learnt of events beyond his personal knowledge. [For the matter of this section comp., in addition to the books quoted, Liicke and Godet as before (this part of Liicke' s Einleitung is of great value, and may be read in the Prolegomena of AHord, who adopts it, and in that of Words- worth, who rejects it) ; Mansel, llie Gnostic Heresies of the First and Second Centtiries,lS7o ; Neander, Church History, § 4, Clark's Eng. Trans., vol. i. pp. 67—93 ; XJeber- weg. History of Philosophy, Eng. Trans., 1874, § 77 ; Wood's Bis- coveries at JEpTiesus, Lend., 1877.] V. Contents and Charac- teristics of the Gospel. — The Gospel is divided into two main sec- tions at the close of chap. xii. The great subject of the first of these sections Is the manifestation of Christ ; and that of the second is the result of this manifestation. The first represents the life; the second, the passion, death, and re- surrection. Subdividing these main sections, we have the follow- ing outline of the general contents of the Gospel : — (1) Prologue. The link with the eternity of the past (chap. i. 1—18). (2) Manifestation of J esus. Vary- ing degrees of acceptance (cnaps. i. 19— iv. 54). (3) The fuller revelation and growth of unbelief among the Jews (ctiaps. V. 1 — xii. 50). (4) The fuller revelation and growth of faith among the disciples (chaps, xiii. 1 — xvii. 2(5). (5) The climax of unbeiiet. Vo- luntary surrender and crucifixion of Jesus (chaps, xviii. 1 — xix. 42). ^6) The climax of taith. tiesur- ST. JOHN. Ill rection and appearances of Jesus (chap. XX.). (7) Epilogue. The link with the eternity of the future (chap. xxi.). The reader will find a detailed analysis of these sections at the end of this Introduction. It has been attempted hy a consecutive enu- meration to indicate the lines of thought running through the whole of the Gospel ; but these are many, and a brief sketch may be helj)- f ul to those who attempt to trace them. (1) The Prologue (chap. i. 1— 18) strikes, in a few words, the keynote of the whole. The Word with God, and God, re- vealed to men, made flesh — this is the central thought. The effect of the revelation, received not, received; light not comprehended in darkness, but ever shining ; this, which rims like a thread through the whole of the Gospel, is as a subsidiary thought present here. (2) The manifestation of Jesus (chaps, i. 19 — iv. 54) is iatroduced by the witness of the Baptist, and one of the characteristic words of the Gospel, which has already occurred in verse 8, \iz., " witness," is made prominent in the very first sentence of the naiTative portion. This witness of John is uttered to messengers from the Sanhediin, is repeated when Jesus is seen coming unto him, and spoken yet again on the following- day. The witness of John is followed by the witness of Christ Himself. At first He manifests Himself in private to the disciples, when their hearts respond to His witness ; and at the maiTiage feast, when the voice of nature joins itself with that of man; and then publicly, beginning in His Father's house, and proceeding in a widening circle, from the Temple at Jerusalem to the city, and then to Judaea, and then Samaria, and then Galilee. Typical characters represent this manifestation and its effects — Xicodemus, the Master in Israel ; the despised woman of despised Samaria, herself steeped in sin ; the courtier of alien race, led to faith through suffering and love. This period is one of acceptance in Jerusalem (chap. ii. 23) ; Judaea (chap, iii, 29) ; Samaria (chap. iv, 39—42) ; Galilee (chap. iv. 45, 49) ; and yet its bi'ightness is crossed by dark lines (chap, ii. 24, 25), and the struggle between light and darkness is not absent (chap. iii. 18, 21). (3) Following this public mani- festation, we have in the third sec- tion (chaps. V. 1 — xii. 50) the fuller revelation of Christ; and, side by side with it, the progressive stages of unbelief among the Jews. He is Lite, and shows this in the energy given to the impotent man at the pool of Bethesda ; but they persecute Him because He did these things on the Sabbath day. He shows that His work is one with the Father's, but they seek to kill Him as a blasphemer. Thus early is the issue ot the struggle foreshadowed ; and thus early does He point out that the final issue is not in physical death, and trace to the absence of moral preparation the true reason of His rejection (chap. v.). He is Life, and shows this in blessing the food which gives sustenance to thousands, and in declaring Himself to be " the bread of life," but they think of manna in the desert, and murmur at one whom they kr>ew to be Jesus-bar- 112 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Joseph claiming- to have come down from heaven ; and again the line between reception and rejection is drawn. Many g-o back, but some rise to a higher faith; j'et even the light which shines in this inner circle is crossed by the presence of one who is a devil (chap. vi.). He is Truth, and declares at the Feasts of Tabernacles that His teaching is from heaven, and that He Himself is from heaven, whither He will return. The perception of truth is in the will to obey it. He that willeth to do His will shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God. The effect of this teaching is that many believe, but that the Pharisees send officers to take Him, He is Life, and declares that in Him is the living water which the ritual of the great daj^ of the Feast represented, and this is followed by a division among the people, and even in the Sanhe- drin itself (chap, vii.). He is Light, and declares Him- self to be ^he true Light of the V\^oi4d, of which the illumination of the Feast was but a type. They murmur at successive points in His teaching, and in answer He declares to them what the true witness is, what His own return to the Father is, what are true discipleship and true freedom and true life, by the word of the Son, who was before Abraham. Their hatred passes from words to acts, and they take up stones to cast at Him (chap. viii. 12 — 59). [The paragraph from chaps. vii. 53 — viii, 11 does not belong to this place.] He is Light, and shows this by giving physical sight to the man born blind. The Pharisees seek to disprove, and then to dis- credit, the miracle, and again there is a division. Some say that this man is not of God because He keepeth not the Sabbath. Others ask how a, man that is a sinner can io such miracles. Jesus Him- self declares the separation which His coming makes between those who are spiritually blind and those who spiritually see (chap. ix.). He is Love, and declares this in the allegory of the Good Shepherd, Again a division is made prominent between those who are willing to accept and those who have willed to reject Him. Then comes Dedi- cation, and the request to declare plainly whether He is the Christ. The answer brings again to them the earlier teaching of moral pre- paredness, and they take up stones to stone Him. They justify their act by the charge of blasphemy, which He proves from the Scrip- tures to be without foundation. But their determination has gone beyond the reach of reason, and they seek again to take Him. Ee- jected by His own, and in His own city, He withdraws from it to Bethany beyond Jordan. The darkness comprehends not the light, but stiU it shineth, and "many believed on Him there" (chap. X.). He is Life, and Truth, and Love, and shows this in going again to Judaea to conquer death, and reveal the fuller truth of the PesuiTection and Life, and sympa- thise with the sorrowing home. The attributes of divinity are so fully manifested that many of the Jews believe, but with the clearer light the darkness is also made more fully visible, and the Sanhe- drin formally decree His death. When this decree is passed He again withdraws to the wilderness, but disciples are still with Him (chap. xi.). ST. JOHN. 113 As the Passover draws near He is again at Bethany. Love to Him is shown in the devotion of Mary ; the selfishness and hatred which shut out love, in the mur- mur of Judas and the consultation of the chief priests to destroy the life of Lazarus which Jesus had restored. But conviction has seized the masses of the people, and the King is received into the royal city with shouts of " Hosanna ! " Even the Pharisees feel that the " world is gone after Him," and there is present the earnest of a wider world than that of which they thought. Men came from the West to the cross, as men had come from the East to the cradle, and are the firstfruits of the moral power which is to draw all men. Life con- quering in death is the thought suggested by the presence of the Greeks ; light and darkness is again the foim in which the thought of His rejection by the Jews is clothed. But the struggle is drawing to a close, and the writer adds his own thoughts and gathers up earliei words of Jesus on those who rejected Light and Truth and Life and Love (chap, xii.). (4) With the next section (chaps, xiii. 1 — xvii. 26) we pass from the revelation to the Jews to the fuller revelation to the disciples. It is the passing from hatred to love, from darkness to light ; but as in the deepest darkness of rejection rays of light are ever present, so the fullest light of acceptance is never free from shadows. His Love is shown by the signifi- cant act of washing the disciples' feet, and this is spiritually inter- preted. His words of love cannot, however, apply to all, for the dark presence of the betrayer is still with 8 them. When Hatred withdraws from the presence of Love, and Judas goes out into the night, then the deeper thoughts of Jesus (which are as the revelation of heaven to earth) are spoken without reser^-e. This discourse continues from chaps, xiii. 31 — xvi. 33, when it passes into the prayer of the seventeenth chapter. It tells them of His glory because He is going to the Father ; of the Father's house where He will wel- come them; that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life ; that being absent. He will still be present, answering their prayers, sending to them the Paraclete, abiding in them ; that His peace shall remain with them. It tells, in the allegory of the Vine, that there is an unseen spritual union between Him and the Church, and every individual member of it ; that there is, there- fore, to be union between them- selves; that the world will neces- sarily hate them because they are not of it ; but that the Paraclete in them, and they themselves, of their own knowledge, should be the witness to the world. It tells them the truth so hard to learn — that His own departure is expedient ; declares the coming and the office of the Paraclete, and His own spiritual j^ower with them, and comforts them with the thought of the full revelation of the Father, and the final victor}^ over the world which He has overcome. Their faith rises to the sure conviction that He is from God. But even this full acceptance is not un- clouded ; He knows they will aU be scattered, and leave Him alone. And then having in fulness of love taught them. He lifts His eyes to heaven and prays for Himself, for , the disciples, and for aU believers, 114 NEW TESTAMENT INTKODUCTIONS. that in Him, as believers, they may have the communion, with the God- head which comes from the revela- tion of the Father through the Son. (o) But here again in the narra- tive Darkness alternates with Light, and Hatred with Love. From the sacred calm of this inner circle we pass (chaps, xviii. 1 — xix. 42) to the betrayal and apprehension, the trials before the Jewish and Eoman authorities, the committal and crucifixion, the death and burial. Unbelief has reached its climax, and hatred gazes upon Him whom it has crucified. (6) But love is greater than hatred, and light than darkness, and life than death. From the climax of unbelief we pass to the climax of faith. Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, and Josc^ph of Arimathaea, join with the band of women in the last office of love. The appearance to Marj^ Magdalene, to the ten Apostles, to the eleven now including Thomas, has carried con\dction to all, and drawn fi'om him who is last to believe the fullest expression of faith, " My Lord and my God " (chaj). xx.). The writer has traced the struggle between acceptance and rejection thi'ough its successive stages, and now that the victory is won the purpose of his work is fulfilled. There is a faith more blessed than sight, and these things are written that we may believe. (7) The things which the writer has told are but a few of those with which his memory was stored. There were many signs not written in this book. He afterwards (in chap, xxi.) adds one of those which serines as a link vnth. the future, in part, perhaps, to j^re- vent a misconception which had sprung up about bis own life. Other disciples, too, give to his writing the stamp of their own knowledge of its certain truth. Such are the characteristics of this Gospel. We feel as we read them that we are in a region of thoughts widely different from those of the earlier Gospels. The characteristic thoughts naturally express themselves in character- istic words. The reader will not need to be reminded, as he again and again comes upon the words "light" (which occurs twenty-thi-ee times), "life" (fifty-two times), "love" (seven times ; 1 John seventeen times), "truth" (twenty-five times), " true " (ideally, nine times), " wit- ness " (substantive and verb, forty- seven times), "believe" (ninety- eight times), "world" (seventy- eight times), "sign" (seventeen times), that he has in such words the special forms which express the special thoughts which have come to us through St. John. Some characteristics in style have been poiated out in sect. II. as bearing upon the authorship of the Gospel. VI. Sketch, of tiie Liitera- ture of the Subject.— References have akeady been given, under the earlier sections of this fntroduc- tion, to works where the reader may find fuller information upon the different topics dealt with. Here it is intended to note such works as the ordinary reader may without difficulty have access to, and which bear upon the subject- matter of the Gospel itself. Of the older commentaries, Chi-y- sostom's Homilies on the Gospel o) St. John, and the Tractatus 124 in Joannem of Augustine, may be read ST. JOHN. 115 in the Oxiord Library of the Fathers. The Commeraary of Cyril of Alexandria has lately been trans- lated by Mr. P. E. Pusey, Oxford, 1875. The Aurea Catena of TLorcas Aquinas is accessible in the Oxford translation of 1841 — -15. Of more modern Commentaries, Lampe's three quarto volumes in Latin [BasUece, 1725 — 27), take the first place, and are a storehouse from which almost all his suc- cessors have freely borrowed. The century and a half which has passed since his book appeared has been fruitful in works on St. John. A selection of exegetical works pre- fixed to the second volume of Meyer's ComDientary, Eng. Trans., 1875, contains more than forty published during this period, and the number may be largely in- creased. The Appendix to the English translation of Luthardt's St. JoJui the Author of tht Fourth Gospel, contains a list of some 500 works and articles upon the authen- ticity and genuineness alone, which have been published since the year 1790. In our own day the best results of Xew Testament criticism, as applied to this Gospel, have been presented to the English reader in the Commentaries of Tholuck, Ed. 7, 1857, Eng. Trans., 1860; 01s- hauseu, edited by Ebrard and Wiesinger, 1862, Eng'. Trans., 1855; Bengel, Eng. Trans., 1874; Luthardt, Ed. 2, 1875—6, Eng. Trans., 1877; Godet, Ed. 2, with critical Introduction, 1877, Eng. Trans., 1877; Meyer, Ed. 5, 1869, Eng. Trans., 1875, all published by Messrs. Clark, of Edinburgh. In our own country the Commen- tarks of Wordsworth, 1868, and Alford, Ed. 7, 1874, are known to all students of the New Testament, and the latter work has been also arranged specially for English readers (1868). Two works, which are less known than they deserve to be, may be specially noted as furnishing in a convenient form the patristic interpretation : Com- mentary on the Authorised English Version of the Gospel according to St. John, by the Eev. F. H. Dun- well, London, 1872 ; and The Gos- pel of John, illustrated from Ancient and Modern Authors, by Kev. J. Ford, London, 1852. Two other English books on this Gospel deal specially with its subject-matter : the well-known Discourses at Lin- coln's Inn of the late Frederick Denison Maurice, a work marked by his spiritual insight and earnest devotion, and containing a striking criticism on Baur's mythical theory, Camb. 1857 ; and The Doctrinal System of St. John, by Professor Lias, London, 1875. For all questions of geography, chronology, and Jewish antiquities, the English reader has the latest results of scholarship in the Bibli- cal Dictionaries edited by Dr. Wil- liam Smith and by Dr. Kitto, Ed. 3, 1866; in Dean Stanley's Sinai and Palestine ; in the Beports of the " Palestine Exploration Fund ;" in the Synopsis of Dr. Karl Wieseler, Eng. Trans., 1864 ; in the Chrono- logical and Geographical Introduc- tion of Dr. Ch. Ed. Caspari, Eng. Trans., 1876. Special reference may be made to the articles on Jewish subjects by Dr. Ginsburg in Kitto's Cyclopccdia. See, e.g., in connection with this Gospel the articles on "Education," "Disper- sion," "Dedication," " Purim, " "Passover," and "Tabernacles." On questions of the text, and the translation of the text, a very valuable help has been furnished in 116 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. The Holy Bible, with Various Ren- derings and Bcadings from the Best Authorities, London, 1876; this Gospel has also been revised by "Five Clergymen," London, 1857, and the results have been incor- porated in The Neio Testament, Au- thorised Version Revised, London, 1876, of the late Dean Alford, who "was one of them. It remains for the writer to ex- press his obligations to the works which he has above mentioned, and to many others from which, directly and indirectly, thoughts have been suggested. To Liicke, Luthardt (especially in the Ana- lysis), Godet, and Alford (both Commentary and Translation), he is conscious of owing a con- stant debt ; but the work which has influenced his own thoughts most in the study of the New Testament is the Krifisch Ex^- getisches Sandhuch of Dr. Heinrich Meyer. ANALYSIS. 1. Prologue (chap. i. 1—18). The Wokd (1) ivas God (verses 1 — 5) ; (2) became man (verses 6 — 13); (3) revealed the Father (verses U-18). 2. Manifestation of Jesus. Varying Degrees of Acceptance (rhaps. i. 19 — iv. 64). (1) The Witness of the Baptist (chap. i. 19—40) : (a) To the messengers of the San- hedrin (verses 19—28) ; {b) At the appearance of Jesus (verses 29—34) ; (c) To the two disciples (verses 35—40). (2) jEsrs Manifests Himself to Individuals (chaps, i. 41 — ii. 11): {a) To the first disciples — the witness of man (verses 41—51); {h) At Cana of Galilee — the ivitness of nature (verses 1-11). (3) Jesus Manifests Himself Publicly (ii. 12 — iv. 64) ; ST. JOHN. 117 (a) In Jerusalem — the Temple (chap. ii. 12—22); {b) In Jerusalem — the city (chaps, ii. 23— iii. 21) ; Niooderrius : The new birth (verses 1-8); Belief (verses 9 — 15) ; Judgment (verses 16 — 21); (c) In Judcba (chap. iii. 22 — 36). The Baptist. (d) Jr, Samaria (chap. iv. 1 — 42). The tcoman of Sa- maria, and the living water (verses 1 — 16). The people of Samaria, and the fields ivhite unto harvest (verses 17 — 42) ; (t) In Galilee {Qh.a,^.ivAZ — 54). Received by the people. The courtier'' s faith. b. The fuller Revelation, and Growth of Unbe- lief among the Jews (chaps. V. 1 — xii. 50). (1) Jesus is Life (chaps, v. 1 — vi. 71). [a) This follows from the unity of Son and Father (chap, v.). (a) Energy given to strengthen the weak (verses 1—9). ()8) Persecution by the Jews (verses 10—18). (7) Teaching of Jesus (verses 19—47) : The Father's work also the Son's (verses 19 and 20) ; The spiritual resurrec- tion and judgment (verses 21—27); The physical resurrec- tion and judgment (verses 28—30)"; "Witness, and the reason of its rejection (verses 31—47). {b) Sis Incarnation is life for mankind (chap. vi.). (tt) Food given to sustain the hungry (verses 1—15). ()3) His body not subject to natural laws (verses 16—21). (7) The multitude follow Him (verses 22—25). (5) Teaching of Jesus (verses 26—58) : The work of God (verses 26—29) ; The Bread of Life (verses 30 — 50) ; The true food (flesh) and the true drink (blood) (verses 51 — 58) ; (e) The effect of the teaching — on the one hand de- fection, on the other a fuller confession of faith (verses 59 — 71). (2) Jesus is Truth and Light AND Love (chaps, vii. 1 — X. 42). {a) Jesus is Truth (chap. vii.). (a) The Feast of Tabernacles (verses 1 — 13). (/8) The teaching of Jesus (verses 14—39) : His doctrine is from the Father (verses 15 — 24); He is Himself from the Father (verses 25 — 31); He will return to the Father (verses 32 — 39). (7) The effect of the teaching Division among the multitude and in the Sanhedrin (verses 40 — 52). (b) Jesus is light (chaps, viii 12— ix. 41). 118 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. (tt) He declares Himself to be the Light, and ap- peals to the witness of the Father and of Him- self (verses 12—20). (j8) His return to the Father misunderstood by the Jews, and explained by Him (verses 21 — 29). (7) True discipleship and freedom (verses 30 — 59). Freedom by the Son's word (verses 30 — 36). Natural and ethical son- ship (verses 37 — 47). Eternal life by the Son's word. The Son's eter- nity (verses 48 — 59). (5) Physical light given to the man born blind (chap. ix. 1—42) : The miracle itself (verses 1—12). The objections of the Pharisees and the wit- ness of the sufferer verses 13—34). Physical light and dark- ness ; spiritual light and darkness (verses 35-41). (c) Jesus is love (chap. x. 1 — 42). (a) The Good Shepherd, who giveth His life for the sheep (verses 1 — 20). (i8) The discourse at the Feast of the Dedication (verses 22—38) : The true sheep hear the Shepherd's voice (verses 22—30). The charge of blas- phemy shown by their Scriptures to be groundless (verses 30—38). (7) Rejected in Jerusalem, Jesus goes away be- vond Jordan (verses 39—42). (3) Life, Truth, Light, and Love moke fully Mani- fested. Corresponding Increase of the Unbelief OF THE Jews (chaps, xi. 1 — xii. 50) : (a) Lazarus restored to life (chap. xi. 1—46). (a) The journey to Bethany. Sleep and death (verses 1—16). (/3) The interview with Mar- tha. The Resun-ection and the Life (verses 17—27). (7) The interview with Marj^. Sorrow and love (verses 28—38). (8) The open sepulchre. The corruptible and incor- ruption (verses 39 — 46). (b) The council of the Jews. The decree of death against the Giver of life (verses 47—53). (c) The withdrawal to Ephraim. Many seek for Jesus (verses 54 — 57). (d) The supper at Bethany. Mary, Judas, the chief priests {love, selfishness, hatred) (chap. xii. 1 — 11). {e) The entry into Jerusalem. The King and His people (verses 12—19). (/) TJie wider kingdom (verses 20—36). Certain Greeks would see Jesus. The firstfruits of the West (verses 20 — 22). The seed and the harvest. Life in death (verses 23—26). ST. JOHX. 119 The woild-wide attraction of the Cross. Light in darkness (verses 27 — 36). {(j) Tin jinal issue of the unbelief of the Jews. (o) The writer's own judg- ment (verses S7 — 43) : On no-faith (verses 37 — 41); On half -faith (verses 42, 43). (j8) The judgment of Jesus (verses 44—50). The rejection of light verse 46) ; love ("that I might save the world," verse 47) ; truth (verse 49) ; life (verse 50). 4. The fuller Revelation, and Growth of Faith among the Disciples (chaps, xiii. 1 — xvii. 26). (1) Love Manifested in Humi- liation (chap. xiii. 1 — 30). {a) The washing of the disciples' feet (verses 1 — 11); {h) The spiritual interpretation of this act (verses 1 2—28) ; (t) The Betrayal. Hatred passm from the presence of love (verses 21—30). (2) The Last Words of Deepest Meaning to the Faithful Few (chaps, xiii. 31 — xvi. 33). ia) His glory is at hand, because He is going to the Father ; they are therefore to love one another (verses 31 — 38). (b) In the Father'' s house He will receive them to Himself. He is the Way, the Truth, the Life (chap. xiv. 1 — 10), {c) Being in the Father, He tvill be 2}yesent in the disciples (verses 11—24): (a) By answering their prayers (vers. 12 — 14) ; (/8) By sending to them the Paraclete (verses 15 — 17); . . (7) Bv abiding in them (verses 18—24). (d) His legacy of peace to them (verses 25 — 31). (e) Relation of Jesus and His disciples to each other; and to the world (chap. XV. 1—27). (o) Their union with Him. The True Yine : union from wathin' (verses 1 — 11). Comp. the Good Shepherd (chap, x.) ; union from without, (i8) Their union with each other (verses 12 — 17). (7) The hatred of the world (verses 18—24) : The reason of it (versos 18-21); The sinfulness of it (verses 22—25). (8) The witness to the world (verses 26, 27) : By the Paraclete (verse 26); By the disciples (verse 27). (/) Their relation to the world and the promise of the Paraclete explained more fully (chap. xvi. 1—33). (a) Though the world will hate them, it is still ex- pedient that He should depart from them (verses 1 — 7). (3) The coming of the Para- clete and His office (verses 8 — 15). (7) His own departure and return. Their sorrow the birth-pangs of joy (verses 16—24). 120 NEW TESTA^IENT INTEODUCTIONS. (5) He promises a full reve- lation of the Father (verses 25 — 28). (fc) Their faith is now weak, though they think it strong (verses 29 — 32) , their future shall be one of tribulation, but He has overcome the world (verse 33). (3) Love Manifested in His Cn- TERCEssoRY Frayer (chap. xvii. 1 — 26). He Prays — (a) For Himself ; the glory of the Son (verses 1 — 5) , {b) For the disciples ; their union with the Father and the Son (verses 6 — 19) ; (hal literature of the New Testament, as in the Acts of Pilate, the Acts of Peter and Paul, of Philip, of Matthew, of Bartholo- niew. III. The Scope of the Book. — It is obvious that the title, whether by the author or by a transcriber, does but imperfecth^ describe its real nature. It is in no sense a historj- of the Apostles as a body. The names of the Eleven meet us but once (chap. i. L3). They are mentioned collectively in chaps, ii. 37, 42, 43 ; iv. 33—37 ; V. 2, 12, 18, 29; vi. 6; viii. 1, 14, 18 ; ix. 27 ; xi. 1 ; xv. 2, 4, 6, 22, 23, 33. 8t. John appears only in chaps, iii. 1 ; iv. 13 ; viii. 14. Nothing is told us of the individual work of any other. Looking to the contents of the book, it would be better described, if we were to retain the jiresent form at all, as the "Acts of Peter and of Paul," the former Apostle occupying a pro- minent place in chaps, i. — v., x. — xii., XV., the latter being the cen- tral figure in chaps, vii. 58, ix. , xi. 25 — 30, xiii. — xxvii. From another point of view a yet more apj)ro- pnate tit'e would be (using the term in if;S familiar literary sense) that of the Origines Ecclesice — the lustory of the growth and develop- ment of the Church of Christ, and of the mission work of that Church among the Gentiles. The starting- point and the close of the book are in this respect significant. It begins at Jerusalem ; it ends at Eome. ^Vhen it opens, circumcision is re- quired, as well as baptism, of every disciple ; the Church of Christ is outwardly but a Jewish sect of some hundred and twenty persons (chap. i. 15). When it ends, every barrier between Jew and Gentile has been broken down, and the Chiux'h has become catholic and all-embracing. To trace the stages of that expansion both locally and as affecting the teaching of the Church is the dominant purpose of the book. The "acts" of those who were not concerned in it at all, or played but a subordinate part in it, are, we may venture to say, deliberately passed over. Some principle of selection is clearly in- volved in the structure of such a book as that now before us, and even wathout going beyond the four comers of the book itself, we may safely aflfirm that the main purpose of the writer was to inform a Gentile convert of Eome how the gospel had been brought to him, and how it had gained the width and freedom with which it was actually presented. IV. Its Relation to the Gospel of St. Luke. — The view thus taken is strengthened by the fact that it presents the Acts of the Apostles as the natural sequel to the Gospel which we have seen sufficient reason to assign to the same writer. For there also, as it has been shown {Introduction), we trace the same principle of selection. It is more than any of the other three a Gospel for the Gentiles, bringing out the univer- sality of the kingdom of God, recording pn rabies and incidents which others had not recorded, because they bore witness that the 124 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. love of God flowed out beyond the limits of the chosen people on I ."""^bers and harlots, on Samaritans and Gentiles. It remained for one who had led his catechumen con- vert to think thus of the Christ during- His ministry on earth, to show that the unseen guidance given by the Christ in Hea-\'en, through the working of the Holy Spirit, was leading it on in the same diiection, that, though there had been expansion and develop- ment, there had been no interrup- tion of continuity. I have ven- tured to say {Introduction) that the Gospel of St. Luke might be described as emphatically " the Gospel of the Saintly Life." The natural sequel to such a Gospel was a i"ecord of the work of the Hoh" Ghost, the Sanctifier. Look- ing- to the prominence given to the work of the Spirit, from the Day of Pentecost onwards, as guiding both the Church collectively and its in- dividual members, it would hardly be over-bold to say that the book might well be called " the Gospel of the Holy Spirit." At every stage His action is emphatically recognised. Jesus, after His resur- rection, had, "through the Holy Ghost, given commandment to the Apostles whom He had chosen " (chap. i. 2). They are to be "bap- tised with the Holy Ghost " (chap. i, 5), are to " receiv£^.pawer after theHoly 'Ghust is come upon_ them^^ap. i. 8). The Holy Ghost had spoken through the mouth of David (chap. i. 16.) Then comes the great wonder of the Day of Pentecost, when all the disciples were " filled with the Holy Ghost (chap. ii. 4), and spake with tongues, and the prophecy, *' I will pour out My Spirit upon all Hesh" (chap. ii. 17), is quoted as on the verge of fulfilment. Jesus has " received from the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost" (chap, ii. 33). Once again all were " filled with the Holy Ghost, and spake the word with boldness " (chap. iv. 31). The sin of Ananias is a " lie unto the Holy Ghost " (chap. v. 3). He and his wife have " tempted the Spirit of the Lord" (chap. v. 9). The " Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey Him," is a witness that the Christ is exalted at the right hand of God (chap. V. 32). The seven who are chosen in chap. vi. are * '' full of the Holy Ghost, and of wisdom" (chap. vi. 3). Stephen is pre-emi- nently " full of faith and of the Holy Ghost" (chap. vi. 5). His leading charge against priests and scribes is that they " do always re- sist the Holy Ghost" (chap. vii. 51.) His vision of the Son of Man stand- ing at the right hand of God is closely connected with his being at the moment ' ' filled with the Holy Ghost" (chap. vii. 55). Peter and John go down to Samaria that those who had been baptised by Philip "might receive the Holy Ghost" (chap. viii. 15 — 17); and the sin of Simon the sorcerer is that he thinks that that gift of God can be purchased with money (chap. viii. 1 8—20) . It is the Spirit that impels Philip to join himself to the Ethiopian eunuch (chap. viii. 39), and carries him away after his baptism (chap. viii. 39). Ananias is to lay his hands on Saul of Tar- sus, that he "may be filled with the Holy Ghost" (chap. ix. 17). The chirrches of Judaea and Galilee and Samaria in their interval of rest are "walking in the fear of the Lord and the comfort of the Holy Ghost " (chap. ix. 31). The admission of the Gentiles is attested THE ACTS. 125 when " the gift of the Holy Ghost " is poured out on Cornelius and his friends (chap. x. 44 — 47), and Peter dwells on that attestation in his address to the Church of Jerusalem (chaps, xi. 15 — 17 ; xv. 8). Barna- has, when he is sent to carry on that work among the Gentiles at Antioch, is described, as Stephen had been, as " full of the Holy Ghost and of faith " (chap. xi. 24). It is the Holy Ghost who " separates Barnabas and Saul for the woi^k of the ministry," and they are sent forth by Him (chap. xiii. 2 — 4). Saul, roused to indignation by the subtlety of El}Tnas, is " filled with the Holy Ghost" (chap. xiii. 9). It is He who guides the decision of the council assembled at Jeru- salem (chap. XV. 28), and directs the footsteps of Paul and his com- panions in their mission journey (chap. xvi. 6, 7). The twelve dis- ciples at Ephesus, baptised before with the baptism of John, ' ' receive the Holy Ghost " when Paul lays his hands on them (chap. xix. 6). He it was who ^atnessed in every city that bonds and imprisonment awaited the Apostle in Jerusalem (chaps. XX. 23; xxi. 11). It was the Holy Ghost who had made the elders of Ephesus overseers of the Church of God (chap. xx. 28). Well-nigh the last words of the book are those which " the Holy Ghost had spoken by Esaias," and which St. Paul, in the power of the same Spirit, applies to the Jews of his own time (chap, xxviii. 25). V. Its Relation to the Con- troversies of the Time. — I have thought it right to go through this somewhat full induction be- cause it presents an aspect of the book which has hardly been ade- quately recognised in the critical inquiries to which it has been sub- jected. But subject to this, as the dominant idea of the Acts of the Apostles, I see nothing to hinder us from recognising other tendencies and motives, partly as inferred from the book itself, partly as in themselves probable, looking to the circumstances under which it must have been written. An educated convert like Theophilus could hardly have been ignorant of the controversy between St. Paul and the Judaisers, which is so prominent in the Epistle to the Galatians and the Second Epistle to the Corin- thians. He would know that the Judaising teachers in the Galatian Church had spoken of the Apostle as a time-server seeking to please men (Gal. i. 10) ; as having no authority but that which he de- rived from the Church of Jerusa- lem (Gal. i. 1, 12, 17, 22); that they used the name of James in support of their exaggerated rigour, and worked upon the mind even of Peter, so as to lead him to, at least, a temporary inconsistency (Gal. ii. 11 — 13) ; that others of the same school had appeared at Corinth, boasting of their " letters of com- mendation" (2 Cor. iii. 1); taunt- ing the Apostle with his ' ' bodily presence weak, and speech con- temptible" (2 Cor. x. 10); speak- ing of him as a " fool " and mad- man (2 Cor. xi. 16) ; arrogating to themselves something like an ultra- apostolic authority (2 Cor. xi. 4) ; boasting that they were Hebrews and ministers of Christ (2 Cor. xi. 22). The language of Kom. xiv. shows that disputes analogous in their nature had sprung up at Rome even before St. Paul's aiTival ; differences as to days and meats (Eom. xiv. 2 — 6) ; connected with the very question of eating ' ' things 126 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS; sacrificed to idols," which, had given occasion to one of the canons of the Council of Jerusalem (chap. XV. 20, 29) proposed by James, the bishop of that Church, and which had been discussed fully in the Epistle which St. Paul addressed to the Church of Corinth, at a ( time when its numbers were largely made up of Roman Chiistians (1 Cor. -v-iii. — x.). These facts were patent to any one who had any knowledge of St. Paul's work. If Theophilus were, as is probable, an Italian, probably even a Roman, convert, they would be forced upon his notice. There are, however, other mate- rials for estimating the attitude of the Judaising- party towards St. Paul, and the language they habi- tually used in reference to him. I do not assume that the Pseudo-Cle- mentine Hoinilies, Eecognltions, and Epistles are of an earlier date than the second century, but it is a legiti- mate inference that they represent the traditions of the party from which they emanated, and they help us to fill up the outline which has been already sketched. In them, accordingly, we find James, the bishop of Jerusalem, as the centre of all church authority, the *' lord and bishop of the holy Church" {Bpist. of Feter, c. i), the "archbishop" {Rccogn. c. i. 73). Peter complains that " some among the Gentiles have rejected his preaching, which is according to the Law, and have followed the lawless and insane preaching of the man who is his enemv " {ibid. c. 2. Comp. Gal. iv. 16). He complains that he has been mis- represented as agreeing with that "enemy" {ibid.). James declares that circumcision is an essential condition of discipleship {ibid. c. 4) . Under cover of the legendary dis- putes between Peter and Simon the Sorcerer, the personal dis- cipleship of the former is con- trasted with that of one who has only heard the doctrine of Jesus through a vision or a dream [Horn. Clem. xvii. c. 14. Comp. chaps, ix. 3, 17; xviii. 9; xxii. 18; xxiii. 11; 2 Cor. xii. 1), and it is suggested that one who trusts in those visions and revelations may have been deceived by^-ar— deipon {ibid. xvii., c. 16). Barnabas is named with praise (ioM i., c. 9), but the name of Paul is systematically ignored. The opposition to Peter at Antioch, of which we read in Gal. ii. 11 — 14, is represented as the work of the sorcerer {Recogn. X., c. 54). Almost the only direct reference to the Apostle of the Gentiles is an allusion to the "enemy" who had received a commission f "om Caiaphas to go to Damascus and make havoc of the faithful {Recogn. i., c. 71), and the fact that the *' enemy " afterwards preached the faith which he had once destroyed is kept out of sight. With the strange confusion of chronology characteristic of this apocryphal literature, the " enemy " is represented as entering the Temple, disputing with James, attacking him with violence and throwing him down the Temple stairs, so that he lay there as dead {Recogn. i., c. 70). Representations such as these might be met in two different ways. St. Paul, in the manly in- dignation of his spirit against such misrepresentations, met them, as in the Epistle to the Galatians, by asserting his entire independence of the Church at Jerusalem (Gal. i. 1 — 12), by showing that they had learnt from him, not he froni THE ACTS. 127 them, the fulness and freedom of the gospel which he preached (Gal. ii. 2) ; that the chief leaders of that Church had oiven to him and Bar- nabas the right hand of fellowship in their work among the G-entiles (Gal. ii. 9) ; that he had not given way hy subjection, no, not for an hour, to the Judaising Pharisee section of the Church (Gal. ii. 4, 5) ; that he had not shrunk from rebuking, with the general ap- proval of the Church at Antioch, the inconsistencv of Peter and of Barnabas (Gal.'ii. 11— U). He meets them also, as in 2 Cor. xi. 13 — 27, by challenging a compari- son between his own life and that of his antagonists. St. Luke thought it wise, in writing to a Gentile convert, to lay stress on the fact that the historj'' of the Church of Jerusalem, truly stated, was against the policy and claims of the Juda- isers, that the Apostle of the Gen- tiles, in his turn, had shown every disposition to conciliate the feel- ings of the Jews. With this view, he records the fact that charges like those which were brought against St. Paul had been brought also against the martjT Stephen (chap, vi. 14) ; that the Apostle had been admitted into the Church of Christ by a disciple devout according to the Law (chaps, ix. 10; xxii. 12); that he had been received, after the first natural suspicion had been lemoved by the testimony of Bar- nabas, by the Apostles at Jeru- salem ('chap. ix. 27) ; that it had been given to Peter to be, perhaps, the first to act on the essential principle of St. Paul's gospel, and to throw open the doors of the Church to the uncircumcised Gen- tiles (cbaps. x; xi. 1 — 13); that he and the Church of Jerusalem had sent Jrlarnabas to canry on that work at Antioch (chap. xi. 22) ; that St. Paul had always addressed himself to the Jews whenever there were any to listen to his preaching (chaps, xiii. 5, 14 ; xiv. 1; xvii. 2, 17; xviii. 4; xix. 8); that he had lost no opportunity of j renewing his friendly intercourse ; with the Church of Jerusalem (chaps. XV. 2 ; xviii. 22; xxi. 15) ; ' and that James, the bishop of that ; Church, had throughout received j him as a beloved brother (chap. xv. i 4, 25, 26) ; that he had shown his willingness to conciliate the Jewish 1 section of the Church by circum- ! cising Tiraotheus (chap. xvi. 3), and by his taking on himself the [ vow of a Nazarite (chaps, x^•iii. 18 ; j xxi. 26) ; and, lastly, that the I Council of Jerusalem had solemnly : formulated a concordat by which i the freedom of the Gentiles was secured (chap. xv. 23 — 29). A principle of selection such as this is naturally open to the charge that has been pressed by unfriendly critics, that it tends to lead the writer to exaggerate the harmony between the two parties whom it seeks to reconcile ; and stress has been laid on the omission of the dispute between Paul and Peter at Antioch (Gal. ii, 14), as showing that with this view he slurred over what was an important fact in the histoiy which he undertakes to write. It may fairly be urged, however, on the other side, that there is absolutely no e^'idence that he was acquainted with that fact. As far as we can gather from his narrative, he was not at Antioch at the time. It was an incident on which St. Paul would naturally be reticent, unless forced to allude to it, as in writing to the Galatians, in vindicating his own i independence. And even if he did 128 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. know it, was this passing, momen- taiy difference of sufl&cient im- portance to find a place in a brief comiDendium of the liistory of St. Paul's work ? AVould the writer of a school history of England during the last fifty years feel bound, in tracing the action of the Conservative or Liberal party as a whole, to notice a single passage at arms, in which sharp words were spoken, in debate in cabinet or Parliament, between two of its leaders ? Would a writer of Eng- lish Church History diuing the same period think it an indispens- able duty to record such a difference as that which showed itself between Bishop Thirlwall and Bishop Sel- wyn in the Pan- Anglican Confer- ence of 1867 r" That he did not shrink from recording a personal dispute when important conse- quences Avere involved is shown by his treatment of the quarrel between Paul and Barnabas (chap. XV. 37—40). VI. Its Evidential Value.— (1) In relation to the Gospels. Had the Acts of the Apostles presented itself as an entirely independent book, its evidence as to the main facts of the Gospel history would obviously have been of the highest value. It assumes those facts thi'oughout as well known. The main Avork of the Apostles is to bear witness of the resuiTCction (chap. i. 32). Jesus of Nazareth had been ' ' approved of God by mu-acles, and wonders, and signs " (chap. ii. 22). Against him " Herod and Pontius Pilate had been gathered together" (chap. iv. 27). God had "anointed him with the Holy Ghost and with power ; " and He " went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the de^-il, beginning from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached" (chap. x. 37, 38). It is obvious, however, that it does not present itself as independent. It looks back to a former book, and that former book is the Gospel according to St. Luke. "It was natural," it has been said, "that the A\iiter should thus take for granted what he had thus himself recorded. You cannot, in such a case, cite the second volume to bear witness to the veracity of the first." Admitting this, however — as in all fairness it must be ad- mitted — the Acts present evidence of another kind. If they are shown, by the numerous coincidences which they present with the writings of St. Paul (see infra), by their occa- sional use of the first personal pronoun (chaps, xvi. 10 — 15 ; xx, ; xxi. 17 ; xxvii. 1 ; xxviii. 16), by their stopping at St. Paul's imprisonmeni at Pome, instead of going on to the close of his work and life, to be, on any fair estimate of cii'cumstantial evidence, the work of a contemporary, and to have been written before St. Paul's death, in A.D. 65 or 66, then it follows that the Gospel from the pen of the same author must have been of even earlier date. The reference to the "many" who had "taken in hand " to set forth a narrative of the gospel (Luke i. 1) connects itself with the quotation from " the words of the Lord Jesus " in chap. XX. 35, as showing that there was not only a widely diffused oral tradition of the facts of the Gospel history (such as that implied in 1 Cor. xi. 23—25 ; xv. 3—7), but that there was also a fairly copious Gospel literature, presenting ma- terials for futui'e editors and com- pilers. But we may go yet fui'ther. It has often been ui-ged, as agaiast THE ACTS. 129 the early date of the Gospels in their present form, that they have left so few traces of themselves in the early history and the early writings of the Church. As far as the Epistles of the New Testament are concerned, those traces are far from few ; but it may be admitted that they do not refer, as we might, perhaps, have expected them to refer, to any individual miracles, or parables, or discourses of our Lord. The same holds good of the Apostolic fathers ; and it is not till we come to Justin Martyr that we get any such frequency of citation as to make it certain that he had one of our first three Gospels or another resembling them, in his hands. Well, be it so ; but here we have a work with the same absence of citation, the same vague generalisa- tion in its reference to the outlines only of the Gospel history ; and of this book, whatever view may be taken of its date, it is absolutely certain that the writer knew that history in all its fulness. Had the Acts come down to us without the Gospel of St. Luke, its reticence, and vagueness also, might have been urged as against the credi- bility of the narratives of the Gospels that bear the names of St. Matthew and St. Mark. As it is, it shows that that reticence and vagueness may be compatible with a full and intimate knowledge, of the facts so narrated. (2) In relation to the Epistles of St. Faul. Here, as Paley has well put the argument in the opening of his Horce FauUnce, the case is different. We have a book pur- porting to be by a contemporary of St. Paul's. We have thirteen or fourteen documents purporting to be Epistles from him. There is not the shadow of a trace in the Epistles that the writer had read the Acts, or even knew of the existence of the book. There is not the shadow of a trace in the Acts of the Apostles that the writer had read the Epistles, or even knew of their existence. He not only does not compile from them nor allude to them, but he does not even record, as might have been expected, the fact that they had been written. He omits facts which we find in them, and which would have been important as materials for his history. Whatever co- incidences the two may present are conspicuously undesigned. So far as they do agree and throw light upon each other, they sup- ply a reciprocal testimony each to the trustworthiness of the other. The coincidences which thus present themselves cannot be dis- played here; while to state them with any fulness would be to re-write the Sores Faulince with numerous additions. It will, how- ever, it is believed, be of some advantage to the student to have at least the more important of these coincidences brought under his notice in such a form as to admit of examination without turning to other books, and the following table has accordingly been drawn up with that view. It has been thought expedient to present them as they occur in the Epistles of St. Paul, and to take those Epistles in their chronological order. 1 Thess. ii. 2 ; iii. 4. St. Paul's suffering at Philippi . Acts xvi. 22, 23. iii. 4 lonica Thessa- xvii. 5. 130 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. lThess.ii.l8;iii.l, 6, 7 . ., ii. 14 „ i. 9 . . „ ii. 9, 10; iv. 11 . 1 Cor. ii. 1 ; iv. 19 ; xvi. 5. „ XV. 32 . . „ xvi. 19 . . „ xvi. 9 . . . „ iv. 17—19 . „ xvi. 10, 11 . „ i. 12; iii. 6 „ iv. 11, 12 . „ ix. 20 . . „ i. 14-17 . „ XVI. 1 . . . „ V. 7, 8 „ xvi. 8 . 1 Cor. i. 1 . „ xvi. 6 . „ xvi. 5 . 2 Cor. i. 16 ; „ xi. 32, i „ LB . 13 xi. St. Paiil left at Athens alone . Acts xvii. 16. Sufferings of the Thessalonians from their o^vn country- men ,, xvii. 5. Thessalonian converts turning from idols „ xvii. 4. St. Paul's precept and practice in working „ xviii. 3. St. Paul's two visits to Corinth . ,, xviii. 1 ; xx. 2. Fighting with wild beasts at Ephesus „ xix. 29, 30. " Aquiia and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord" . „ xviii. 18, 26. The "effectual door" opened at Ephesus „ xix. 20, 26. The many adversaries ... „ xix. 9, 28. Timotheus sent to Corinth from Ephesus .... „ xix. 21, 22. St. Paul's doubt as to arrival of Timotheus ... „ xix. 22. Work of Apollos at Corinth . „ xviii. 27, 28. St. Paul's working for his bread at Ephesus ... „ xx. 34. St. Paul's becoming to Jews as a Jew „ xvi. 3 ; xviii. 18; xxi. 23 —26. Baptism of Crispus and Gaius . „ xviii. 8. Collection for the saints in Galatia ,, xviii. 23. Allusion to the Passover • • I • oo " Tarrying at Ephesus tiU I " ^- "^"^ ' ^^• Pentecost" J Sosthenes with St. Paul . . . „ xviii. 12 — 17. St. Paul's wintering at Corinth „ xx. 3, 6. „ journey through Macedonia „ xx. 1. St. Paul's journey through Macedonia „ xx. 1. St. Paul's escape from Damas- cus „ ix. 23 — 25. The trouble that came on him in Asia xix. 29, 30. Supplies from the brethren from Macedonia .... „ xviii. 1, 5. 2 Cor. i. 19 „ xi. 25 . „ iii. 1 . . „ X. U— 16 Gal. i. 17, 18 . „ ii. 1 . „ ii. 13 . „ V. 11 . „ i. 18 . „ ii. 9 . Rom XV. 25, 26 . „ xvi. 21—23 . „ xvi. 3 . . . „ xvi. 27 . . „ i. 13; XV. 23 „ XV. 19 . . „ XV. 30 . . Phn. ii. 19 . . . „ i. 29,30; ii. 1, 2 . . „ iv. 2, 3 . . Eph. vi. 21 . . . „ vi. 19, 20 . CoL iv. 10 . . . THE ACTS. 131 SUvanus and Timotheus as St. Paul's fellow-workers at Coiintli Acts xviii. 5. " Once was I stoned "... „ xiv. 19. Letters of commendation . . „ xviii. 27. Corinth as then the limit of St. Paul's labours ... „ xviii. 18. His visit to St. Peter and James the Lord's hrother, after his conversion .... „ ix, 28. The journey with Barnabas to Jerusalem .^ . . T" . „ xv. 2. Barnabas with St. Paul at Antioch „ xv. 35 — 37. Persecutions from the Jews . „ xiLi. 49 ; xiv. 1—19; xvii. 4—13; xviii. 12. The shortness of the first visit to Jerusalem „ xxii. 18. The authority of James, the brother of the Lord . . „ xii. 17 ; xv. 13; xxi. 18. St. Paul's journey to Jerusalem „ xx, 6 ; xxiv. 17. Salutations from Sosipater, Timotheus, and Gains . „ xx. 4. Aquila and Priscilla at Corinth and Pome „ xviii. 2. Phoebe of Cenchreae .... „ xviii. 18. St. Paul's desire to visit Rome . „ xix. 21. The gospel preached in Illy- ricum „ xx. 2. Apprehension of coming dan- ger . „ XX. 22, 23. Timothe us known to the Philip- ' pianS ' „ xvi. 4 ; xvii. 14. St. Paul's sufferings at Philippi „ xvi. 22. Euodia, Syntyche, and the other women at Philippi . „ xvi. 13. Tychicus as known to the Ephesians „ xx. 4. St. Paul as an ambassador in a chain . „ xxviii. 16 — 20. .^axk as sister's son (better, "cSJIhin) to Barnabas . . „ xv. 37 — 40; xii. 12. 132 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Col. iv. 10 1 Tim. y. 9 i. 13— IG . „ i.5,7;iv.l- T^tas iii. 13 . 2 Tim. i. 16 20 4,5 15 iii. 10, n ir. 11 iv. 14 Aristarchus, St. Paul's feUow- prisoner Acts xix. 29 xxvii, Provision for the maintenance of widows The persecutor converted . . State of the Church at Ephesus Apollos in Crete • Onesiphorus and St. Paul's chain Trophimus left at Miletus . . The mother of Timotheus . . His education in the Holy Scriptures Persecutions at Antioch, Ico- nium, Lystra Mark profitable in ministering Alexander the coppersmith 2. vi. 1. vin. 3; ix. 1 —10. XX. 29, 30. XVlll. 24. xxviii 20. XX. 4. xvi. 1. xvi. 2. xiii. , xiv. Xlll. 5. XIX 33. It should he stated that the com- parison of the Acts and the Pauline Epistles hring-^ to light also some real or apparent difficulties. Of these the most conspicuous are : — (1) The omission in ix. 19 — 23 of the journey to Arahia mentioned in Oal. i. 17. (2) The omission in Gal. ii. 1 — 10 of any notice of the jour- ney to Jerusalem in chap, xi. 30, or of the decrees of the council of Apostles and elders in chap. xv. (3) The omission in the Acts of any record of the dispute between St. Peter and St. Paul at Antioch (Gal. ii. 11). These are examined in detail in the Conmientary.* =• See " A New Testament Commentary for English Readers," Acts, This method of inquiry may be extended, with similar results, to the Epistle to the Hebrews, and to the two Epistles of St. Peter. It is in the uccount of Apollos, in chap, xviii. 24 — 28, that we get what many critics since Luther's time have looked upon as the only satisfactory explanation of the phenomena presented by the first of these Epistles. Assuming the authorship of Apollos as at least a probable hypothesis, the spiritual condition described in Heb. v. 11, vi. 2, as that of some of those who had been under the teaching of the writer, may be compared with that of the twelve disciples at Ephesus who knew only the bap- tism of John (chap. xix. 1 — 7). In the reference to the ' ' saints of Italy " in Heb. xiii. 24 — apparently as distinct from Eoman Christians — we may, perhaps, see a refer- ence to the Church of Puteoli, the only Italian town, besides Rome, mentioned in the Acts as con- taining "brethren" (chap, xxviii. 14). THE ACTS. 133 I note, further, a few coincidences 1 of the Apostles and the Epistles of of some interest hetween the Acts St. Peter : — 1 Pet. i. 11 , . The tone in which prophecy is spoken of, as compared -with ,, i. 17 . . God no respecter of persons . ,, i. 22 . . Purity by faith and obedience „ ii. 7 . . The stone which the builders re- jected „ iv. 16 . The name of Christian . „ V. 12 . . Mention of Silvanus as accounting for St. Peter's knowledge of St. Paul's Epistles (2 Pet. iii. 15) „ V. 13 . . " Marcus my son "... Acts ii. 16, 17, 30, 31. „ X. 34. „ xy. 9. „ iv. 11. „ xi. 26 : xxvi. 28. XV. 32, 40. xii. 12. (3) In relation to External His- \ Acts. v. 37. Judas of Galilee. tory. — It is obvious that the Acts I Acts vi, 9. The synagogue of of the Apostles take a wider range, ' the Libertines, both in space and time, than any Acts viii. 9. Simon the sorcerer, other nai-rative book of the New \ Acts viii. 27. Candace, queen of Testament. They cover a period the Ethiopians, of more than thii-ty years. The Acts ix. 36. Dorcas, scene is shifted from Jerusalem to Acts x. 1. The centurion of Samaria, Ciesarea, Damascus, An- the Italian band, tioch, Cyprus, Asia Minor, Greece, Acts xi. 26. The name of Chris- and finaUy ends in Italy. The tian at Antioch. writer is constantly brought across Acts xi. 28. The famine under some of the events of contempo- Claudius, rary history, and the scenes which ' Acts xii. 23. Death of Herod earlier or later travellers have i Agrippa I. described. Does he show himself i Acts xiii. 7. Sergius Paulas of in these respects an accurate ob- Cj-prus. server, faithful in his reports, cor- ' Acts xiv, 11. Paul and Barnabas rect in his language ? Does he fall taken for Zeus into the blunders which would be and Hermes, natural in a man writing a ficti- Acts xvi. 12. Philippi a colonia. tious narrative a century or so after Acts xvi. 14. The purple-seller of the events which he professes to i Thyatira, relate ? For a full answer to these Acts xvi. 16. The damsel with a questions the reader must he re- Python spirit, ferred to the Commentary ; but it Acts xvi. 22. The strategi of may be well to indicate briefly ' Philippi. some of the more important of i Acts xvi. 37. St. Paul's Eoman these points of contact with the j citizenship, contemporary history of the outer Acts xvii. 6. The poUtarchs of world : — 1 Thessalonica. 134 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Acts xvii. 19, Acts xvii. 21. Acts xvii. 28. Acts xviii. 2. Acts xviii. 12. Acts xix. 9. Acts xix. 24. Acts xix. 27 — 29. Acts xix. 31 — 35. Acts xix. 38, 39. Acts xxi. 38. Acts xxii. 28. Acts xxiii. 2. Acts xxiii. 24. Acts xxi v. 24. Acts xxiv. 27. Acts xxv. 13. Acts xxv. 11. Acts xxvii. Acts xxviii. 7. Actsxxviii.lo. The court of the Areopagus. Character of the Athenians. Quotation from Aratus. Jews hanishcd from Rome hy Clau- dius. Gallio pro-consu] of Achaia. The school of Ty- rannus. The silver shrines of Ai'temis. The temple and theatre at Ephe- sus. The Asiarchs and town - clerk of Ephesus. The pro-consuls and the lawful As- semhly. The Egyptian rebel. St. Paul's Roman citizenship. The high priest Ananias. Felix the governor. Drusilla. Porcius Festus. Agrippa and Ber- nice. Appeal to Cassar. The details of the narrative throughout. The "chief man" of Melita. Appii Forum and the Three Ta- TJnder this head also it is right to notice that which appears to make against, rather than for, the credi- bility of the narrative, and I accordingly name the chronological difficulty connected with the name of Theudas in Gamaliel's speech (chap. V. 36). (4) Internal Evidence of Credi- bility. — The internal consistency of any book is not necessarily evi- dence of more than the skill of the writer. Every writer of fiction aims more or less at producing the impression of verisimilitude by touches that have the effect of coincidences between one j)art of the narrative and another ; and the art that conceals art will produce, according to the skill of the author, the impression that the coincidences are xmdesigned. On the other hand, we feel, as we read some stories, that they contain, in the natural- ness of their style, the absence of any sensational dove-tailing of incidents, ^yrimd facie testimony to their own veracity. And it is sub- mitted to the reader whether in- stances such as the following may not fairl}'^ claim consideration, as coming under the latter category rather than the former. (1) Hostility of the high priests, as Sadducees, to the jjreach- ing of the resurrection (chaps, iv. 1, 2; v. 17). (2) Barnabas of Cyprus going twice to his own country (chaps, iv. 36 ; xiii. 4 ; xv. 39). (3) The complaints of the Hel- lenistae (Grecians), leading to the election of seven men with Greek names (chap. vi. 1 — 5). (4) The Cilicians disputing with Stephen (chap. vi. 9). The young man named Saul (chap. vii. 58) ; afterwards described as of Tarsus (chap. ix. 11). THE ACTS. 135 (o) Philip's arrival at Caesarea (chap. viii. 40). No fur- ther mention of him till we find him again at Caesarea (chap. xxi. 8). (6) Mark's return to Jerusalem (chap. xiii. 13) explained by his mother's being there (chap. xii. 12) and the pres- sure of the famine (chap. xi. 28). (7) Agabus prophespng the famine (chap. xi. 28) ; again appearing in the character of a prophet sixteen years later (chap. xxi. 10). (8) The speech of Lycaonia as accounting for the surprise of Paul and Barnabas at the preparations for sacri- fice (chap. xiv. 11 — 14). (9) Conversion of Samaritans fchap. viii. 14). Incidental mention of the brethren in Samaria (chap. xv. 3). (10) Men of Cyprus and Cyrene found the Church at An- tioch (chap. xi. 20). Bar- nabas of Cyprus sent to carry on the work (chap. xi. 22). Lucius of Cyrene among the prophets of the Church (chap. xiii. 1). (11) Philippi a colonia (chap. xvi. 12). Philippians speak of themselves as Romans (chap. xvi. 21). (12) Trophimus the Ephesian (chap. xxi. 29) recognised by Jews of Asia, i.e., from Ephesus and its neighbour- hood. The list might, it is believed, be easily enlarged, but these will be sufficient to put the student on the track of a method which he can apply almost indefinitely in other instances for himself.* YII. Sources of the His- tory. — It will be assumed here that the use of the first person in parts of the history implies that the writer was then the companion of the Apostle whose labours he records. We have seen, in the Introduction to St. LuJce, how far the facts that are thus implied brought the writer into contact with persons who could give him trustworthy information as to what he relates in his Gospel ; it remains to be seen how far they point to the probable sources of his know- ledge as to the events recorded in the Acts. Acts i. — V. Philip the Evan- gelist (chap. xxi. 8 — 10), or Mnason of Cy- prus (chap. xxi. 16), or others— and, in parti- cular, the "women" of Luke viii. 2 — at Jeru- salem. Acts vi., vii. Philip or St. Paul. Acts viii. Philip. Acts ix. St. Paul. Acts x.— xi. 18. Philip. Acts xi. 19 — 30. St. Paul, or, probably, personal knowledge gained at Antioch. Acts xii. 1 — 19. John sumamed Mark (Col. iv. 10—14). Acts xiii. 1—13. St. Paul, or Mark, or Mnason of Cyprus. * It lies on tlie surface that I am largely indebted in this part of my work to Paley's Horce. PauUnce. I wish also to acknow- ledge my obligation to Mr. Birks's Horx Apostolic(B. 136 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Acts xiii. 14 — 62; xiv. St. Paul ; or, possibly, knowledge gained by Luke in person on his journey to Troas, or afterwards from Timo- theus. Acts XV., xvi. 1 — 7. St. Paul, or, probably, personal knowledge, as staying at Antioch, and, pos- sibly, going up to Jeru- salem. Acts xvi. 8 — 40. Personal knowledge. Acts xvii.,xviii. Probable com- munications from the brethren who came from Philippi to Thessalonica (Phil. iv. 16), and again to Corinth (2 Cor. xi. 9). General intercourse between the Romans of Philippi and the Roman Jews at Corinth. Acts xix. St. Paul ; or possibly Aristarchus and Gains of Macedonia, or Ty- rannus. Acts XX. — xxviii. Personal knowledge. Looking to the manner in which the Gospel begins with what has the character of a distinct docu- ment, so strongly marked by He- braisms that it could scarcely have been written by a Greek T\Tfiter, it is probable that the first five chap- ters of the Acts may, in like man- ner, have been incorporated from an earlier document, recording, like the later history of Hegesippus, the history of the Chtirch of Jeru- salem with a special fulness. It will, at any rate, be clear that at every step in the narrative we are able, in the Acts, as in the Gospel of the same writer, to point with a very high degree of probability to those who here also were " eye- witnesses and ministers of the Word" (Lukei. 2). Vin. Its Bearing on the Mission-work, Organisation, and Worship of the Church. — (1) Jlission-tvork. It will not, it is believed, be unprofitable to look at the records of the Acts of the Apostles as presenting the type and pattern for all future labours in the work of evangelising the world. It is obvious that the preaching of the Apostles is some- tliing very different from that of those who offer to men's acceptance simply a lofty ideal of virtue or high-toned ethical precepts. The central fact of all their teaching is the resurrection of Christ (chaps ii. 32, 33; iv. 10; x. 40, 41; xiii. 32 —37; xvii. 31; xxvi. 23). Upon that proclamation of a fact in the past they be Ud their assurance that He will come again as the Judge of the living and the dead (chaps, iii. 21; x. 42; xvii. 31); that ia the meantime He calls men to repent and believe in Him (chaps. ii. 38; v. 31; x. 43; xiii. 38, 39; xiv. 15; xvii. 30, 31); and that thus they may receive remission of their sins and the gift of the Holy Ghost (chaps, ii. 38 ; viii. 15 ; x. 45 ; xix. 2). They are naturally brought into contact, as they preach this gospel, with men of very different habits of thought, varying in their training, their knowledge, and their culture ; and they adapt themselves, as far as lies in their power, to all these variations in thoir hearers. With the Jews of Jerasalom, Antioch in Pisidia, Corii^th, and Rome, they draw their arguments almost exclusively from the correspondence between i the acts and death and resui-rection THE ACTS. 137 of Jesus with what had been written in the Law and Prophets as pointing to the coming Christ (chaps, ii. 14—36; iii. 19—26 ; vii. 2—53; xiii. 17—41; xx^dii. 23). With peasants, such as those at Lystra, they lay their foundation on what we should call the broad lines of a simple natural theology, and appeal to the goodness oi God as manifested in the order of nature, in rain from heaven and fruitful seasons (chap. xiv. 15 — 17). "With the Stoics and Epicureans of Athens, St. Paul (he alone, it may be, of the glorious company of the Apostles was fitted for that work) rises to the level of the occasion, and meets the thinkers on their own grounds, appeals to the witness of their own poets, and sets before them what we Live ventured to call the outlines of a philosophy at once of worship and of human history (chap. xvii. 22 — 31). And it may be noted how care- fiilly in all these cases the preachers abstain from the weapons of terror and of ridicule which men have sometimes used in dealing with the heathen whom they were seeking to convert. There are no state- ments that the world outside the range of the gospel was sentenced to hopeless condemnation — that the forefathers of those to whom they preached were for ever in the dark prison of Gehenna. They recog- nised, on the contrary, that in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is ac- cepted with Him. (See chap. x. 35.) They speak of the times of ignorance which God "winked at" (chap. x^di. 30). They are no "blasphemers" even of the worship which they are seek- ing to supplant (chap. xix. 37). They present the Gospel to men's minds as realising at once the con- scious prophecies of Israel and the unconscious prophecies of heathen- ism. They come, it is true, with some weapons in which modem missionaries are wanting. They claim to work signs and wonders as atte.stations of their divine mission (chaps, iii. 6, 7 ; v. 15 ; ^d. 8 ; viii. 13; ix. .34—40; xiv. 10; xix. 12; xxviii. 5 — 8) ; but they lay far less stress on these than on the " de- monstration of the Spirit "—the prophecy that reveals the secrets of the * heart, the conscious ex- perience of the power of that Spirit to give a new peace and a new- purity to souls that had been alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that was in them (chaps, ii. 38, 39 ; xi. 17, 18 ; Rom. viii. 23—26; 1 Cor. ii. 4). (2) Organisation and Worship. And, it may be noted further, they do not rest satisfied with the con- version of individuals as such, nor with leaving with each believer a book or a rule of life for his own personal guidance. Everywhere they seek to organise a society : the "brethren," the "disciples," the " saints," are formed into a church — i.e., an ecchsia, or congregation ; and that society receives a distinct and definite constitution. Elders, otherwise known as bishops (chap. XX. 28 ; PhU. i. 1 ; Tit. i. 5, 7), are appointed in every city (chaps, xi. 30 ; xiv. 23 ; xx. 17), to teach, and preside in worship, and administer the discipline and laws of the con- gregation. There are ministers or deacons under them, who assist in baptising, in the subordinate offices of worship, in the relief of the sick and poor, and, if they have special gifts, in preaching the gos- pel to Jews and heathen, and teach- ing converts also (chap. vi. 3 — 6 ; 138 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. PhU. i. 1 ; 1 Tim. iii. 8). The Apostles appoint both elders and deacons, with the consent — and therefore the implied right of veto — of the congregation, and exercise over them an authority analogous to that of the later hishops (chaps. xiv. 23; XX. 17). There is an organisation of the charity of the Church on the basis of systematic almsgiving ; and the Apostles, and, in their absence, the bishop-elders of the Church, act, where necessary, with the help of others as repre- senting the laity of the Church, as treasurers and almoners (chaps, iv. 37 ; V. '_'). The disciples meet to break bread, as their Lord had com- manded, on the evening of every day ; afterwards, as the Church included men of various classes and employments, on that of the first day of the week — probably, i.5.,on Saturday evening (chaps, ii. 46 ; xx. 7) ; and the history of the institu- tion of what came to be known as the Supper of the Lord formed the centre of the celebration of that feast (1 Cor. xi. 23—26). The feast itself was preceded by a solemn blessing, and closed with a solemn thanksgiving. Psalms, hymns, and unpremeditated bursts of praise, chanted in the power of the Spirit, such as those of the gift of tongues, were the chief elements of the service (chap. iv. 24—30; Eph. v. 19; Col. iii. 16). The right of utterance was not denied to any man (women even seem at first to have been admitted to the same right — chap. xxi. 9 ; 1 Cor. xi. 5) who possessed the neces- sary gifts (1 Cor. xiv. 26—33) and was ready to submit them to the control of the presiding elder or Apostle. There were in the un- written traditions of the Church ; in its oral teaching as to our Lord's life ind teaching (1 Cor. xi. 23 ; XV. 1 — 8) ; as in its rules of disci- pline and worship (2 Thess. ii. 15 ; iii. 6) ; in the "faithful sayings" which were received as axioms of its faith (1 Tim. i. 15; iv. 9; 2 Tim. ii. 11 ; Tit. iii. 8), the germs at once of the creeds, the canons, the liturgies, the systematic theo- logy of the future. It is, lastly, instructive and suggestive to note that throughout the history there is no record of any effort to set apart a separate place of worship for the members of the new society. They meet in private houses (chaps, ii. 46 ; xx. 8 ; Rom. xvi. 5, 15, 23 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 19), or in a hired class- room (chap. xix. 9), as opportunities present themselves. There would apparently have been no difficulty in their claiming the privilege which Roman rulers con ceded freely to other Jews and proselytes, of erecting a synagogue of their own ; but they left this to come in due course afterwards. Their own work was of a different and higher kind. They were anxious rather to found and edify the society which, as built of "liWng stones," was to be the temple of the living God, than, in the modem sense of the term, to be the builders of churches. IX. Its Bearing on the Church History of the Future. — Nor is the record which we owe to St. Luke less instructive considered as the first volume of the history of Christendom. Fairly considered, while it brings before us the picture of primitive Chris- tianity as a pattern to be followed in its essential features, it is as far as possible from presenting it as a golden age of unalloyed and unapproachable perfection. It tells us of men who were of like passions THE ACTS. 139 with ourselves, not free from the bitterness of personal quarrels (chap. XV. 39), or from controversies in which party was arrayed against party on a question on which each held that it was contending for a vital truth (chap. xv. 1 — 5). It records, as if with an unconscious prevision of future controversies, how that dispute ended in an ami- cable compromise, each party mak- ing concessions, within certain well-defined limits, to its opponents, neither insisting on what an inexor- able logic might have looked on as the necessary conclusion from its premisses (chap. xv. 23 — 30). The writer tends, partly by his natural instincts, partly of deliberate pur- pose, to dwell on the points of agreement between men rather than on their points of difference; to bring out the good which was to be found in men of different degrees of culture and very varied training. Peter, James, Apollos, Paul, are not for him what they were for so many others — leaders of parties, rivals for allegiance. He is able to recognise in each and all men who are ministers of Christ, fitted lor the work of that ministry by the gift of the Holy Ghost. And in striking contrast to the martyro- logists and other annalists of the Church who followed him, he avoids what we may call the sensational element of history ; does not dwell (with the one marked exception of St. Stephen) on the deaths and sufferings of the disciples ; understates the work, the hardships, and the perils of the Apostle who is the chief figure in his history ; aims rather at presenting the results of the actual contest between the new and the old societies, now favourable and now quite other- Avise, than at representing the two as in irreconcilable enmity. There is, so to speak, a hopefulness and healthiness of tone, which contrasts favourably with that of later writers after the sword of systematic persecution had been unsheathed, or even in some measure with that of the later writings of the Xew Testament, such as the Epistles of St. Peter and the Apocalypse, and which may fairly be allowed some weight as evidence for the early date cl its composition. 140 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. P5 O o 3 O H CO O < o pq i o Hi o o p^ o -^ -^ -^ ce ^ C4_| _j q_( '^ 2^ o ^ o S »'■ o ^ --^ S CD "S aj o ^ o +^ .S 60.2 05 ^ "^ CO ^ .r^ o^ « =R o p<^ a-^ -' - -^ s o 03 I O r^ d &c =^ ij *^ '-' d o «+-! erf -rt rrt rQ .2 "^ O 2 Q^ i^ i2 ^ ^^ ^ d d=*-i^ . --C rd ^ r-H K .2 f* 3 ® .^2 Q^ .^ ^ S o O J> .2 o ^^2-^ oQ Q> ^ .2 - "^ rd O ^ d a^d-si JJ O -J r-H d 3 2 I ^ lo tot- eo ct5 CO CO eo CO a o pi - a pi Q 1 Cl m 1:3 "ii ® i ft PL, i?pH<1 a; H a Cs ia ^ j5 OJ £2^ o "'■ 2 <= rt -3 a -5 H M "d ^ o "h r5 I O O :i2 i-^b 3 qj ^ C o la's . c3 ifilil -d °5 g m rt^ THE ACTS. U\ W .5 53.5 P S 2 S o 5£ fl CO c3 P =^ .So":: d § grt S ;q o P to fflO ^ Q W o Ph p3 a, < O Co jQPhHj 3(11 i-s I'' SpPo til's 2 Pi II (» O 1 *" rSgn S ^ = c S 4l^^«|.S pq .•° 5.2 S§ s.d ,^ <^ •- P^" o wo •p|Wp |:§ Q (Li pLi pL| g^ ,_, cS O -t-J a'? K H c Q ci PL| S 2 5a PU PM §5 H 1^ «5 s &,ss -= Pk i c U2 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. -S =" '&.-^ .^'S Ph<5 t. .o •§5 3 t3 oi O CO .S "^ 1 I- •- g^S «s -St! r Ph 88 i If 0? a 2 ■ I'w'^'S© Q^ - l-l 3 ^ n !3 -^s ,d '2 « -: 2 ^ <1 H fM 3-3 1 « OS ^+a O iH ^ « » . £d , Cfl 5:> « ♦* fl> ® « 0) ij iliM^s|3|sg THE ACTS. 143 l«- S S fe CO Oi O r-l (MM-* »0 «Ob-00O> o 1 < i El a 2 8 o o o I:~ t- l^- 1-t- b- r~r~t-i» 00 5f !l Si tip ill III 3 1 ll 1 Sill nil 114 II SI III 1- i 1 M 1° lit if 1=1 ll Hi. Bis m ^ t^ > W HO MP4 O s 3 i >• 3 ■§g es eSs* 1 o a ■3 >^ H 1 1 1 o o 2S ^"Ss s s Is e « El Ph 2 p o ^ o^ ® Cm W o 3 o 1 g ll 1 1? ^1 lo s 1 o • o| fl o 2 1 ii « "■ M Q OQ o_ ;» O w i is 1 ^Sl 1 1 O 6>| ■^ ^ <© *- s ""cT" 'o i-H (Mco^ o co^•<»o> 8 ^ <© o «o t- 1-- 1- t-*- »» t-t-t-t- 144 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. S8SS SSSfeS OSO l-H C^ CO Tit LO «o t- 00 050 I-H i 58 s^ in fl S3 ■a 1^5 5 ,4 °1 la 1 ? H =i 1 II t-s E? _fl c"3 «.§! g i ? p ^ rt 1 IS o ^ " Ill ^ IP rt ^-.1 2 '3 J •=1 III 3 "el w o Vn 1 Si |2 §15 ill O M tj3 1 '3 2W If < 1 11? >§3 < 1 1 >> ra H 5 $ -^1 P -«5 < O" p^ Q ►^o n (5 S ^S:: g-2a 35 ^ g ^0. S.:S « t o M H H H a PP P ^ H ROMANS. By the Rev. Pkofessor SANDAY. D.U. I. The Epistles of St. Paul generally, and that to the Romans in particular. — It is a somewhat remarkable fact that so large a part of the documents of Christianity should be taken up with a correspondence. The con- tents of the Old Testament, hetero- geneous as they are, correspond more nearly to what we should expect to find in a sacred volume. A legislation such as that of Moses, songs expressive of deep religious feeling like the Psalms, impassioned addresses Uke those of the prophets, histories such as the continuous series which trace the fortunes of the Chosen People — all these, we should have thought, were the natural vehicle for a religion. But the composition of the New Testa- ment is something more unique. The foundation of Christianity is laid in a narrative ; but the first and greatest development of Chris- tian theology is not embodied in narrative, not in any set and formal treatise, not in liturgies, canons, and works of devotion, but in a collection of letters. The causes of this peculiarity are not far to seek. C'hristianity was the first great missionary religion. It was the first to break the bonds of race, and aim at embracing all mankind. But this necessarily in- volved a change in the mode in which it was presented. The pro- phet of the Old Testament, if he had anything to communicate, either appeared in person or sent messi3ngers to speak for him by word of mouth. The one excep- tion of any religious significance is a letter of Elijah to Jehoram in 2 Chron. xxi. The narrow limits of Palestine made direct personal communication easy. But the case was different when the Christian Church came to (consist of a number of scattered posts, stretching from Mesopotamia in the east to Rome, or even Spain, in the far west. It was only natural that the Apostle by whom the greater number of these communities had been founded should seek to communicate with them by letter. He was enabled to do so by two things : first, the very general diffusion of the Greek lan- guage ; and, secondly, the remark- able facilities of intercourse afforded at this particular time. The whole world was at peace, and held to- gether by the organised rule of imperial Eome. Piracy had been put down. Commerce flourished to an extraordinary and unpre- cedented degree. In order to find a parallel to the rapiditj^ and 10 146 NEW TESTA]\IENT INTRODUCTIOISrS. ease of communication along the whole coast of the ]Mediterranean and the inland districts, intersected as the}' were with a network of military roads, we should have to come down to the present century. St. Paul was in the hahit of travel- ling surrounded hy a group of more intimate disciples, whom, as occa- sion arose, he despatched to the seve- ral churches that he had founded, much as a general sends his aides- de-camp to different parts of a battle- field ; or, without faUing back upon those, he had often an opportunity of sending by some chance traveller, such as was probably Phebe, the bearer of the Epistle to the Rom.ans. The whole of St. Paul's Epistles bear traces of their origin. It is just this occasional character which makes them so peculiarly human. They arose out of actual pressing- needs, and they are couched (most of them, at least) in the vivid and fervent language of one who takes a deep and loving interest in the persons to whom he is wi'iting, as well as in the subject that he is writ- ing about. Precept and example, doctrine and practice, theology and ethics, are all mixed and blended together. No religious books pre- sent the same variety as the Chris- tian, and that because they are in the closest contact with actual life. There is, however, as we might naturally expect, a difference in the balance of the two elements — the personal or epistolary element pro- per on the one hand, and the doc- trinal or didactic element on the other. In some of the Epistles the one, in others the other, pre- ponderates. As types of the fii-st class, we might take the First, and still more that noble and un- surpassable Second Epistle to the Corinthians, and the Epistle to the Philippians. At the head of the second class would be placed the Epistles to the Eomans and to the Ephesians. It can hardly be a chance co- incidence that precisely in these two Epistles there are certain MSS. which omit the words of address to the particular chui'ch. By reasons which cannot be given in this Introduction the writer has been led to the suggestion that the Epistle was at an early period cir- culated in a double form— one that in which we now have it, and the other, with the personal matter excised, as a general treatise on Christian doctrine. In any case, this character in it is marked : it is the most like a theological trea- tise of any of the New Testament writings. How are we to account for this ? We shall b<^ in a better position to answer such a question when we have considered more particularly the circumstances under which the Epistle was written, the persons to whom it was addressed, and the object for which it was designed. II. Time and Place of the Epistle. — And first, as to the time and place of the Epistle. These are fixed witbin very definite limits. One set of allusions clearly points to Coi'inth as the place from which the Apostle is A^Ttiting. In chap. xvi. 23 he spealcs of himself as the guest of one " Gains," and in 1 Cor. i. 14, he says that he had bap- tised none of the Corruthian Church "but Crispus and Gains." The name was a common one; still there would be a prima facie jn'oba- bnity in the identification. In the same verse (chap. xvi. 23), the Apostle conveys a salutation fro;:i ROMANS. 147 Erastiis, "the treasurer" ("cham- berlain," Authorised vei-sion) " of the city," and in 2 'Jim. iv. 20 we are told that Erastus "abode in Corinth," which would be natural if Corinth was his homo. These indications are clenched by the com- mendatory notice in chap xvi. 1 of Phebe, deaconess of the Church at Cenchrea, to whose care it would seem that the Epistle was entrusted. Cenchrea was the port of Corinth. From another set of allusions (chap. XV. 25, 26) we gather that at the time at which he was writ- ing, St. Paul was about to go up to Jerusalem, bearing with him the sums collected amongst the com- paratively wealthy churches of "Macedonia and Achaia" for the poor Christians at Jerusalem. The order in which the two names are mentioned would quite fall in with the assumption that it was from Achaia — of which province Corinth was the capital — that the Epistle was written ; and we should also naturally infer that he had passed through Macedonia on his way to Corinth. We find, besides, the intention expressly declared of extending the journey, after his visit to Jerusalem, to Rome (chap. XV. 23—26). All this tallies exactly with the statement in Acts xix. 21, "After these things were ended {i.e., the success of the Apostle's preaching at Ephesus), Paul pm-- posed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, sjiying, After I have been there, I must also see Rome." Such was his programme ; and that it was actu- ally carried out appears from the notices in Acts xx. 1 — 3, 22, xxi. 15. In the first we find the Apostle •spending three months in Greece, in the second he announces at IMiletus the destination of his journey for Jerusalem, in the third he actually aiTives there. We learn, moreover, incidentally from liis speech before Felix, in Acts xxiv. 17, that the object of his visit to Jerusalem was to bring "alms and offerings." And there are repeated allusions to a collection for the same purpose in both the Epistles to the Corinthians. (See 1 Cor. xvi. 3; 2 Cor. viii. 1, 2; ix. 1 et seq.) The Epistle is thus placed, by a remarkable convergence of evi- dence, in that part of the Apostle's third missionary journey which was spent in Corinth. The journey in question began at Antioch. Thence the Apostle made his way to Ephesus by a detour through Galatia and Phrygia. At Ephesus he stayed in all about three years, and his preaching was attended with a success which roused the heathen population against him. The distirrbance that ensued has- tened him on his way to Mace- donia. Through Macedonia he passed westwards as far as IlljTi- cum (chap. xv. 19), and thence to Greece, where he spent three months. It was at Corinth, then, during these three months that the Epistle was written. This would be, ac- cording to the system of the best chronologists, in the spring of the year a.d. 58. That the time of the year was spring is fixed by the fact that the Apostle had intended to sail for Spia (Acts xx. 3), which he would not have done during the winter season. The na's'igation of the Mediterranean was held to be unsafe from October to the middle of March. But the Apostle must have left Corinth before the spring was far advanced, as he had time, 148 NEW TESTAMENT INTEODUCTIONS. after passing through. Macedonia and coasting along the shore of Asia Minor, to arrive at Jerusalem for the Feast of Pentecost — i.e., our "Whitsuntide. We shall not be far wrong if we place the Epistle to- wards the end of the month of February. III. Place of the Epistle in relation to the rest of St. Paul's Epistles. — Three other Epistles Avere written during the same joiu-ney, the First and Second to the Corinthians, and that to the Galatians. The First Epistle to the Corinthians was written from Ephesus dming the spring of the year preceding, a.d. 57. The Second Ex)istle was written from Macedonia in the autumn of the same year. The Epistle to the Galatians is less clearly dated. It may possibly belong to the earlier part of the three years' residence at Ephesus, and it is assigned to this time and place by the majority of commentators. But when we come to deal with that Epistle, reasons will be given for preferring another ^dew, which places it rather between the Second Epistle to the Corinthians and that to the Romans. We should thus have the following order : — 1 Cor, Ephesus a.d. 57 Sirring. 2 Cor. Macedonia „ 57 Autumn. /Macedonia,' or perhaps Gal. •< more pro- bably L Greece Rom. ] Corinth 57, 58 Winter. }" 58 Early Spring. The Epistle to the Romans comes, in any case, last in the group. Passing to the wider relations of the group to which the Epistle to the Romans belongs, to the rest of the Apostle's writings, we shall see that it comes second of the four larger groups. The order woidd be this : — ■ 2nd Mis- sionary • jom-neyj 3rd Mis- \ sionary > ( journey j C. Philip., Eph. ' Col., PMl. [Epistles of' the Imprison- ment) A. 1 & 2 Thess. ] B. 1 & 2 Cor., ( Gal., Rom First Ro- man Im- prison- ment D. 1 & 2 Tim., Titus [Pastoral E2)istles) ''Interval ' of free- dom and Second Roman 1 Impri- I sonment ) A.D. 52 (end), 53 A.D. 57, 58 A.D. 62, 63 A.D. 66— e IV. The Roman Church The next point to be determined is the character of the Church to which the Epistle was addressed. And this we may do well to con- sider from two points of \iew. Fii'st, with reference to what may be learned respecting it from ex- ternal sources ; and, secondly, with reference to the indications sup- plied by the Epistle itself. 1. At Rome, as elsewhere, Chi'is- tianity first took root among the Jews. A large colony of this people existed in Rome at the Christian era. The foundation of it had been laid by the captives carried away by Pompey after the taking of Jerusalem in k.c. 63. A number of these were settled in Rome. They attracted the favour- able notice first of Jidius Ca3sar, and then still more of Augustus, who assigned to them a special ROMAXS. 149 quarter beyond, i.e., on the right bank of .the Tiber, and opposite to the modern Jewish quarter, or Ghetto, which lies between the Capitol and the river. They were allowed the free exercise of their religion, and, as was always the case where they were treated with toleration, rapidly increased in numbers. A Jewish embassy, which came to Eome after the death of Herod the Great, was able to attach to itself as many as 8,000 Eoman Jews, who naturally would represent only the more respectable portion of the male community, 'ibis rapid progress received a check imder Tiberius, who, in a.d. 19, probably at the instance of Sejanus, obtained a decree of the Senate, sending 4,000 Jews and Egyptians to Sardinia on military service, and forbidding the rest from the practice of their religion on pain of expul- sion from Italy. Josephus tells a scandalous story to account for this, Imt the real reason may, very possibly, have been the fear o-^' secret political machinations under the disguise of religion. In the latter part of his reig-n Tiberius reversed this policy, and its effects speedily disappeared. Under the next emperor, CaligTda, an embassy of Alexandrine Jews, headed by Philo, met with a rough reception ; but this would seem to have been more than count'^rbalancd by the favoTir extended to Herod Agrippa, who stood high in influence at the Court. This astute politician made use of his position to further the accession of Claudius, and, as a reward, not only was restored to the dominions of his grandfather, Herod the Great, but also obtained an extension of privileges for his coimtrymen throughout the empire. Later in the reign of Claudius dis- turbances arose among the Jews at Eome, which seem to have been connected with the first preaching of Christianity, either through the excitement of the Messianic expec- tations, ortlirough disputes between the Jews and Christians. Suetonius says that they took place at the instigation " of one Chrestus," which, for the heathen historian, would be a not imnatural miscon- struction. The result was a second banishment of the Jews from Eome (Acts xviii. 2). But this again cannot have been really complete, and the Jews who were banished seem in many instances (such as that of Aquila and Prisca) soon to have returned. The effect of the repressive measures might easily be exaggerated. There is abundant evidence to show that, at the time St. Paul was writing, the Jewish community at Eome was numerous and floiuishing, and its influence upon Eonian society was loudly complained of alike by the philosopher, the satirist, and the historian. The chronology of the foregoing sketch may be thus exhibited : — Foimding of the Jewish commimity at Eome by prisoners brought from Jerusalem by Pompey b.c. 63 Favourable position imder Julius Caesar b.c. 48 — 44 and Augustus b.c. 27 — a.d. 14 Embassy to Eome after the death of Herod .. , b.c. 4 First decree of banish- ment under Tiberius a.d. 19 Philo's embassy to Caligula ... circa „ 40 Second decree of banish- ment under Claudius circa „ 49 150 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Return of Aquila and Prisca to Rome . . . a.d. 57 Epistle to the Romans ,, 58 According- to the tradition which is still in vogue among the modern representatives of the Roman Church, Christianity was planted there hy St. Peter in the year a.d. 41. St. Peter himself is said to have held the episcopate for twenty- five years. This tradition, how- ever," only dates from the time of Jerome {oh. a.d. 420), and is there- fore much too late to be of any value. It is contradicted by the whole tenor of St. Paul's Epistle, which could hardly have failed to contain some allusion to the presence of a brother Apostle, especially when we consider the express declaration of St. Paul that he was careful not to " build upon another man's foundatioa." Be- sides, a distinct alibi can be proved by the comparison of Acts xv. with Gal. ii. 1—9, which shows that, at the time of the Apostolic Council in A.D. 52, not onlj^ was Peter at Jerusalem, but Jerusalem had been up to that time his head-quarters. He is still the Apostle of the circumcision, and a pillar of the mother church. At a later period he is found, not at Rome, but at Antioch. It is more probable that the germs of Christianity were carried back to Rome by the " strangers " (Acts ii. 10) whom we find in Jerusalem at the Feast of Pente- cost, i.e., Jews resident in Rome who had come up for the purpose of attending the feast. The rudi- ments of Christian teaching brought back by these would soon be developed in the constant inter- course which took place between Rome and the provinces. The fact that, in the list of salutations at the end of the Epistle, so many are mentioned who were not native Romans, but had been already under the personal influence of St. Paul, would readily account for the advanced knowledge of Christianity that the Apostle assumes among them. 2. Turning now more exclusively to the Epistle itself, what are we to gather from it in regard to the Church to which the Apostle is writing ? The main question to bo decided is the proportion in which the two great constituent elements of the primitive Christian Church were mixed and combined in it. Was the Church at Rome, in a preponderating degree, Jewish or Gentile ? The answer to this question iTSually gives throughout the apostolic times the best clue to the doctrinal bearings and general character of any Christian com- munity. We find throughout the Epistle an easy interchange of address, first pointed, as it were, towards Gentiles, and then towards Jews. In one place (chap. xi. 13) the Apostle says in so many words, " I speak to you Gentiles." In another place (chap. vii. 1) he says as ex- pressly, " I speak to them that know the law," and in proof that this is not merely an external knowledge, he evidently in chap, iii. 19 is appealing to an authority which he knows that his readers will recognise. " What things soever the law saith, it saith to them that are xmder the law." Accordingly we find, that though the Apostle begins his Epistle by addressing the Romans as a Gentile Church (chap. i. 6, 13), and although the first section of the proof of his great thesis, the uni- ROlSrANS 151 versa! need and offer of salvation, j bears specially upon the Gentiles, j he very soon passes from their case I to that of the Jews. Chap. ii. con- tains a direct expostulation with the one, just as chap. i. had con- tained a condemnation of the other. Nor is it only a rhetorical artifice that in the section chap. ii. 1 7 — 24 the Jew is addressed throughout in the second person. The Apostle evidently had actual Jews before his mind. In like manner, the long- parenthetical discussion of the claims and fall of Israel in chaps. ix. — xi. is clearly intended to be double-edged. It has a two-fold application at once to Jew and Gentile. On the one hand it is intended as an apology for the justice of the divine dealings addressed to the Jew, and on the other hand it contains a warning addressed to the Gentile. If stress is laid upon the calling of the Gentiles, it is to provoke the Jews " to emulation." If stress is laid upon the rejection of the Jews, it is in order that the Gentiles may not " be high minded, but fear." The whole phenomena of the Epistle, then, point to the conclu- sion that the Church for which it was destined consisted in almost equal proportions of converts from Judaism and from heathenism ; and the easy transitions hy which the Apostle turns from the one to the other seem to show that there was no sharp and hard antagonism between them. The Epistle is written as if both might form part of the audience that would hear it read. The Church at liome was divided as yet by no burning questions. The Apostle did not think it necessary to speak strongly on the subject of circumcision on the one hand, or of laxity and immorality on the other. The differences that existed were of a much milder kind. The " strong " and " weak brethren," whose mutual difficulties are weighed so judiciously in chap, xiv., are not by any means a synon^^n for Je^ or Gentile, though there would naturally be a tendency in parties to divide according to their origin. The asceticism and observance of days alluded to were not common characteristics of Judaism, but belonged especially to the sect of the Essenes. Nor does it seem that the divisions to which they gave rise extended beyond a gTeater or less degree of scrupulousness or liberality. The inferences that we have thus been led to draw receive support from an analysis of a different kind. Much hght is thrown upon tbe com- position of the Church by the list of names of the persons selected for salutation in the last chapter of the Epistle. These cannot very well be fidly discussed in an Introduction, but in this place we may so far sum up the resists as to say that they point clearly to a mixture of nation- alities. The one named Mary (= Miriam) is exclusively Jewish; Apelles is, if not exclusively, at least typically so. But besides these.. Aquila and Prisca, Andronicus and Jimia (or Junias), and Herodian, must have been Jews. As Aristo- bulus was a Jew, and the Jews generally hung much together, it is probable that the household of Aristobulus would be mostly Jews also. Urban and Ampliatus (the true reading for Amplias) are genuine Latin names. Julia would be a dependent on the imperial household, of what nationality is uncertain. The rest of the names are Greek, which tallies with the 152 NEW TESTAIVIENT INTRODUCTIONS. fact that the literature of the Roman Church was Greek, and there are other evidences that the Church bore a general Greek character up to the middle of the second century. A detailed comparison of the names with those which have come down to us in mortuary and other inscrij)- tions, seems to show that their owners belonged for the most part to the lower section of society — petty tradesmen, and officers, or slaves. There is reason to think that the gospel had already found a footing among the slaves and freed-men of the court, who formed a prominent body in the Church Bome four years later, when St. Paul Bent greetings to the PhiKppians "chiefly" from them "of Csesar's household" (Phil, i v. 20). We may picture to ourselves the Roman Church as originating in the Jewish S5'7iagogues,as gi'adually attracting converts from the lower ordess with which the Jews would come mostly in contact, as thus entering the household of the emperor himself, and, at the time when St. Paul was wi'iting, con- stantly gaining ground among the Gentile community. As yet, how- ever, the two great divisions of Jew and Gentile exist side by side in amicable relations, and with differ- ences hardly greater than would at this day be found in the opposite views of a body professing the same creed. V. G-eneral Character of the Epistle to the Romans. — We have, then, two kinds of data which may help us to understand the gene- ral character of the Epistle. We know that it was written at the same time as the Epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians, and we know that it was ^rritten to a j Church composed partly of Jewish and partly of Gentile converts with no very pronounced antagonism between them. In these facts we may seek the explanation of the question that was raised at starting — the question how it was that the Epistle to the Romans conies to be so much of a comprehensive theo- logical treatise. It was addi-essed at once to Jews and Gentiles. There was, there- fore, nothing to disturb the even balance of the Apostle's teaching. For once, at least, he found himself able to dilate with equal ftdness upon both sides of his great theme. His own mind was naturally ele- vated above controversy. He had worked out a system for himself, which, though its main elements were drawn from the Old Testa- ment, yet transcended the narrow limits of Judaism. His philoso- phy of thin(.s was one in which Jew and Gentile alike had their place, and each received justice, but not more than justice. Hitherto his desire to hold the equilibrium be- tween the parties had been thwarted. He wrote to the Corinthians, but his letter had been prompted by an outbreak of Gentile licence, in the face of which it would have been unseasonable to insist on the relaxa- tion of the Mosaic law. He ^Tote to the Galatians, but then it was with indignation roused by Jewish bigotry. In each case a one-sided treatment of Christian doctrine was necessary. It was as necessary as it is for a physician to apply local remedies to a local sore. In the Roman Church the neces- sity existed in a much less degree. Nor, even if it had existed, would the Apostle have felt it as strongly. The character of the Church was only known to him by report. He RO^IANS. 153 had not the same vivid personal impressions in respect to it as he had of the Churches of Corinth and Galatia. In these Epistles the strong per- sonal feelings of the Apostle and his vivid realisation of the circum- stances with reference to which he is writing, come out in almost every line. " I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you." " Now some are puffed up, as though I would not come to you. But I will come to you shortly if the Lord will, and will know, not the speech of them that are puffed up, but the power.'" " I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done the deed . . . ." " Out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears ; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. But if any hath caused grief, he hath not grieved me but in part : that I may not overcharge you all." " Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men . . . ." " Ye know how through the infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first. And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor re- jected ; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus .... I bear you record, that if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me." These disturbing influences were wanting in the case of the Romans. If the Epistle loses somewhat in the intensity of its personal appeals, it gains in breadth and comprehen- siveness. It is the most abstract of aU the Epistles. It is not a special doctrine for special circumstances, but Christian theology inits broadest sense. A double set of reasons com- bined to produce this. Not only the nature of the Apostle's relation to the Church at Rome and the character of that Church, but also the condition of his own mind at the time of writing. He was writ- ing from Corinth, and just after he had despatched a letter to Galatia. An extreme upon one side balanced an extreme upon the other. Jew and Gentile were present to the mind of the Apostle in equal degree. At last he was able to express his thoughts in their own natural proportions. His mind was in its true philosophical attitude, and the result is the great philosophical Epistle, which was most appropriately addressed to the capital of the civilised world. VI. Contents and Analysis of the Epistle. — The Epistle represents, then, the most mature result of the Apostle's reflection at this period of his life. It gathers up and presents in a connected form the scattered thoughts of the earlier Ej)istles. The key to the theology of the apostolic age is its relation to the Messianic expectation among the Jews. The central point in the teaching of the Apostles is the fact that with the coming of Christ was inaugurated the Messianic reign. It was the universal teaching of the Jewish doctors — a teaching fully adopted and endorsed by the Apostles — that this reign was to be characterised by righteousness. But righteousness was just what the whole world, Jew and Gentile alike, had signally failed to obtain. The Mosaic law had indeed held 154 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. up the ideal of righteousness before those who were subject to it, but it remained an ideal, utterly unful- filled. Left merely to his own powers, threatened with punish- ment if he failed, but with no help or encouragement to enable him to succeed, the Jew found in the Law a hard task-master, the only effect of which was to " multiply trans- gTessions" — i.e., to provoke to sin and to increase its guilt. Chris- tianity, on the other hand, does what the Law failed to do ; it induces a state of righteousness in the believer, and opens out to him the blessedness and salvation which the Messiah came to bring. The means by which this state of righteousness is brought about is naturally that by which the be- liever obtains admission into the Blessianic kingdom — in other words, Faith. Righteousness is the IMes- sianic condition; Faith is the Mes- sianic conviction. But by Faith is meant, not merely an acceptance of the Messiahship of Jesus, but that intense and lo%'ing adhesion which such acceptance inspired, and which the life and death of Jesus were eminently qualified to call out. Faith opens out a new road of ac- cess to the divine favour. This was no longer to be sought only by the painful and laborious — nay, impossible, way of a fulfilment of the divine commands. The favour of God, and admission into the IMessianic kingdom, was promised to all who with a true and heartfelt devotion took the Messiah for their king. Of such it was not asked whether they had actually fulfilled the Law in their own persons; their faith was imputed to them for righteousness — i.e., taken in lieu of it, as the condition which would exempt them from the wrath and obtain for them the favour cf God. That which gave to faith this peculiar efiicacy was the fact that Jesus, the Messiah, towards whom it was directed, by His sacrificial death had propitiated the anger which God coxild not but feel against sin, and set free the hither- to obstructed current of di^-ine love. Henceforth the anger of God could not rest upon the fol- lowers of the Messiah, by Airtue of that which the IMessiah Him- self had done. But the faith of the Christian was no merely passive principle. Such an ardour of devotion must needs gain strength by its own exercise. It became by degrees a moral lever by which the righteous- ness, at first imputed, was made more and more real. It placed the believer in so close a relation to Christ as could hardly be de- scribed by any word short of union itself. And union with One so holy as Christ was could not fail to have the most powerful effect upon him who entered into it. It brought him into a new sphere entirely dif- ferent from that of the Law. Henceforth the Law was nothing to him. But the end for which the Law existed was accomplished in another way. By union with Christ he became dead to sin. He entered upon a new ser^dce and a new state — a state of righteousness, which the indwelling Spirit of Christ [i.e., the closest conceivable influence of the Spirit of Christ upon the soul) enabled him to maintain. The old bondage of the flesh was broken. The lawless appetites and desires engendered by the body were annihilated by the presence of a deeper and stronger emotion, fanned and chexished by the inter- ROMANS. 155 vention of a power higher than that of man. Such, at least, was the Christian's ideal, which he was pledged to aim at, even if he failed to reach it. And the presence of the Divine Spirit within him was something more than the guarantee of a moral life here on earth ; it was tiie earnest of an existence still more glorious in the future. The Christian, hy his adhesion to Clirist, the ]Messiah, was brought within the range of an order of things in which not he alone, hut all creation, was to share, and which was des- tined to expand into as yet dimly anticipated perfection. As faith is the faculty which the Christian is called upon to exercise in the present, so Hope is that hy which he looks forward to the future. He finds the assurance of his ulti- mate triumph in the unconquerable and inalienable love of Christ. One objection might naturally be raised to this exposition of the Christian's privileges. What re- lation did they bear to another set of pri^aleges — the ancient pri^-i- leges of the chosen people, Israel ? At first sight it seemed as if the throwing open of the Messianic kingdom to faith only, and there- fore to Gentiles equally with Jews, was a violation of the Old Cove- nant. To this objection there were several answers. Even if there had been some further act of choice on the part of God, involving a re- jection of Israel, His absolute power of choosing one and refus- ing another was not to be ques- tioned. 'But really the promise was not made to the whole of Israel, but only to such as should comply with the condition of faith. All Israel did not do this. Nor was all Israel rejected. If a part of Israel was rejected, it was only with the beneficent purpose of bringing in the Gentiles. In the end Israel, too, will be restored. The privileges of the Christian are natirrally connected with his duties, and these, as we should expect, the Apostle insists upon in considerable detail. Tlie two points that seem to have a special refer- ence to the condition of the Roman Cliristians are : — Fir-st, the incul- cation of obedience to the civil power. This would seem to allude to the disturbances wliich had led to the expulsion of the Jews from Rome {^'Judaosassidxe tumultuantes Eomd expuUf — Suetonius). The second point is the stress that is laid iipon the duty of toleration on the part of the more liberal mem- bers of the Church towards those who showed a greater scrupulosity in ceremonial observances, espe- cially those connected with dis- tinctions of meats and drinks. This may, however, have been suggested less by anything that the Apostle laiew to have hap- pened in the Church at Rome, than by his recent experiences of the Churches of Corinth and Galatia, and the possibility that similar dangers might arise at Rome. The analysis of the Epistle which follows is intended to give the reader a clearer conception of its contents, and must not always be taken to represent a conscious division of his subject in the Apostle's mind. This is especially the case with the two headings that are printed in italics. The course of his thought happens to lead the Apostle, in the first instance, to deal with the application of the Christian scheme to the individual ; and, in the second, to its applica- tion to the great question of Jew 156 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. and Gentile, but this is rather accidentally than hecanse such a distinction entered into his plan. The headings are inserted as helping' to hring ont a point which really exists, and which is, perhaps, of more importance to the reader, who looks upon the Epistle as a theo- logical treatise, than it was originally to its author. A- Treatise ox the Christian Scheme as aDivinely- appointed Means for Producing Righ- teousness IN Man, and so realising the Messianic Reign. I. — Introduction (i. 1 — 15). a. The apostolic salutation (i. 1-7). I. St. Paul and the Roman Church (i. 8—15). II.— Doctrinal. a. The Great Thesis. Righteousness by Faith (i. 16, 17). Proof- Righteousness not hitherto attained either by Gen- tiles (i. 18—32) or by Jews (ii. 1—29). Parenthetic answer to objections (iii. 1 — 8). Confirmatory proof from Scripture (iii. 9—20). h. The Great Thesis Re- peated AND Expanded. Righteousness by Faith. The propitiatorydeath of Christ (iii. 21— 26). (1) This righteousness is open to Jew and Gen- tile alike, and excludes boasting (iii. 27—31). (2) Proof from Scripture — Abraham (iv. 1 — 5, 9—25). David (iv. 6—9). (3) First CJlimax. Blissful effects of righteous- ness by faith (v. 1 — 11). (4) The first and the second Adam (v. 12—19). Abundance of sin and of grace (v. 20 — vi. 1). c. The Christian Scheme in its Application to the Indivi- dual. (1) Progressive righteous- ness in the Christian. Death to sin, thi-ough union with Christ (vi. 1—14). (2) The Christian's release (vi. 15— vii. 25). a. Its true nature (vi. 15—23). $. Illustration from the mariiage bond (vii. 1-6). 7. The inward struggle and victory (vii. 7 -25). (3) Second Climax (viii. 1 — 39). a. The Flesh and the Spirit (^dii. 1—13). )8. The adoi)tion of sons (viii. 14—17). 7. Creation's yearning (viii. 17—25). S. The Spirit's inter- cession (viii. 26 — 27). e. Happy career of the Christian (viii. 28 — ■ 30). ^. Ti'iumphant close (viii. 31—39). KOMANS. 157 d. The Christian Scheme in its world-wide significance and hearing. Israel's rejection (ix., x., xi.), A saddemng thouglit (ix. 1 -5). a. Justice of th.e rejection. The promise was not made to all Israel indiscriminately, but confined to the chosen seed (ix. 6 — 13). Absoluteness of God's choice, which is not to be questioned by man (ix. 14—23). iS. Cause of the rejection. Self -sought righteous- ness contrasted ^-ith righteousness by faith in Christ (x. 1—13). The gospel preached and believed (x. 14— 21). 7. ^Mitigating considera- tions (xi. 1—36). (i.) Not all Israel fell (xi. 1—10). (ii.) Special purpose of thefaU (xi. 11— 24). The engrafted and original olive branches (xi. 17 —26). (iii.) Prospect of final restoration (xi. 25—29). Third Climax. Be- neficent results of seeming seve- rity (xi. 30— 32). Doxology (xi. 33 — 36). Ill —Practical and Horta- tory. a. The Christian sacrifice (xii, 1, 2). b. The Christian as a mem- ber of the Chirrch (xii. 3-8). e. The Christian in his rela- tion to others (xii. 9— The Christian's vengeance (xii. 19—21). d. Chui'ch and State (xiii. 1-7)-. . e. The Christian's, one debt ; the law of love (xiii. 8—10). The day approaching (xiii. 11—14). /. Toleration : the strong and the weak (xiv. 1-xv. 3). g. Unity of Jew and Gentile (XV. 4—13). IV. — Valedictory. a. Personal explanations. Motive of the Epistle. Purposed visit to Eome (xv. 14—23). b. Greetings to various per- sons (xvi. 1 — 16). A warning (xvi. 17 — 20). Postscript by the Apostle's companions and amanu- ensis (xvi. 21—23). Benediction and doxology (xvi. 24-27). VII. Style.— The style of St. Paul's Epistles varies considerably, according to the date at which they were written. A highly-strmig and nervous temperament like his would natui'ally vary with circumstances. His Hfe was excessively wearing. We have only to read a catalogue like that in 2 Cor. xi. 23—28, to see the enormous strain to which he was exposed. The list of bodily hardships and sutterings is almost unparalleled, and his own Epistles show what the ' ' care of all the 158 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. churches " must have heen to him. Hence it is not unnatui-al that in the later Epistles we should trace a certain loss of vitahty. The style is more depressed and formal, and less buoyant and spontaneous. The period at which the Epistle to the Romans was written was, on the con- trary, that at which the Apostle's physical power was at the highest. All through the two Epistles to the Corinthians, the Galatians, and the Romans, there is the gTcatest energy and force of diction. This gains, perhaps, from the fact that all these Epistles were written from dicta- tion. The name of the amanuensis in the case of the Epistle to the Romans, as we gather from chap. xvi. 22, was Tertius. In some of the later Epistles it is possible that the tiun of phrase was left more to the amanuensis, but the earher group of Epistles bears all the ap- pearance of ha\'ing been taken down just as the Apostle spoke. Hence the broken and disjointed form of some of the sentences, beginning with one construction and ending with another, as in chaps, ii. 5 — 10, iii. 21—26, V. 12—14, is. 22— 2'4. A pointed instance would be (if the view taken in this Introduction is correct) chap. ^^i. 21. Hence, also, the insertion of long parentheses, in- terrupting the sense, as in chap. ii. 13 — 15, and of digressions such as chap. iii. 3 — 8. Hence, lastly, the rapid and vehement cut and thrust of indignant questioning as in chaps. ii. 21 — 23,ix. 19 — 21, or impetuous challenge as in chap. viii. 31 — 35. The plain and direct stylo of the Apostle is well exemplified in the practical and hortatory chaps, xii. — XV. On the other hand, the more involved and elaborate style of the later Epistles finds a paral- lel in the opening and closing paragraphs, chaps, i. 1 — 7, xvi. 25—27. VIII.— External Evidence of the Genuineness of the Epistle. — It is hardly necessary to collect external evidence to the genuineness of the Epistle, as it bears upon itself the most indisput- able marks of originahty. As a matter of fact it has not been dis- puted by any critic of the slightest importance. The external evidences are, however, abundant. Before the first century is out there is a clear allusion to the language of the Epistle iu the letter of Cle- ment of Rome to the Corinthians (a.d. 95). This writer entreats the Corinthian Christians to cast off from themselves ^^ all un- righteousness and iniquity, cove- toiisness, strifes, malignities, and deceits, whisperings and backbitings, hatred of God, pride, arrogance, vain- glory, and inhospitahty," on the ground that '■'■they that do these things are hateful to God ; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them.'" The words in itahcs, many of them markedly peculiar, ai-e taken from the passage Rom. i. 29—32. In another j)lace (§ 46) in the same letter occurs the phrase, " We are members of one another," which recalls Rom. xii. 5. Other allusions that have been found in the Epistle are perhaps less certain. In the first quarter of the next century allusions to the Epistle are alleged from the letters of Ignatius and Polycarp. The first of those are, pd'haps, them- selves of too doubtful authenticity to be claimed very strongly in evi- dence. The Epistle to Polycarp, itself well guaranteed, presents an exact repetition of the phrase, " we must all stand before the judgment- RO]\IANS. 159 seat of Christ ; " adding, " and each one must give an account of him- seK." (Comp. Rom. xiv. 10, 12.) The Gnostic writers ai)pealed to the passages, " He who raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal hodies " (Eom. viii. 11), and " sin reigned from Adam to Moses" (Rom. v. 13, 14), in support of their own peculiar views ; hut it is somewhat doubtful whether the fragments quoted by Hippolytus in which those allusions occm? are really to be referred to the founders of the respective sects, Basihdes {circ. A.D. 125) and Valentinus {circ. A.D. 140), or to their followers. The date, therefore, of this evidence is uncertain. So also is that derived from the Epistle to Diognetus which is commonly placed at about a.d. 170. Justin Martyi' {ob. a.d. 148) seems pretty clearly to have made use of the Epistle, for he quotes precisely the same series of Old Testament passages as is quoted in Horn. iv. 11 — 17, in the same order, and in the same way— as if they were one connected passage. In the last quarter of the second cen- tury, as Christian hteratui-e be- comes more copious, the references to the Epistle become more express and definite. The letter of the Churches of Vienna and Lyons to that at Rome (a.d. 177) contains an exact verbal coincidence with Rom. viii. 18 ("I reckon that the suf- ferings of this present time," &c.). In Theophilus of Antioch (a.d. 181) there are mimistakable paraphi-ases of Rom. ii. 6 — 9, and of Rom. xiii. 7, 8. Irenteus, Avriting about a.d. 185, quotes the Ex^istle directly by name. "This very construction St. Paul put upon it, writing to the Romans, ' Paul an Apostle of Jesus Cluist,' &c. ; and again, Mriting to the Romans concerning Israel, he says, * whose are the fathers,' " &c. Irenasus also quotes expressly Rom. V. 17 : "And in agreement with these St. Paul, too, addressing the Romans, says : ' Much more they who receive abundance of grace and righteousness unto life, shall reign through One, Jesus Christ.'" Besides these, there are other long quotations, which are the more to be remarked, as they show in some cases the presence of readings in the Codex used by Irenaeus, which, though supported by other authoii- ties, are certainly false, and there- fore show that they have already a long history behind them. There are equally express and direct quo- tations in Clement of Alexandria (flourished a.d. 185—211) and Ter- tullian (flourished a.d. 198—210). The Epistle to the Romans is also contained in the Muratorian Frag- ment on the canon circ. a.d. 170. From this point onwards the pro- duction of further e\ddence is su- perfluous. The main points to notice in what has been given are that the existence of the Epistle is proved incontestably by Clement of Rome as early as a.d. 95, and that it was attributed to St. Paul by Irenaeus in a.d. 185, or some fifteen years earlier by the Muratorian Fragment. [Of the many Commentaries on this Epistle the most useful are perhaps those of Meyer and Dr. Vaughan. The scholarly tact of the English commentator might, perhaps, have been allowed to correct, even more often than has been the case, the rigorous science of the German. Dr. Vaughan's carefully-assorted references have also been of much ser^ice. Special attention has been paid to all that has been written on this Epistle,. 160 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. either directly or incidentally, by Dr. Lightfoot. The writer's most mature thoughts upon the connec- tion between the several parts of the doctrinal teaching of the Epistle will be found in the section of the Introduction which deals with this subject. I. CORINTHIANS. By the Kev. Canon TEIGNMOUTH SHORE. To describe briefly the relation in which St. Paul stood to the Corin- thian Church, and the circumstances under which he wrote this Epistle, will, I think, be the best and most efficient help to the ordinary reader. After a stay at Athens of some few months, St. Paul, towards the end (probably) of the 3'ear a.d. 51, left that city for Corinth. At Athens, the centre of philosophic thought and culture, St. Paul had preached Christianity. The wide question of the relation of God's providence to the heathen world in times past — Christ crucified and raised from the dead— all these topics had been dwelt on by the Apostle in a speech which still remains a model of the subtlest rhetorical skill and of the most earnest eloquence. Judged, how- ever, by immediate results, the speech on Mars Hill, and the other addresses at Athens, of which we have no record, but which were probably on the same lines, were not successful. Only a few con- verts were won to Christ. The Apostle dwells with no fond recollection on his work here, A single sentence* sums up the ; resvdts of his labour in a city where the successful planting of the Church would have been of such vast importance : " Howbeit ; certain men clave unto him, and believed ; among the which was I Dionysius the Areopagite, and a ; woman named Damaris, and others ! with them." There is an under- ' tone of sadness and disappointment * Acts xvii. 34. in these words of St. Paul's com- ■ panion and friend, St. Luke. The Ajjostle left Athens down- j cast and thoughtful. The subtle I skill, the earnest eloquence, had I been employed apparently in vain. j The inestimable value which that great exposition of God's dealings with man, as well in the world at j large as in the more sacred enclo- I sure of the Christian faith, might j have — as we know now it has had ': — for Christendom, did not present itself to the Apostle's mind as any consolation for the want of practical results at the moment. Athens was a sad memory to St. Paul. He never mentions her name in an Epistle. He sends no words of greeting to any of her children. From the Piraeus — the port of Athens— St. Paul sails for Corinth. It being late in autumn (probably October or November), it is most 11 1G2 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. likely that the Apostle landed at Cenchrese, a seaport town on the Saronic Ba)'.* The experience which he had at Athens, and its bearing on the work on which he was now about to enter in the capital of Achaia, were doubtless the uppermost thoughts in the Apostle's mind dimng this brief journey. He sees that the j^ower of the gospel to win men to Christ lies in the message itself, and not in the method and style of its delivery. He resolves to lay aside the rhetoric and the merely human eloquence, and in the new field of his missionary labours " to know nothing but Jesus Christ, and Him crucified."f This vow he probably made as he landed at Cenchreae ; and when, a year and a half after- wards, he embarked at the same port on his return joumej'', he could look back with satisfaction and with thanksgiving on the resolution which he had formed, and the glorious results which had followed in Achaia from his preach- ing. A journey of nine miles from Cenchi-eae brought the Apostle to Corinth, which was situated in the south-west end of the isthmus, and * I assume that St. Paul went by sea, and not by land, as the words (Acts xvili. i;, "Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth," seem to imply a briet and uninterrupted journey. Had he gone by land he would have passed through other toAvns on the way, some mention ot which it would be natural to expect. t See 1 Cor. ii. 1, 2, and Note there, •ihe word " you," repeated in both these verses, seems emphatic, as if the Apostle meant to bring out a contrast between his tonuer style of teaching among others, and that which he had resolved should be nis style of teaching amongst them. The only point on which he had detennined when coming to them was, " Jesus Christ, and Him crucified," as the subject-matter ot his te.aching. at the northern base of the Acro- corinthus. The two things which in older days had made" Corinth famous in Grecian history still rendered her a place of supreme importance. From a military point of view, she might be regarded as the key to the Peloponnesus, and commercially she was the central point of the vast trade which was carried on between Asia and Europe. The storms which so con- stantly raged on the southern shoi-3 of Greece di-ove the vast tide of commerce into the safer overland route, which lay through Cenchreai and Lechanim, which latter port was only a mile and a half distant from Corinth, It was at Corinth that, in B.C. 146, the Achaians made their last stand against the Romans, and were finally defeated by Mummius. After this, Achaia became a Roman province, and Corinth foi a century remained in the condition of utter desolation to which the sword and fire of the victorious consul had reduced it. Some years before the birth of Christ (b.c. 44 j Julius Csesar re- stored Corinth, and, under the Emperor Claudius, the direct rule of the province was transferred from the emperor to the senate; and hence we find at the time when St. Paul arrived its government was administered by a proconsul.* As St. Paul entered Corinth his eyes might for a moment have rested on the grave of Lais amid the cypress grove outside the walls, and the monument of Diogenes which stood bj^ the gate — fit types of the cynical, worldly philosophy, and the gross, yet attractive, sen- suality with which the society of that day and city were permeated. • Acts xviii. 12. I. CORINTHIANS. 163 Within the city, most of the buildings were comparatively mo- dem, "run up" within the last century hy the imported popula- tion of Roman freed-men ; while only here and there, in the stately magnificence of an older style of architecture, stood an occasional edifice which had survived the " fire " that had " tried every man's work" in the great conflagration which had swept away the inferior structures of "wood, hay, stubble " when the conquering troops of Mummius had captured Corinth.* The population of Corinth was composed of many and diverse elements. Tliere were Greeks, who thought, by their delight in a tawdry rhetoric and in a sham and shallow philosophy, to revive the historic glory of a past age. There were a thousand corrupt and shame- less priestesses attached to the tem- ple of Aphrodite, which crowned the neighbouring hill. There were the families of the Roman freed- men whom Julius Caesar had sent to rebuild and recolonise the town. There were traders from Asia and from Italy, and all that ' nonde- script element naturally to be found in a city which was practi- cally a great commercial seaport and the scene, every fourth year, of those Isthmian games which attracted among the athletes the best, and among some of the spec- tators the worst, of the population of the surrounding provinces. All these, like so many streams of human life, mingled together here, and at this particular juncture were met by the vast returning tide of Jews expelled from Rome by Clau- dius, t and so formed that turbulent * See St. Paul's recollection of this in the imagery employed in 1 Cor .iii. 10—13. t Acts xviii, 2. and seething flood of human life on which the barque of Christ's Church was launched at Corinth. Amongst those who had lately come from Italy were Aquila and Priscilla, his wife. With them the Apostle lodged, joining witlx them in their occupation of tent- making. Pontus,* the native country of Aquila, and Cilicia,t the native country of St. Paul, were both renowned for the manufacture of the goat's-hair cloth from which the tent-coverings were made. It is probable, however, that an affinity of faith, as well as an identity of occupation, led to the Apostle's intimate association with these friends. If this man and his wife had not been converted to Christianity before this they would scarcely have allowed St. Paul to join himself so intimately with them. The very circum- stances of their expulsion from Rome would have embittered them against a Christian. From a remark in Suetonius, we find that the expulsion of the Jews had to do with their riots with Christian converts. Rome cared nothing about the religious opinions of these rival sects ; but when their difi:"erences led to public riots Rome was then as vigorous and decisive in action as before she had been indifferent.;}; Having left Italy under such circumstances, Aquila and Priscilla would, if unconverted * Acts xviii. 2. t Acts xxi. 39. t " Claudius expelled the Jews from Rome on account of their continual tumults instigated by Chrestus." The name Christus, in pronunciation nearly identical with Chrestus, was mixed up in the riots somehow. That was quite suffi- cient for the authorities to assiune that some person of that name was the author of them. 164 NEW TESrAIMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Jews, have certainly not taken a Christian as a partner in their home and work ; whereas, if ah'cady Christians, and siifltering expixlsion thus from Eome, they would gladly welcome such a convert as Paul. These considerations are confirmed by the course of events at the out- set of St. Paul's preaching at Corinth. The Apostle first preaches to the Jews and those proselytes (called "Greeks")* who had at least accepted Judaism so far as to attend the synagogue. He is met with opposition and blasphemy by them, and then turns unto the Gentiles, and teaches in a house close by the synagogue, winning- many converts to the faith, amongst others, Crispus, the ruler of the S5Tiagogue, Gaius, and Stephanas and his household, who received their baptism at the hand of the Apostle himself .f Silas and Timothy joined the Apostle during the earlier part of his sojourn, and probably brought with them some pecuniary help from the Philippians, which was doubly acceptable be- cause of a famine then prevalent and of the Apostle's unflinching determination to take nothing from the Corinthians.]; Some time in a.d. 53, M. Annaeus Novatus, the brother of the philo- sopher Seneca, arrives at Corinth as proconsul of Achaia. He was called GaUio, having been adopted into the family of that name. His kindly and loving disposition § gave the Jewish faction some hope that they might make him the uncon- • Acts xviii. 4. t 1 Cor. i. 14—16. t See 2 Cor. xi. 7—12 ; Phil. iv. 15. § Seneca says of Gallic, " He was loved much even by those who had little power to love;" ajid, "No mortal is so dear to me as GaUio to all meu." scions tool by which they would wreak their intensifying rage on St. Paul and his Christian companions. Gallio, with the imperturbable calm- ness of a Pioman governor, refuses to allow himself to be dragged into a religious dispute between two sects. In retaliation for this con- duct on the part of the Jews, the Greeks take Sosthenes, who had succeeded Crispus as chief ruler of the synagogue — here, no doubt, the ringleader in the persecution of St. Paul — and beat him.* When the same Sosthenes became a convert it was not strange that he and St. Paul should become firm friends. Both had been active enemies of the faith which they now preached, and the two converted persecutors are joined together in the opening of this Epistle to the Corinthian Church (1 Cor. i. 1). For some considerable time the Apostle remains and teaches at Corinth, and then returns to Syria by Cenchrese. The vow made on landing there had been kept, t Jesus Christ and His cruci- * In Acts xviii. 17, the words "the Greeks " do not occur in the best MSS., and some commentators conclude that it was the Jewish faction who took Sosthenes and beat him, suspecting him of some leanings towards the faith which he after- wards embraced. I think it more natural to assume that it was the Greek mob who acted thus towards the leader of the defeated faction of the Jews. If it were the Jews writhing undfer their defeat, surely they would have taken vengeance on some avowed Christian like Paul or Aquila. t Acts xviii. 18. The words here may, as a mere matter of grammar, refer to either Paul or Aquila ; but the whole sense of the passage refers them to the former. The fact that Paul goes on to Jerusalem, and Aquila remains at Ephe- sus, is almost in itself sufficient to indi- cate Paul as the one having some solemn obligation to fulfil. I have already indi- cated that in the solemn vow made by the Apostle, and which was carried out I. COEINTHIANS. 165 fixion had been the sole subject and strength of the Apostle's teach- ing. "With what feelings of pro- found thanld'ulness must St. Paul, as he sailed from Cenchrete, have looked back on the work and the success of those intervening months. With Aquila and Priscilla, he arrives at Ephesus, and leaves them there. After a somewhat prolonged tour thi'ough Galatia and Phrygia, and a visit to Jerusalem, St. Paul retm-ns to Ephesus, probably in the year a.d. 54. Meanwhile, during the absence of St. Paul on his journey visit- ing the churches in Galatia and Phrygia, a man arrives at Ephesus who is destined to have a remark- able influence in the future on St. Paul's relation with the Corinthian Church. Apollos, a Jew by religion and an Alexandrian by birth, had been brought up in a city where commerce brought together various races, and where philosophy at- tracted varied schools of thought. Alexandria, famous also as the place where the Greek translation of the Old Testament had been made, became naturally the seat of an intellectual school of scriptural interpretation, as well as the abode of Greek philosophy. Amid such surroundings, Apollos, gifted with natural eloquence, became " mighty in the scriptures," and was " in- structod in the way of the Lord," possibly by some of those Alexan- drian ^ews who, in their disputes with Stephen,* had become ac- apparently according to the law of the Nazarite vow (see Num. vi.), was included a resolve as to his teaching at Coriuth. What, if any, other motives for the vow the Apostle could have had, must, of course, be matter of the merest con- jecture. • Acts vl 9. quainted with the elementary prin- ciples of Christianity. His imper- fect acquaintance with the Christian faith — limited to the tenets of the Baptist * — is supplemented and completed by the instruction which he receives from Aquila and Pris- cilla, who were attracted by the eloquence and fervour with which he preached in the synagogue at Ephesus his imperfect gospel. The days spent with St. Paul at Corinth were fresh in the memory of these Christians. The incidents of those days were doubtless often recalled in many a conversation with Apollos, and what he hears fires his earnest soul with a desire to preach the gospel in Achaia. To the various chui'ches — including, of course, Corinth — he receives letters of commendation from the Ephesian Christians, and his preaching is attended with great blessing, " help- ing them much which had beheved tlu-ough grace." His style of teaching was strikingly different from that which St. Paul — in accordance with his vow " to know nothing but Jesus Chi'ist, and Him crucified," — had adopted at Coriuth. With more intellectual eloquence, and with a wider and more philo- sophic range of thought, he opened up the deeper spiritual meaning of the Old Testament sciiptures, show- ing from them that Jesus was Christ, t The philosophic school of thought in which he had been educated could be traced in the style of his eloquence, which won many converts amongst those classes to whom the simplicity of Paul's preaching had not been acceptable, and who, on that account, had continued to the end his active opponents. Acts xviii. 2j. t Acts xviii. 166 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Wliile the eloquent Alexandrian is preacking in Corintli — -watering * where Paul had planted, building up where Paul had laid the founda- tion, giving strong meat to those whom, in their spiritual infancy, Paul had fed with milk, and win- ning some new converts amongst those whose Jewish and intellectual prejudices had hitherto been invin- cible — St, Paul rejoins Aquila and Priscilla at Ephesus.f This is not the place to dwell upon St. Paul's work at Ephesus (of which a full account is given in Acts xix.), only so far as it directly bears upon his Epistle to Corinth. During his Btay at Ephesus he is constantly hearing news of the Corinthians by those whose business necessitated constant journeyings between these two commercial capitals. The Apostle himself also, during the earlier part of his sojourn, pays a brief visit to Corinth, of which we have no record, and of which we should know nothing but for the casual allusion in his Second Epistle that he is coming to them the third time. J After some two years' re- sidence at Ephesus, the Apostle detennines, after some time, to pro- ceed directly by sea to Corinth, and making it his head-quarters, visit the churches in Macedonia, return- ing after this tour to Corinth again, on his way back to Jerusalem, § * 1 Cor. iii. 1, 6, 10. t Acts xix. 1. X I place the xmrecorded visit of St. Paul thus early during his residence at Ephesus because it seems to have occurred before the matter treated of iu the First Epistle to the Coriuthiaus assumed a serious aspect ; otherwise we cau scarcely imagine that there should be no aUusiou iu this Epistle to some definite rebuke or instruction for which that visit would have afforded an opportunity. § 2 Cor. i 15, 16. from whence, finally, he hoped to visit Eome.* This plan is, how- ever, entirely upset by the course of events which we have now to narrate. Pimiours, more or less A'ague at first, reach St. Paul of a bad state of affairs in the Corinthian Church. The Corinthian Christians were living in the midst of a heathen society. The religion of heathen- dom, and the sensual license and indulgence which formed a part of it, pervaded all the social customs and entered into the very fibre of the social life of the country. To define, therefore, the precise posi- tion which Christians should as- simie in relation to the political conditions and the domestic insti- tutions of the heathen was a matter of the utmost delicacy and difiiculty. Christian thought and practice per- petually oscillated between the license into which human nature easily transfonned the liberty of the gospel, and the rigid rejection of every custom which was tainted with heathen approval. To steady in the line of right that trembling pendulum of vibrating religious thought required all the spiritual skill and all the fine delicacy of touch which were characteristic of the great Apostle of the Gentiles. Wlien the earliest rumours reach him of the unsatisfactory condition of some of the Corinthian Cliiis- tians, he writes a letter to them, in which he probably mentions his intention of visiting them on his way to Macedonia ; and he warns them of the great danger of moral contamination to which they would infallibly be subject if they allowed any of the immoral practices of the heathen to receive anv sanction * Acts xix. 21. I. COEINTHIAXS. 167 from ths Christian Church. What- ever the heathen might think of the lawfulness of sinful indulgence which their own faith surrounded ^vith a distorting moral atmosphere of religious sanction, Christians were to allow no trace of such im- morality within the boundaries of the Chui'ch. This Epistle has heen lost; we can only conjecture its general contents from the circum- stances under which it was written, and the reference to it in what is now the First of St. Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians.* The Apostle still adheres to his intention of visiting Corinth and Macedonia, and sends Timothy and Erastus to prepare the various churches in Macedonia and Achaia for his coming, and, above all, to set things right at Corinth by, as St. Paul says, " bringing you into remembrance of my ways which bo in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every church."t After the despatch of Timothy and Erastus, more alarming news reaches St. Paul. The household of ChloeJ — some Chi'istian resident, either at Corinth or Ephesus, evi- dently well known to the Corin- thians — report to the Apostle that the Church is disorganised with sectarian strife, and detiled by sanc- tioning a marriage between a Christian man and a heathen woman v.-ho had been his step- mother, and was now divorced from his father. A letter also ar- rives § from the Corinthians to St. Paul, which was in part a reply to St. Paul's lost Epistle, and which contained various questions regard- ing doctrine and practice which revealed the disintearated condition • See 1 Cor. v. 9. $ 1 Cor. i. 11. t 1 Cor. iv. 17. § 1 Cor. viii. 1. of religious thought and life in Christian Corinth.* The letter was probably brought to Ephesus by Stephanas and his companions, who supplemented the infoi-mation which it contained by their own knowledge, based upon personal and recent observation. The arrival of this letter, which called for an im- mediate answer, and the receipt of this intelligence of a state of affairs which required to be dealt with im- mediately and vigorously, led to a change in the Apostle's plans. He abandons his intention of going direct to Corinth, so as to give time for a change for the better in the state of that Church; and he can no longer, now that he realises the full extent of the evil, leave it to be dealt with by one of Timothy's gentle disposition. He therefore writes this (Second) First Epistle to the Corinthians, and sends with it Titus, who, going direct to Corinth, would reach that city pro- bably before the arrival of Timothy, who would be delayed visiting other churches en route. Titus — whom we may call St. Paul's companion in determination, as Timothy was * My reasoii for thinking that the letter from the Corinthians was in i^SLYt a J'eply to St. Paul's lost Epistle is that the Ai)0stle says (1 Cor. v. 9) emphatically, "I wrote to you in the Epistle,"— i.e., the Epistle to which you refer. They had probably taken exception to his strict in- junction, and said in reply, "If we are not to keep company at all with forni- Ciitors, then we must go out of the world altogether. " His words seem to me to 1 )e an answer to some such captious criticism, and not a voluntary modihcation or expla- nation of what he had no reason to suppose should be misunderstood. It has been suggested by some commentators that the lost Epistle had been sent by Timothy. But St. Paul seems to assume as certain that the letter has reached them (1 Cor. v. 9), and to be doubtful whf^ther Timothy was there or not (1 Cor. xvi. 10). 168 NEW TESTAMENT INTliODUCTlOKS. St. Paul's companion in conciliation — was far more competent to meet the difficulties which would present themselves in such a state of affairs as existed then at Corinth. More- over, Titus was a Gentile, whereas Timothy was half Jewish by birth ; and so there would be no danger of the most hostile faction in Corinth — the Jewish — awakening any sym- pathy for themselves in him. How judicious the selection of Titus was is evident by the success of his mission, which we read of after- wards when he rejoined Paul in Macedonia.* The Epistle was written and des- patched probably about Easter, a.d. 67,t and the Apostle's intention is now to remain at Ephesus until after Pentecost, and then proceed, visiting the chiu'ches in Macedonia before going to Corinth. This would leave time for this Epistle to have the desired effect, and for fSt. Paul to meet Titus somewhere — probably at Troas. This Epistle divides itself into two parts. The first Section, extending to chap. vi. 20, deals with the reports which had reached St. Paul as to the condition of the Corinthian Church ; and the second Section, which occu- pies the remainder of the Epistle, is a reply to the letter received from Corinth, including du-ections for the collection for the saints at Jerusalem and the usual salutations from the brethren. AVith characteristic courtesy, the Epistle opens with words of ap- proval and congratulation, J which show that the writer's subsequent * See 2 Cor. ii. 12, 13. t See 1 Cor. \. 7 aud xvi. 18, showing that it was written before Pentecost, and probably at Passover time. : 1 Cor. i. 1 -C. censures arise from no desire to see merely what is bad in the Corin- thians, but are forced from him by the serious nature of the evils which have to be checked. Three evils are then rebuked — viz., The Spirit OF Faction,* The Case of Pko- HiEiTED Marriage, f The Ap- peals OF Christians to Heathen Courts. J The general principles of the relation of Christianity to heathenism, out of which the ad- vice given under the last two heads has grown, are then solemnly re- iterated ; § and the first Section of the Epistle closes with these words of earnest warning. From the second Section of this Epistle we can discover what were the topics concerning which the Corinthians had written to St. Paul. He would doubtless treat of these subjects in the same sequence as they occurred in the letter to which this is the ;inswer. The questions asked were probably these : Is it liiGHT TO MARRY ? The auswcr to this II is, — that, owing to the excep- tional state of cii'cumstances then existing, the unmarried state is better. This advice is, however, to be modified in its practical applica- tion in the cases of those who have an irresistible natural desire for marriage and those who have al- ready contracted it. The second question was : Is it LAWFUL FOR A CHRISTIAN TO EAT THE FLESH WHICH HAS BEEN AL- READY USED FOR SACRIFICIAL PUR- POSES BY THE HEATHEN ? To this the answer^ is, in general terms, that there is no harm in eating such meat, but that in practice this wide principle of Chi'istian liberty must * 1 Cor. i. 10— iv. 21. t 1 Cor v. l--l:j. t 1 Cor. vi. 1—0. § 1 Cor. vi. 5—20. II 1 Cor. vii, H 1 Cor. viii. l~xi. 1. I. CORINTHIANS. 169 ].o limited by rcg-ard to the general welfare of others and their tender- ness of conscience. The third inquii-y was : What IS THE BECOMING DRESS OF WOMEN IK PUBLIC WORSHIP ? This ques- tion was rendered necessary by some women pushing the freedom of the faith so far as to a^^pear in public unveiled — a practice which might easily be mistaken by the heathen as the indication of a loose morality. To this the Apostle re- plies * practicall}- that our Chris- tianity is not to make us transgress the social order and customs of the community in which we live. The fourth question was : What IS THE PROPER ORDER OF THE CELEBRATION OF THE LoRd's SuP- PER ? In his answer to this ques- tion t the Apostle severely censures the scenes of riot and debauch into which the Love Feasts — with which the Lord's Supper was practically united, though not identical — had fallen, and gives stringent and exact dii-ections as to the means of avoiding such scandal in the fu- ture.:}: The fifth question was : Which IS THE MOST VALUABLE OF SPI- RITUAL GIFTS ? The discussion of this matter § involves the condem- nation of the extravagant value attached by some to the gift of tongues, and the enunciation of the principle that the value of a gift * 1 Cor. xL 2—16. t 1 Cor. xi. 17—34. t It seems impossible to us that diuiikeuness could arise from the abuse of the Eucharistic wiue as administered in our own day. A remarkable instance is mentioned in Mrs. Brassey's Voyage of the "Sunbeam" (p. 234) of a chui-ch which they visited in Tahiti, where cocoa-nut milk was used in the Holy Communion in the i>lace of wine, owing to abuses of the cup which had arisen. § 1 Cor. xii. 1— xiv. 40, depends on its utility for the good of the whole Church. The sixth, and last, inquiry was : Is THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD A VITAL DOCTRINE OF CHRIS- TIANITY? The reply to this* is an elaborate exposition and vindi- cation of the doctrine of the resur- rection. The collection for the I saints at Jerusalem, information regarding his own change of plans, and some personal matters, occupy the concluding chapter of the Epistle, After despatching this Epistle, St. Paul is full of fears lest it may have been written with too much severity, and possibly may have exactly the opposite effect from that which he desired. It may fail to reconcile to him the Church so dear to his heart — ^it may only widen the breach and embitter op- ponents. The Apostle leaves Ephe- sus after Pentecost, but his fears increase. Even an "open door" at Troas-f cannot detain him in his restless anxiety. No new love could make up for the possible loss of the old one at Corinth in that large and tender heart of St. Paul. He passes over into Macedonia — full of care : there are the echoes of tumults at Ephesus behind him ■ — there is the fear of coming dis- ruption with Corinth before him. At last at Philippi, he meets Titus, who brings him the joyful news that, on the whole, the letter has been successful.;}: The Corinthian Chi'istians are penitent, the chief offender has been expelled, and there is nothing now to prevent the Apostle taking back into his confi- dence and love the Chm'ch to which he was so warmly attached. A * 1 Cor. XV. t 2 Cor. ii. 12. ; 2 Cor. ii. 14. 170 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. second letter* — to express his joy and gratitude, to reiterate his ex- hortations, and to finally prepare the Corinthians for his coming (which he explains had heen de- layed fx'om no personal caprice, hut for their sakesf) — is written, and the last trace of the cloud which, by separating him from them had cast so terrible a darkness over his own soul, is completely and finally removed. The authenticity of this Epistle has never been seriously disputed ; indeed, to deny it would almost in- volve a disbelief in the historical existence of the Corinthian Church and in the personality of St. Paul. The earliest fathers refer to it as the recognised letter of the Apostle. Clement of Eome, Polycarp, and Irenaeus quote passages from it as St. Paul's writing. All throughout this Epistle we have the heart as well as the intellect of the Apostle displayed to us ; the Holy Spirit of God not setting aside, but control- ling and guiding those good gifts of which, though we call them " natural," He is the Author and the Giver. Many of the subjects treated of here were local and personal. The combination of circumstances which give rise to them cannot possibly occur again in Chi-istendom ; but the principles on which the Apostle decided these matters are im- perishable and of universal obliga- tion. They can guide the Church amid the complex civilisation of the nineteenth century as truly and as clearly as they indicated to her the path of safety in the infancy of the Christian faith. 2 Coiiuthians. t 2 Cor. i. 23. The following woiks will be found useful by those who desire to enter into a more detailed and exhaustive study of this Epistle: — The Greek Testament, ivith a Critically-revised Text, ^-c, by Dean Alford. Vol. II. Rivingtons, 1871. The Greek Testament, with Notes, by Bishop Wordsworth. Kritisch-exegetischer Kommentar uber das Neue Testament. Gottingon (Eng. Trans., Clark, 1877). The Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinthians, with Critical Notes and Dissertations, by Dean Stanley. John Murray, 1876. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul, by W. J. Conybeare and the Very Rev. J. S. Howson, Dean of Ches- ter. New Edition. Longmans. The Hulsean Lectures for 18G2, by the Very Rev. J. S. Howson. Third Edition. Strahan & Co. The Metaphors of St. Paul, by the Very. Rev. J. S. Howson. The Companions of St. Paul, by the Very Rev. J. S. Howson. Is- bister, 1874. Expository Lectures on St. PauVs Epistles to the Corinthians, by the late F. W. Robertson. Smith and Elder, 1870. The Life and Epistles of St. Paul, by Thomas Lewin, M.A.' 2 Vols. Third Edition. George Bell & Sons, 1875. The Homilies of St. John Chrysos- torn, on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. Vols. IV. and V. of the Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church. Parker, 1839. G. B. Winer's Grammatik des neutcstamentlichen Sprachidioms (English Translation, bv Dr. W. F. Moulton. Eighth Edition. T. & i T. Clark, 1877). IT. CORINTHIANS. Bt the late Veut Eev. E. H. PLUMPTRE, D.D. It is not without some reluctance I that I have undertaken to treat of , an Epistle which stands in such : close connection with that which precedes it that it can scarcely be dealt with by a different hand without some risk of want of unity of treatment. I have, however, kept on the same main lines of thought and method of interpretation which have been followed in the Com- mentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, and have been glad to find myself on all important points of one mind with the commentator. Of the genuineness of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians there has never been a moment's doubt, even among critics who allow themselves the widest range in their attacks on the canon of New Testament writ- ings. External evidence is in itself adequate. The Epistle is quoted by Irenteus {Hcer. iii. 7, § 1), by Athenagoras {Be resurr. woyl), by Clement of Alexandria {Slrom. iii. 94, iv. 101), and by Tcrtullian {Jk F'ldlcltid, c. 13). Testimony of this kind is, howevei", hardly needed. The Epistle speaks for itself. In | its intense personality, its pecu- liarities of style, its manifold coin- cidences with the Acts and with other Epistles (especially with 1 Corinthians, Eomans, and Gala- tians), its vehement emotions, it may fairly be said to present phenomena beyond the attainment of any later writer wishing to claim for what he wrote the authority of a great name. Pseudonymous authorship is, in this case, simply out of the question. In order to understand the Epistle we must throw ourselves, as by a mental effort, into the mind and heart of the writer at the moment when he wrote or, more probably^ dictated it. Of the sins and disorders of the Corinthians as reported to him by successive informants — the household of Chloe (I Cor. i. 11), and by Stephanas, Fortmiatus, and Achaicus (1 Cor. xvi. 17); of his treatment of the topics then brought before him; of the probable effect of what he wrote upon the several parties in the Corinthian Church, we need not here speak. It will be sufficient to note that he had sent Timotheus before he wrote the First 172 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Epistle ; that he had theu sent the First Epistle hy Stephanas, his companion; that when they were gone (or possibly with them*) he despatched Titus to complete the work, perhaps as trusting more to his energy than that of the other messengers. Timotheus had re- turned to him. It is not certain that he reached Corinth. If he did, he came and left before the Epistle had arrived, and was tmable to report what had been its result. His timid and shrinking character probably imfitted him for coping with the difficulties which presented themselves. His coming, there- fore, however welcome it might be, brought no relief to the Apostle's anxiety. He started from Ephesus, whether before or after the arrival of Timotheus we do not know, and, in pursuance of his plan, went to Troas. But there, too, great as the opportunities for mission- work were (chap. ii. 12), he had no strength or heart to use them. A restless, feverish anxiety devoured him night and day, and he sailed for Mace- donia, probably for Philippi. And there, at last, after a time of expec- tation and anxiety, Titus came to him (chap. vii. 6). His report was evidently more fuU and satisfactory than that which had been brought by Timotheus. He was able to report, what the latter had not re- ported — the effect of the First Epistle ; and this was, in part, at least, fuU of comfort. The majority at a meeting of the Church had acted as he had told them to act, in the punishment of the incestuous offender (chap. ii. 6), they had shown generally a desire to clear themselves from the reproach of * See Introduction to the First Epistle to Uie Corinthians. sensual impurity (chap. vii. 11), and had manifested warm feelings of attachment to the Apostle per- sonally (chap. \'ii. 7). They had obeyed Titus as the Apostle's dele- gate, and had made the work which ho had undertaken in much anxiet}^, a labour of love and joy (chap. vii. 13 — 16). They had taken up the collection for the saints with an eager interest, and had not only accepted the idea, but had begun to act on the suggestion of 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 2, as to the weekly payments, and to the alms-box of the house (chap. ix. 13). So far all was well, and had this been all, the Second Epistle to the Corinthians would probably have been as full of thank- fulness, and joy, and comfort, as that to the Philippians. But it wus not all. Wisely or imwisely, Titus thought it right to tell him of the words and acts of the two parties in the Chi-rch of Corinth, who, at opposite extremes, were agreed in resisting his authority. There were some, the party of Ucense, who needed sharp words of censure, and had given no proof of repent- ance for the foul evils of their former life (chap. xii. 21). There was the Judaising party, claiming to belong to Christ in a sense in which St. Paul did not belong to Him, boasting of their Hebrew descent (ch;ips. x. 7 ; xi. 4, 22), arrogating to themselves a special apostolic authority (chap. xi. 5), insolently lording it over their abject followers (chap. xi. 20). And from one or other of these rival parties, probably in some cases from both, there had come — • so Titus reported — taunts, sneers, and insinuations against the Apos- tle's character. He had shown feebleness in his change of plan (chap. i. 17) ; his personal appear- n. CORINTHIANS 173 ance, feeble and infirm, did not match the authoritative tone of his letters ; his speech had nothing in it to command admiration (chap. x. 10) ; he threatened supernatural punishments, but he did not dare to put his threats to the proof (chap. xiii. 3). What right had he to claim the authority of an Apostle, •when he had never seen the Chi'ist in the flesh ? Was it certain that he was a Hebrew, a Jew of the pirre blood of Palestine, or even that he was of the seed of Abraham ? (chap. vi. 22). They turned into a re- proach the fact that he had worked for his maintenance at Corinth, and yet had received gifts from the Macedonian churches, as though he had been too proud to put himself under obligations to any but his favom-ites (chap. xi. 2 — 10). They j insinuated that what he would not do directly he meant to do indirectly, through the collection for the poor of Jerusalem (chap. xii. 16). How could they teU that the fund so secured would find its way to those who were ostensibly its objects ? AVho was this Paul who came without credentials (chap. iii. 1), and expected to be received on the strength of his everlasting self- assertions? (chaps, iii. 1 ; v. 12; X. 8, 12; xii. 11). Was there not a touch of madness in his visions and revelations ? Could he claim more than the tolerance which men were ready to extend to the insane ? (chaps. V. 13 ; xi. 16—19.) Conceive all these barbed arrows of sarcasm falling on the ears, and through them piercing the very soul, of a man of singularly sensi- tive nature, passionately cra\dng for affection, and proportionately feeling the bitterness of loving with no adequate return (chap. xii. 15), and we may form some estimate of the whirl and storm of emotion in which St. Paul began to dictate the Epistle on which we are about to enter. Joy, affection, tenderness, fiery indignation, self -vindication, profound thoughts as to the mys- teries of the kingdom of God which flashed upon his soul as he spoke — all these elements were there, crav- ing to find expression. They hin- dered any formal plan and method in the structure of the Epistle. They led to episodes, and side- glances, and allusive references without number. It follows from this that an analysis of such an Epistle is not a very easy matter, and that which follows must be received only as an approximately complete one, helping the student to foUow the manifold oscillations of thought and feeling. 1. — St. Paid wishes the Corinthians to know his troubles and suf- ferings before the return of Titus (chap. i. 1—14). 2. — He tells them of his first plan of coming to them, and de- fends himself against the charge of fickleness in chang- ing it (chaps, i. 15 — ii. 1). 3. — He is glad that he did change his plans, for thus there was time for the repentance on the part of the incestuous offender of 1 Cor. v. 1. Such a one now needed sympathy and pardon (chap. ii. 2 — 11). 4. — He is about to tell them of his meeting with Titus, but the remembrance of the tri- umphant joy of that moment overpowers him, and fills him with a profound sense of the issues of life and death which hang upon his words (chap. ii. 12 — 17). 171 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. 5. — ^WiU this be called the self- assertion of one who has no credentials ? His thoughts pass rapidly to the true cre- dentials of effective preach- ing, and so to the new cove- nant of which he is the preacher, and so to the con- trast between that covenant and the old (chap. iii. 1 — 18). 6. The sense of the tremendous responsibility of the work thus committed to him, leads him to dwell on his own fitness and unfitness for it. On the one side there is nothing but infirmity and disease, on the other there is the life of Jesus working in his life (chap. iv. 1 — IS), and the hope of a life after death, in which all that is spiritual in us now shall find itself emancipated from the flesh and clothed with a new spiritual organism (chap. V. 1—9). 7. — ^That hope does not, however, exclude the fear of the judg- ment through which all must pass. At the risk of seeming mad he must dwell on that fear. Only so can he lead men to estimate rightly the preciousness of the message of reconcilia- tion (chap. V. 10—21). 8. — ^Will those to whom he writes receive that message in vain ? He pleads with them by all he has done and suffered for them to give him a place in their affections, above all to give Christ the supreme place in them. Only so can they be indeed God's chil- dren (chap. vi. 1 — 18). They cannot serve him and the lust demon, Belial. 9. — His thoughts turn from the party of license, whom he had in view in the previous section, to those who had shown themselves zealous against impurity. Now he can tell these, and such as these, why meeting Titus had given him matter for such warm rejoicing; why he feels that he can trust them (chap. vii. 1 — 16). 10. — A new topic begins, appar- ently after a pause. He is about to show that he trusts them, by asMng them to let their performance in the matter of the collection for the saints be equal to their readi- ness of will. He tells them of the arrangements he has made for it, and stirs them up by example of the Macedoni- ans, by appeals to their own sell ; by the hope of God's fa- vour (chaps, viii. 1 — ix. 15). 11. — As if by the association of contrast, he turns from what he viewed with satisfaction and hoi)e to the sarcasm and insinuations which had caused such acute pain (chap. X. 1 — 18). He charges his opponents, the Judaising teachers, with intruding into his pro\dnce, defends himself against some of their special accusations, and chal- lenges them to a comparison of their labours and suffer- ings with his own (chap. xi. 1—29). Even the infirmi- ties with which they taunted him are, for those who under- stand them rightly, a ground of confidence and strength (chaps, xi. 30 — ^xii, 18). 12. — Having thus defended him self, his thoughts travel on to IT. COT^TNTHTANS. 175 the time of his projected visit. He looks forward, not without anxiety, to the pos- sibility of having to exercise his apostolic authority in punishing the offenders both of the party of license and that of the Judaisers. But he hopes that that necessity will not arise. His wish and prayer is that they may be restored to completeness without it. The agitation of his own spirit is calmed, and he ends -w-ith words of peace and blessing for them (chaps, xii. 19 — xiii. 14). Of the immediate results of the Epistle, and of the after-history of the Church of Corinth, we know but little. Within a few months he paid his promised visit, and was rereived with hospitahty by one of the chief members of the Church (Rom. xvi. 23). Titus and the un- named brethren of chap. viii. 18, 22, probably Luke and Tychicus, had done their work effectually, and he could tell the Eomans to whom he wrote of the collection for the saints which had been made in Achaia as well as in Macedonia (Rom. xv. 26). They apparently had so far gained the contidence of the Corinthians that they did not think it necessary to choose any delegates of their own to watch over the appropriation of the funds collected (Acts xx. 4). The mahgnant enmity of the Jews, however, had not abated. His life was endangered by a plot to attack him as he was embarking at Cen- chreae, and he had to change his plans and return through Macedonia (Acts XX. 3). After this we lose sight of the Corinthian Church altogether, and the one glimpse which we get, accepting the Pas- toral Epistles as genuine, and as coming after St. Paul's first im- prisonment at Rome, is that on his return to his former labours, Eras- tus, who seems to have travelled with him, stopped at the city in which he held a mTinicipal position of authoritv (Rom. xvi. 23 ; 2 Tim. iv. 20). The Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians, written, probably, about a.d. 95 — some thirty-five years, therefore, after the date of this Epistle — shows, however, that the character of the Church has not altered, and that the old erih had re-appeared. A few rash and self-confident persons, putting themselves at the head of a factious party, had brought dis- credit on the Church's name. It was necessary to exhort them once more to submit to their rulers and to follow after peace (Clem. Rom. i. 1), to remind them of the self- denj-ing laboui^s of the two Apostles, Peter and Paul, whose names they professed to honour (i. 2), of the examples of faith and humility pre- sented by Christ Himself and by the saints of the Old Testament (i. 16—18). The old doubts as to the resurrection (1 Cor. xv.) had re- appeared, and Clement, over and above the teaching of Scripture and of the Apostles on this subject, presses on them the analog}' of the stories then current as to the death and revival of the Phoenix* (i. 24, * The elaborate note in Dr. Lightfoot's edition of St. Clement shows that a fresh prominence had recently been given to tlie Iihoenix-legend, which may account for the stress thus laid on it. It was said to have re-appeared in Egypt in the reign of Tibe- rius (A.r>. 34—36) (Tacit. Ann. vi. 28). In A.D. 47 a live phoenix was actually exhi- bited in the comitium of Rome (Plin. Nat. Hist. X. 2). Historians and savans, though they might think the particular instance an imposture, accepted the tradition with hardly a question. 170 NEW TESTA :\rEXT TNTT^ODUCTIOXS. 25). The authority of the legitimate pastors of the Church (he names bishops or deacons only, as St. Paul had done in Phil. i. 1) was disputed, and he urges submission, and quotes the Epistle — the first of the two which St. Paul had addressed to them (i. 47) — paraphrasing the sec- tion in which he had set forth the excellence of charity (i. 49). The letter was sent by messengers, among whom we find one, Fortu- natus, who may have been among the survivors who knew the Apostle's work, and had been the bearer of the Epistle of which Clement has just reminded them. The name, however, like its synonyms, Felix, Eutychus, and the like, was not an uncommon one, and the identifica- tion cannot, therefore, be regarded as more than probable. Somewhat later on, about a.d. 135, the Church of Corinth was visited by Hegesippus, the historian of the Jewish Chiu'ch, to whom we owe the narrative of the death of James, the Bishop of Jerusalem. He touched at that city on his voy- age to Pome, and remained there for several days. He found the Church faithful to the truth under its bishop Primus (Euseb. Hist. iv. 22). Dionysius, who succeeded Primus in his episcopate, brought out all that was good in the Church over which he ruled, and extended his activity to the Macedonians, the Athenians, the people of Nioomedia, of Crete, and of the coast of Pontus. He bears his testimony to the liberality of the Church of Corinth in relie^nng the poverty of other churches, to the traditional liberality which it had, in its turn, experi- enced at the hand of the Roman churches. The teaching of 2 Cor. viii., ix., had, it would seem, done its work efi:'ectually. He records the fact that the Epistle of Clement was read, from time to time, on the Lord's Day. A female disciple, named Chrysophora, ap- parently of the some type of charac- ter as Dorcas and Priscilla, was conspicuous^ both for her good works and her spiritual discernment (Euseb. Eisf. iv. 23). With this glimpse into the latest traceable influence of St. Paul's teaching, our survey of the history of the Cliurch of Corinth may well close. GALATIANS. By the Eev. Professor SANDAY, D.D. I. G-alatia.— The name Galatia is used in two senses. In ordinary speech it was used to designate that portion of Asia Minor lying chiefly between the rivers Sangarius and Halys, whicli was inhabited by the tribe of Galatae, or Galli. This warlike people had been invited over from Europe by Nicomedes, king of Bith}-nia, who repaid their services by a grant of land. Issu- ing forth from thence, they had been for a time the terror and the scourge of Asia Minor, but they had been at last driven back and confined within the territory" origin- ally assigned to them. These events took place in the latter half of the third century b.c. Their power was broken by the Romans in jj.c. 189, and though for another cen- tiiry and a half they retained a nominal independence, in i;.c. 25 they were formally annexed to the empire of Rome. Just before this final annexation, during the reign of the last king, Am}Titas, the kingdom of Galatia had been considerably enlarged. Am}Titas had ranged himself on the winning side in the great civil wars, and he had received as his reward Pisidia, Isiiuria, parts of Lycaonia and Phrygia, and Cilicia Trachaea. On his death the greater part of these dominions, with the exception of Cihcia Trachaea, be- came a single Roman province, which, for adiniuistrative purposes, was also known by the name Galatia. To which of these two Galatias did .St. Paul address his Epistle :' Was it to the narrower Galatia — Galatia proper^or to the wider Galatia — the Roman province ? There are some temptations to adopt the second of these views. In that case we should have a graphic accoimt of the founding of the Galatian churches — for such they would be — in Acts xiii., xiv. At Antioch in Pisidia, which we are expressly told formed part of the kingdom of Amyntas, the Apostle had preached with a success which had called down ^-io- I lent opposition. Iconium, to which he retreated, appears not to have been given to Amyntas, and whe- ther it formed part of the Roman pro\-ince at this time is uncertain. There is, however, no doubt as to Lystra — where the two Apostles were received so enthusiastically— and Derbe. On the hypothesis that the Galatia of the Epistle is the Roman pro\dnce, the scenes of the first missionary journey would be directly associated with it. On 12 178 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. the contrary assumption, no details whatever as to the foiinding of the Galatian churches have come down to us. In spite of this, and in spite of some other points in which the history may seem to be simplified by assigning to Galatia the wider signification, a balance of considera- tions seems to prevent us from doing so. There can be no question that St. Luke, in the Acts, wher- ever he speaks of Galatia, uses the word in its narrower and proper sense, and though this would not be in itself decisive as to the usage of St. Paul, still it is impossible to think that in impassioned passages like Gal. iii. 1, "0 foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you," &c., the Apostle is using only an official title. We shall be safe in assuming that he was really writing to the descendants of the Gallic invaders, and that he addresses them by the name by which they were familiarly known. II. The Galatians. — It does not, however, follow from what has just been said that the Chi'istian converts were taken solely or even chiefly from the native Galatians. They did but give a name to the country; thi'ee other nationalities went to make up its population. First came the Greeks, who were so numerous as to give to their adopted home the second name of Gallogra3cia. Then, beneath the upper layer of conquei-ing Gala- tians, there lay a large substratum of the older inhabitants, the con- quered Phrygians ; and by the side of both— brought partly by coloni- sation and partly by pui-poses of trade — were considerable numbers of Jews. Of the disturbing pre- sence oi this lattci- element the Epistle itself gives us ample evi- dence. Still, the predominant body, and that which gave its most distinctive characteristics to the Church, were the genuine Galatians themselves. A question similar to tkit as to the boundaries of Galatia has been raised in regard to these. To what race did they belong ? A large section of the ablest German com- j mentators rmtil quite recently were 1 disposed to claim them as Teutons, the main ground for this being that Jerome, in the fourth century, observed the resemblance between the language spoken in Galatia and that of Treveri, who bequeathed their name to the modern district I of Treves, and who are said to j have been German. This point, j however, is itself perhaps more than doubtful, and as to the Galatae ' there is abimdant e^^dence, besides their nam.^, to show that they were Celts, and not Teutons. This was the xmiversal opinion of antiquity, to which even Jerome, notwith- standing his statement about the language, was no exception ; and it is confirmed by a philological analysis of the names both of per- sons and of places in Galatia that have come down to us. The theory of the Teutonic origin of the Gala- tians is now given up, not only in England, but in Germany. The Galatians, then, were Celts, and we are not surprised to find in them the Celtic qualities. They came of the race which " shook all empires, but founded none." Their great failing was in stabHity. Quick to receive impressions, they were quick to lose them; at one moment ardently attached, at the next violently opposed. This is precisely what St. Paul complains of. He gives a striking picture of GALATIAKS. 179 the enth-usiasm with whicli lie had "been received on his first visit. He himself was stricken down with sickness, but that did not damp the ardour of his converts. They would even have " plucked out their eyes," and given them to him. But in a short space of time all this was gone. They had now made common cause with his adver- saries. They had forsaken his teaching and repudiated his au- thority. The cause of the e\'il lay in the intrigues of certain Judaisers. And the consideration of the question in debate between them and St. Paul opens out a new subject for dis- cussion. III. Contents and Doc- trinal Character of the Epistle. — The controversy that divided, and could not but divide, the infant Church, came to a head most conspicuously in Galatia. Was the Jewish Law to be binding upon Christians P It was only natural that many should be found to say that it was. Christianity had sprung out of Judaism. The first and most obvious article in the Christian creed — the Messiahship of Jesus — was one that might easUy be accepted, and yet all the pre- judices in favour of the Jewish Law be retained. It was only a deeper and prolonged reflection that could show the fundamental antagonism between the Jewish view of things and the Christian. St. Paxil saw this, but there were many who were not so clear- sighted. The main body of the Church at Jerusalem held tena- ciously to the Jewish practices. The old Pharisaic passion for mak- ing proselytes still clung to them. And emissaries from this Church had found their way— as they easily might, through the chain of Jewish posts scattered over Asia ]\Iinor — as far north as Galatia. These emissaries pursued the same tactics as they had pursued elsewhere. They called in question the Apostle's authority. They claimed to act from a superior commission themselves. They dis- paraged his teaching of personal faith in Jesus. They knew nothing of such faith. They acknowledged Jesus as the Messiah, and Avith that they were content. They still looked for salvation, as they had done hitherto, from the literal per- formance of the Mosaic Law, and they forced this view upon the Galatians. They insisted specially on the rite of circumcision. They would not allow the Gentile con- verts to escape it. They proclaimed it as the only avenue to the cove- nant relation with God. And no sooner had the convert submitted to circumcision than they proceeded to lay upon him an oppressive burden of ritualistic ceremonies. He was to keej) a multitude of seasons, " days, and months, and times, and years." If he was to enjoy the Messianic privileges he must be righteous. But to be righteous was to perform scrupu- lously the precepts of the Mosaic Law, and in the attempt to do this the convert's whole powers and energies were consumed. The Messiahship of Jesus was something secondary and subordinate. The Judaisers accepted it so far as it seemed to hold out to them a ijro- spect of advantage, but otherwise it remained a mere passive belief. The key to life and conduct was still sought in the fulfilment of the Mosaic Law. With such a position as this the 180 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Apostle could not but be directly at issue. To him the Messiahship of Jesus (including, as it did, His eternal Sonship) formed the very root and centre of his whole religious being. Faith— or the ardent conviction of this ISIessiah- ship in its completest sense — was the one great motive power which, he recognised. And the state in which the Christian was placed by faith was itself — apart from any laborious system of legal obser- vances—an attainment of right- eousness. The Messianic system was everything. Tbe Law hence- fortb was nothing. By his relation to the Messiah the Christian ob- tained all of which he had need. Sin stood between him and the favour of God, but the ]\lessiah had died to remove the curse entailed by sin ; and b}^ his adhesion to the Messiah the Christian at once stepped into the enjoyment of all the blessings and immunities which the Messianic reign conferred. It was not that he was released from the obligations of morality (as represented by the Law), but morality was absorbed in religion. One who stood in the relation that the Christian did to Christ could not but lead a holy life ; but the holy life was a consequence — a natural, easy, necessary conse- quence — of this relation, not some- thing to be worked out by the man's unaided efforts, independ- ently of any such relation. The command, "Be ye holy as I am holy," remained, but there inter- vened the motive and stimulus afforded by the death and exaltation of Christ. " Be ye holy, because ye are bought with a price; because ye are Christ's, and your life is hid with Christ in God." The Law then no longer held that primary position which it had occupied under the old covenant. It had fulfilled its functions, which were preparatory and not final. Its object had been to deepen the sense of sin, to define unmistakably the line which separated it from right- eousness, and so to prepare the way for that new Messianic system in which the power of sin was not ignored but overcome, and over- come by lifting the behevcr as it were bodily into a higher sphere. He was taken out of a sphere of human effort and ritual observance, and raised into a sphere in which he was surrounded by divine in- fluences, and in which all that he had to do was to reahse practically what had already been accomplished for him ideally. In that sphere the centre and hfe-giving agency was Christ, and the means by which ChrJst was to be apprehended was Faith. So that Christ and Faith were the watchwords of the Apostle, just as the Law and Cir- cumcision were the watchwords of the Jews. Thus the line that the Apostle takes in this Epistle was clearly marked out for him. Against the attacks upon his apostolic authority he defended himself by claiming that, although he was a late comer in point of time, this did not imply any real inferiority. His was not an authority derived at second- hand. On the contrary, he owed his calling and commission directly to God Himself. The j)roof was to be seen both in the circumstances of his conversion and also in the fact that, though he had once or twice been brought into apparent contact with the elder Apostles, his teaching was entirely in dependent of them, and was already fully formed when he had at last an opportunity GALATIAXS. 181 of consulting them about it. And in practice, not only was he recog- nised by them as an equal, but even Peter submitted to a rebuke from him. On the other hand, upon the great dogmatic question, St. Paul meets his opponents by an emphatic statement of his own posi- tion. Christianity is not something accessory to the Law, but super- sedes it. Righteousness is to be sought not by legal observances, but by faith. The old system was carnal, material, an affair of ex- ternals. The new system is a spiritual renewal by spiritual forces. Not that there is any real conti-a- diction between ths new and the old. For the very type and pattern of the old dispensation — Abraham himself — obtained the righteous- ness that was imputed to him not by works, but by faith. Thus, the true descendant of Abraham is he who puts faith in Christ. It was to Chxist that the promise related, in Christ that the whole divine scheme of redemption and regene- I'ation centred. The Law could not interfere with it, for the Law came after the Promise, by which it was guaranteed. The function of the Law was something temporary and transient. It was, as it were, a state of tutelage for mankind. The full admission to the privileges of the divine patrimony was reserved for those who became personal followers of the Messiah. He was the Son of God, and those who cast in their lot wholly with Him were admitted to a share in His Sonship. To go back to the old stage of ritual observance was pure retro gTession. It was an unnatural exchange — a state of drudgery for a state of freedom. It was a reversal of the old patriarchal story — a preferring of Uagar and Ishmael for Isaac, the child of promise. The Apostle cannot think that the Galatians will do this. He exhorts them earnestly to hold fast to their liberty, to hold fast to Christ, not to give up their high privilege of seeking righteousness by faith, and accepting it through grace, for any useless ordinance like circumcision. Yet the liberty of the Christian is far from mean- ing license. License proceeds from giving way to the impulses of the flesh, but these impulses the Christian has got rid of. His relation to Christ has brought him under the dominion of the Spirit of Christ. He is spiritual, not carnal : and to be spiritual implies, or should imply, every grace and every virtue. The Galatians should be gentle and charitable to offenders. They should be liberal in their alms. The Epistle concludes with a repeated warning against the Ju- daising intruders. Their motives are low and interested. They wish to pass off themselves and their con- verts as Jews, and to escape perse- cution as Christians. But to do so they must give up the very essen- tials of Christianity. The Epistle is not constructed upon any artificial system of divi- sions, but the subject-matter falls natm-ally into three main sections, each consisting of two of our present chapters, with a short preface and conclusion, the last in the Apostle's own handwriting. The first section contains the de- fence of his apostolic authority and independence in a review of his own career for the first seventeen years from his conversion. This leads him to speak of the dispute with St. Peter at Antioch, and the doc- trinal questions involved in that dispute lead up to the second or 182 NEW TESTAIMENT INTRODUCTIONS. doctrinal section, in which his own main tenet of righteousness by faith is contrasted with the teach- ing of the .Tudaisers and established out of the Old Testament. This occupies chaps, iii. and iv. The last section, is, as usual with St. Paul, hortatory, and consists of an application of the principles just laid down to practice, with such cautions as they may seem to need, and one or two special points which his experience in the Church at Corinth and the news brought to him from Galatia appear to have suggested. The following may be taken as a tabular outline of the Epistle* : — T. — Introductory Address (chap. i. 1—10). a. The apostolic salutation (chap. i. 1—5). b. The Galatians' defection (chap. i. 6—10). II.— Personal Apologia : an Autobiographical Retro- spect (chaps, i. 11 — ii. 21). The Apostle's teaching derived from God and not man (chap. i. 11, 12), as proved by the circumstances of — (1) His education (chap. i. 13, 14). (2) His conversion (chap. i. 15 — 17). (3) His intercourse with the other Apostles, whether' at (rt) his first visit to Jerusa- lem (chap. L 18— 24),_or (b) his later visit (chap. ii. 1 — 10). (4) His conduct in the contro- versy with Peter at Antioch (chap. ii. 11—14); * Figures are used where the subdivi- sions are continuous steps in the same argument, letters where they are distinct arguments. The subject of which con- troversy was the super- session of the Law I y Christ (chap. ii. 15 — ^ 21). III. — Dogmatic Apologia : Inferiority of Judaism, or Legal Christianity, to the Doctrine of Faith (chaps, iii. 1 — iv. 31). {a) The Galatians bewitched into retrogression from a spiritual system to a carnal system. (chap. iii. 1 — 5). {b) Abraham himself a witness to the efficacy of faith (chap. iii. 6—9). (c) Faith in Christ alone removes the curse which the Law entailed (chap. iii. 10 — 14). (d) The validity of the Promise unaffected by the Law (chap. iii. 15—18). {e) Specic.l paedagogic function of the Law, which must needs give way to the larger scope of Christianity (chap. iii. 19—29). (/) The Law a state of tutelage (chap. iv. 1 — 7). (9) Meanness and barrenness of mere ritualism (chap. iv. 8 — 11). (h) The past zeal of the Galatians contrasted with their present coldness (chap. iv. 12 — 20). (i) The allegory of Isaac and Ishmael (chap. iv. 21 — 31). IV. — Hortatory Application of the Foregoing (chaps. V. 1— vi. 10). (a) Christian liberty excludes Judaism (chap. v. 1 — 6). {b) The Judaising intruders (chap. v. 7—12). (c) Liberty not license, but love (chap. V. 13—15). GALATIAXS. 183 {d) The works of the flesh and of the Spirit (chap. v. 16—26). {e) The duty of sympathy (chap. vi. 1 — 5). (/) The duty of liberality (chap. vi. 6-10). v.— Autograph Conclusion (chap. yi. 11 — 18). {a) The Judaiser's motive (chap, vi. 12, 13). [b) The Apostle's motive (chap. vi. 14, 15). [c) His parting benediction, and claim to be freed from any further annoyance (chap. vi. 16—18). The subject of the Epistle to the Galatians might be summarily de- Fcribed as the same as that to the Romans — the doctrine of justifica- tion by faith — i.e., the state of righteousness entered by means of faith. (See Introduction to liOmans.) IV. Date of the Epistle.— Mention has just been made of the Epistle to the Romans, and the resemblance between these two Epistles forms an important element in the consideration of the next question with which we have to deal — the question as to the date of the Epistle, and the place from which it was written. On this point two views are cur- rent. It is agi-eed that the Epistle was written on St. Paul's third great missionary journey. It is agreed that it belongs to the group which includes 1 and 2 Corinthians and Romans. The difference is as to the place which it occupies in this group. A large majority of commentators suppose it to have been the first of the four Epistles, and date it from Ephesus at some time during the Apostle's length- ened stay there, i.e., at some time during the three years a.d. 54 — 57. The other view is that the Epistle was written after the two Epistles to the Corinthians, but before the Epistle to the Romans, i.e., at the end of the year 57 or beginning of 58, from Macedonia or Greece. This \new has until recently not had many supporters, but it found a strong advocate in Dr. Light- foot. Practically there is a single main argument on each side. In favour of the earlier date, the one point that can be pressed is the expression used in chap. i. 6 : "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you, into another gos- pel." The conversion of the Gala- tians appears to have taken place in A.D. 51. St. Paul paid them a second visit in a.d. 54. In the autumn of that year his three years' stay at Ephesus began. And it is argued that the expression " soon " will not allow us to go beyond these three years. " Soon," however, is a relative term. It may mean any interval from a few minutes to one or more centuries. The context nmst decide. A change, which in the natui-al course of things would take a protracted length of time to accomplish, might be described as taking place " soon " if it was brought about in a space of time conspicuously shorter than might have been expected. But for the conversion of a whole community to Christianity, and for their second conversion to another form of Christianity wholly distinct from the first, we should surely expect a long and protracted period. Under such circumstances a period of six 184 NEW TESTA^MEXT INTRODUCTIONS. or seven years might verj^ well be called " soon." To this argument, then, it does not seem that very much, or indeed any, weight can be attached. The one chief argument upon the other side is the very close and re- markable similarity, both in ideas and language, between the Epistles to Galatians and the Romans, and, in somewhat lower degree, 2 Corin- thians. Any one may observe in himseK a tendency to use similar words, and to fall into similar trains of thought at peculiar periods. This is especially the case with strong- thinkers who take a firm grip of ideas, but are possessed of less facility and command of words in which to express them. Such was St. Paul. And accordingly we find that the evidence of style as a help to determine the chronological re- lations of the different Epistles is peculiarly clear and distinct. But in the doctrinal portions of Romans and Galatians we have a resem- blance so marked — the same main thesis, supported by the same argu- ments, the same Scripture proofs (Lev. xviii. 5 ; Ps. cxliii. 2 ; Hab. ii. 4), the same example, Abraham, thrown into relief by the same con- trast, that of the Law, developed to the same consequences and couched thi'oughout in language of striking similarity — that we seem to be pre- cluded fi'om supposing any interval between them sufficient to allow of a break in the Apostle's mind. And considering the throng of events and emotions through which the Apostle was now passing ; observing further that the three Epistles, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, and Ro- mans, in this order, form a climax as to the distinctness with which the ideas expressed in them are elaborated, it would seem that the Epistle with which we are dealing should be placed between the other two ; that is to say, we should asisign it to the end of the year 57, or beginning of 58, and the place of its composition would probably be Macedonia or Greece. The course, then, of the history will be this : St. Paul first ^dsite'd Galatia on the occasion of his second missionary journey soon after the memorable conference at Jerusalem, and probably about the year a.d. 51. His intention had been to pass from Lycaonia due west into the Roman pro\dnce of Asia. From this, how- ever, he was prevented, as St. Luke informs us, by some supernatural intimation . Accordingly he turned northwards through Phrygia, and so entered Galatia. Here he seems to have been detained by illness (Gal. iv. 13, 14). He took the opportunit}- to preach, and his preaching was so successful that the Church in Galatia was definitely founded. This work accomplished, he left for Mj'sia, and thence passed on to Troas and Macedonia, where the better-known portion of the second missionary journey begins. After the conclusion of this journey St. Paul, in starting upon his third missionary journej'', again directed his course to Galatia. This time the historian mentions " the country of Galatia and Phrygia " in a dif- ferent order from that in which they had occurred before. We should conclude, therefore, that St. Paul made his way straight from Antioch; and as no mention is made this time of the churches of Lycaonia, it would seem probable that he took the direct Roman road skirting Cappadocia. On his arrival in Galatia we read that he went through it "in order, strengthen- ing the disciples" (Acts xviii. 23). GALATIANS. 185 We should gather from some in- dications in the Epistle ^chaps. iv. 16 : V. 21) that he had found it necessary to administer rather severe reproof to his converts. Already there were signs of false teaching in the Church. The Apostle's Judaising opponents had obtained an entrance, and he was obliged to speak of them in language of strong condemnation (Gal. i. 9). But the warning was in vain. This second visit had taken place in tlie autumn of a.b. 54, and from the end of that year till the autumn of a.d. 57, duiing which he was settled at Ephesus, disquieting rumours con- tinued to be brought to him of the increasing defection of his converts, and the increasing influence of the Judaising party. Matters went on from bad to worse; and at last, apparently upon his way through Macedonia to Greece, the Apostle received such news as determined him to winte at once. The Epistle bears marks of having been written under the influence of a strong and fresh impression ; and Dr. Light- foot, with his usual delicate acumen, infers from the greeting, " from all the brethren that are with me " (cliap. i. 2), that it was probably written en voyayc, and not from any of the larger churches of Macedonia, or, as might have been otherwise thought natural, Corinth. At all events, it would seem that we should be keeping most closely to the canons of pirohability if we assign the Epistle to the winter months of the years 57 — 58. V. G-enuineness of the Epistle. — Xo doubt of any real importance has been or can be cast upon the genuineness of the Epistle. It is one of those fervid outbursts of impassioned thought and feeling which are too rare and too strongly individual to be imitated. The internal evidence, therefore, alone would be sufficient, but the external evidence is also considerable. It is true that no- thing conclusive in found in the apostolic fathers. The clearest allusion would seem to be in the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philip- pians, cap. 5 : " Knowing, then, that God is not mocled " (a peculiar and striking word) " we ought to walk in His commandment and His glory " (comp. Gal. vi. 7) ; and again, in chap, iii., with perhaps a somewhat more direct reference, " who (St. Paul) also in his absence wrote unto you Epistles that you might be able to be built up unto the faith given you, which is the mother of us all." (Comp. Gal. iv. 26.) It is noticeable that though Justin ]\Iartyr does not name the Epistle, and, indeed, no- where directly quotes from St, Paul, yet in two consecutive chap- ters he makes use of two passages of the Old Testament (Deut. xxi. 23, and xxvii. 26), which are also quoted in close connection by St. Paul, and that these passages are given with precisely the same variations both from the Septuagint and the Hebrew. There is also a clear quotation in Athenagoras {circ. 177 A.D.). But, until we get towards the end of the second cen- tury, the best evidence is not so much that of orthodox writers as of heretics. Marcion, who flourished A.D. 140, laid great stress upon this Epistle, which he placed first of the ten which he recognised as St. Paul's. The Ophites and Valen- tinians, in writings belonging to this century, quoted largely from it. Celsus {circ. 178) speaks of the saying, Gal. vi. 14, " The IRfi NEW rE^^JAxMENT INTRODUCTIONS. world is crucified unto rae, and I unto the world," as commonly heard amongst Christians. The author of the Clementine Homilies (which maj^ be probably, though not certainly, placed about 160 A.D.) grounds upon St. Paul's account of the dispute at Antioch an attack upon the Apostle him- self; and the Epistle furnishes other material for accusation. As we draw near the last quarter of the century, the evidence for this, as for most other books of the New Testament, becomes ample. The Muratorian Canon {circ. 170 a.d.) places the Epistle in the second place, next to 1 and 2 Corinthians. The Syriac and the Old Latin translations (the second of which was certainly, and the first probably, made before this time), both contain it. Irenseus, Clement of Alexandria, and TertuUian, quote the Epistle frequently, and as a work of St. Paul's. And, what is of still more importance, the text, as it appears in quf.tations by these writers, as well as in the versions, and even so far back as Marcion, already bears marks of corruption, showing that it had been for some time in existence, and that it had passed througli a lengthened process of corruption. But to prove the genuineness of the Epistle to the Galatians is superfluous. It is rather interest- ing to collect the evidence as a specimen of the kind of evidence that, in the case of a work of acknowledged genuineness, is forth- coming. [The English commentator upon the Epistle to the Galatians has no excuse beyond the calibre of his own powers, if his treatment of the subject is inadequate. He has be- fore him two commentaries in his own language, Dr. Lightfoot's and Bishop Ellicott's, which, in th«^ir kind, cannot easily be surpassed. It is neeaiess to say that these, along with INIeyer, have been taken ! as the basis of the present Irdroduc- I tion, though Wieseler, Alford, and I Wordsworth have been consulted.] THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL'S FIRST CAPTIVITY. Bt the Eight Eev. ALFRED BARRY, D.D. The Epistles of St. Paul's captiN-ity • — to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon — fonn a distinct group, distinguished by certain marked characteristics both of style and subject, in the series of the writings of the great Apostle of the Gentiles. Just as, in com- parison with the Thessalonian Epistles, belonging to the second missionary journey, the four gTcat Epistles to the Corinthians, Gala- tians, and Romans, written at the close of the third missionary journey, show a "second manner," with exactly that union of simi- larity and diversity which marks a true development of thought and circumstance — so, in comparison with this latter group, the Epistles of the Capti^dty present a " third manner," itself again markedly distinct from that of the Pastoral Epistles, of still later date. In those early days of Christianity events moved fast ; under the liA'ing Apostolic inspiration and the rapidity of the Apostolic mis- sion, successive years marked changes as great as would have indicated the lapse of generations in. more ordinary times. When we compare the marvellous gro-wi:h of the Christian Church in the thirty years (or thereabouts) of St. Paul's own Apostolate — from a small sect limited to Palestine, hardly as yet completely dis- tinguished fi'om the Judaic system, to a community which had its branches in every province of the Roman world, and which was ob%'iously advancing to a world- wide dominion — we may be pre- pared to find obvious and important developments, both of teaching and of circumstance, even in the various periods of his Apostolic ministry. I. The Period to -w^hieh thay belong. — In accordance with the great majority of com- mentators, ancient and modem, I take these Epistles to belong to the Roman captivity, in which the history of the Acts leaves St. Paul, and to which he was consigned about the year a.d. 61. It has, indeed, been proposed by Meyer and other German commentators to refer them to the Caesarean captivity of Acts xxiv. — xxvi. The reasons on which this proposal is based may be seen in Meyer's edition of the "Epistle to the Ephesians" [Introduction, sect. II.). They prove, however, on examina- tion, to be not only trivial, even if 188 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTION'S. maintained, but in themselves un- certain, resting largely on mere supposition, and certainly incapable of standing against the powerful arguments which may he brought on the other side. .These are of two kinds — general and special. Of the first kind is the whole style and tone of the Epistles, indicating a transition to an entirely diiferent and most important sphere of mis- sionary labour, such as could not possibly be foimd in the compara- tively imimportant town of Cces- area; and, moreover, the obvious expectation by the writer (see Phil, ii. 24 ; Philemon verse 22) of a speedy release from captivity, which would enable him to -sdsit, not Rome and Spain, as was his intention at the time when he was taken prisoner at Jerusalem (Acts xix. 21 ; Rom. xv. 24, 25), but Mace- donia and the Eastern churches, where at the earlier time he de- clared that he had "no longer any place" (Rom. xv. 23; comp. Acts XX. 25). Of the latter kind are the references found^especially in the most personal of all the Epistles, the Epistle to his beloved Church at Philippi — to the manifestation of his bonds "in the whole Prae- torium" (Phil. i. 13) — a phrase which (in spite of the verbal coin- cidence with Acts xxiii. 35) could not well be used of his prison at Caesarea; to the converts made from "Ctesar's household," which must surely have belonged to Rome (Phil. iv. 22) ; to the circumstances of his captiA-ity, which describe with an almost technical accm-acy (see Eph. xi. 20) the imprison- ment at Rome "in his own hired house with the soldier that kept him," and the freedom which he then had (Acts xxviii. 16, 30, 31), but which at Caesarea, particularly considering the especial object con- templated by Felix in prolonging his capti^-ity (Acts xxiv. 26), was eminently improbable. In accordance, also, with the general opinion, I should designate this as St. Paul's "First Roman Captivity"; though it will be, perhaps, more appropriate that the evidence for the common belief that St. Paul was set at liberty from his captivity, and that, after a period of freedom, he underwent a second imprisonment, which was only closed by his death, should be considered in relation to the Pas- toral Epistles. For with this belief the acceptance of these Epistles as genuine is closely, if not inseparably, connected. II. The G-enuineness of these Epistles.— On this point external ev'dence is strong and imvarying. It will be suliicient here to notice that all were in- cluded unhesitatingly in all the catalogues and versions of St. Paul's Epistles, and placed by Eusebius (as by othei's before him) in the list of the New Testament books "acknowledged by aU." More detailed evidence will be with more advantage given in the Introdnction to each "Epistle. It is true that, as in the case of many other New Testament books, their genuineness has been chal- lenged, on supposed internal evi- dence, even by critics who are ready to acknowledge the four Epistles of the preceding group. This adverse criticism has been advanced with different degrees of positiveness against different Epistles t)f this gTOup. Thus, the Epistle to the Philippians has been but little doubted; and, indeed, EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL'S FIEST CAPTIVITY. 189 the similarities to St. Paul's earlier Epistles, and especially to the Epistle to the Eomans, are so stiik- ing that it requires singular per- Aersity to discoA^er or imagine dissonance with them. The beauti- ful little Epistle to Philemon, again, can hardly he said to have been questioned, excejjt in the mere wantonness of arbitrary criticism. (Jn the other hand, the two Epistles which bear most distinctly the j)eculiar impress of St. Paul's "later manner" — the Ejiistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians — have been far more seriously attacked on that very ground ; the Epistle to the Colossians, moreover, on the suj)position that it involves references to (gnosticism of later date ; and the Epistle to the Ephe- sians, on the supposition — which it might have been thought that an attentive study of these two Epistles would have soon shown to be un- tenable — that it is a mere copy and expansion of the Epistle to the Colossians. On the peculiar grotmds of scejjticism in each case it will be more convenient to speak in connection with each Epistle separately; but on the general question of the relation of these Epistles to the earlier gTOup it will be best to dwell here, not merely with a view to show the hoUowness of this destructive criti- cism, but with the more important object of sketching out the main characteristics of this group of Epistles as a whole. Now it must be considered ex- actly what is the nature of the question. AVe have not here an anonymous document, like the Epistle to the Hebrews, as to which we have to inquire into the degree of its likeness or unlikeuess to St. Paul's acknowledged Epis- I ties. We have Epistles which not only bear his name, but present I various indications marking them ! as his ; and these Epistles are , received as his at a very early date I — alluded to by Clement of liome, IgTiatius, Polycarp, formally in- i eluded in the ]Muratorian Canon I about the year 170. Accordingly, ] they are either his gonuine j Epistles, or Epistles written in his name at an early period by some adherent of the " Pauline School" desiiing to claim a forged authority from his great master. Xow, in the wise of forgery, we should expect to find substantial inferiority of power and inspira- tion, and possibly some discre- pance of the inner reahty, as contrasted with the outward form, of doctrine ; but certainly no marked difference of style, no peculiar words and phrases pre- viously unknown, no change of expressions, which had become markedly characteristic of St. Paul in the acknowledged Epistles of the earlier group. In the case of genuineness, on the other hand, we should look for substantial identity of thought and teaching, coupled with free variation of ex- pression and style, and with indi- cations of a development of doctrine, corresponding to progress of time, change of scene and circumstance, increase of the xjower of Christianity over thought and society, as exemphfied in the development of the Chi-istian Church. It is all but impossible for any careful student to doubt that it is always the latter — ^never the former — condition which is dis- tinctly realised in these Epistles. This will be seen clearly on examination both of their style ; and of their substance. 190 NEW TESTA^IENT IJSTRODtJCTIONS. III. The style of the Epistles. — There is unquestion- ably a marked difference of style, although, in various degrees — the Philippian Epistle showing such difference far less than the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians. Now it is not a little remarkable that the nature of this acknow- ledged change of style singularly corresponds with the historical change in St. Paul's circumstances. When he wrote the former Epistles he was in the full tide of his Apos- tolic work ; at periods, moreover, of marked excitement and interest — just after the tumult at Ephesus, or on his circuit through Mace- donia "round about into lUyricum," or at Corinth in the very heat of the Judaisiag controversy. He was then emphatically the preacher and the church-founder. His Let- ters, written in the intervals of his busy work, would be like fragments of his preaching, marked by the incisive earnestness, the close argument, the impressive abruptness of a pleader for God. When he wrote these later Epistles he was in the enforced inactivity and the comparative rest of im- prisonment, and this imprisonment (as, indeed, we might have ex- pected) appears to have been to him a time of study, in those "many writings" which Festus thought at that time to have " made him mad " (Acts xxvi. 24), with such "books and parch- ments " round him as those which he asked for even in the greater severity of his second imprison- ment (2 Tim. iv. 13). He is now not so much the worker as the thinker. The impassioned em- phasis of the preacher might naturally be exchanged for the quiet, deliberate teaching of the Christian sage ; sounding the lowest depths of thought ; wander- ing, as it might seem, but with subtle links of connection, from one idea to another ; rising con- stantly in secret meditation from truths embodied in the practical forms of earthly life, to truths as they exist above in the calm per- fection of heaven. Who can doubt that this is exactly the change of style which we trace in these Epistles of the Captivity? The Ej^istle to the Philij^pians has least of it; for there his remem- brance of earlier times would be strongest, and would tend most to reproduce the earlier tone of thought. But in the Colossian Epistle, wiitten to a Church which he had never seen — knowing it, indeed, well, but only by hearsay — still more in the Epistle to the Ephesians, probably an encyclical letter, certa^'nly approaching more nearly to the nature of abstract general teaching, this characteristic difference is most vividly marked. It manifests itself in the appear- ance of many words used in no other Epistles, and these frequently words compounded with a thought- ful felicity of compressed meaning. It manifests itself in sentences which, unlike the terse and often abrupt incisiveness of his earlier Letters, flow on without gram- matical break, sometimes not with- out grammatical harshness and obscurity, but with an unfailing- connection and evolution of thought, a singular and (so tO' speak) philosophical completeness • of doctrine, a sustained perfection - of meditative and devotional beauty. It manifests itself, again, in a constant looking upward to- " the heavenly places " of the Ephesian Epistle ; sometimes, as in* EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL'S FIRST CAPTIVITY. 191 the opening of that Epistle, to the source of all Christian life in the election of the divine love; some- times to the ang-elic " principalities and powers," invisibly fighting for or against that love of God in sal- vation; sometimes to the life of Christians "hid with Chi-ist ia God," in virtue of which we sit with Him in heaven even now; most often, perhaps, of all, to Christ in His heavenly glory, seen now by the eye of faith, ready to reveal Himself in the Epiphany of the great day. Yet, with all this difference of style, the detailed links of connection, both in word and in thought, are simply numberless— mostly showing simi- larity, not absolute identity, of expression ; an independent like- ness, not an artificial copyism. AboA^e all, the general impress of the mind and character of St. Paul comes out more and more clearly as we pursue the detailed study of the Epistles. Thus, the character which paints itself in the Epistle to the Philippians is obviously the same as that which we know in the Epistles to the Corinthians, or in that yet earlier Epistle to the other Macedonian Chm-ch at Thes- salonica, which presents some strik- ing similarities in detail. But there is a greater calmness and m.aturity, sometimes of peaceful- ness, sometimes of sadness : it is the pictiu'e of an older man. Again, the notion that the teach- ing of the Ephesian or Colossian Epistle could possibly have come from the weaker hand of a disciple will seem fairly inci-edible to any who have ever glanced at the writings of Clement of Eome, of Ignatius, or of Polycarp, the scholars of St. Paul and St. John. The inspii-ed hand of the Apostle is traceable in every line ; the very change of style argues at once identity and development. It is a strong internal evidence of the Apostolic authorship ; it is in itself full of deep interest and signifi- cance. lY. The Substance of the Epistles. — Still more striking is the corresponding phenomenon in relation to substance. In the doc- trine of these Epistles there is the same indication of a true develop- ment. (1) The Doctrine of Salvation. — Thus, for example, it is profoundly instructive to examine the relation of these Epistles to that primary doctrine of "justification by faith" which had been the one all-impor- tant subject of the Galatian and Roman Epistles, It is touched on here with the same master-hand. "By grace are ye saved through faith ; and that not of yom'selves : it is the gift of God : not of works, lest any man should boast" (Eph. ii. 8, 9). "That I may be foimd in Him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the Law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith" (Phil, iii. 9). But it is no longer the one subject to which all else leads up. It is treated as a thing known and accepted, with a quiet calmness utterly imlike the impassioned and exhaustive earnestness of St. Paul's pleading for it in the crisis of the Judaistic controversy. The em- phasis on faith is less Ai^id and less constant. "Salvation by grace" takes the j)lace of "justification by faith," and leads the thoughts on from the first acceptance in Christ 192 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. which such acceptance is the first beginning. The Law, which before its idolaters in Galatia or at Rome was resolutely tlirnst down to its right secondary position, described as the servile " pedagogue to bring men " to the true Teacher, depre- ciated as the mere subsidiary guard of the covenant of promise, is now loss often touched upon, and less unreservedly condemned. It has obviously lost the dangerous fasci- nation with which such idolatry in- vested it. It is only "as contained in ordinances" that it is now viewed as a separation between Jew and Gentile, or between man and God, or considered as cancelled by " nailing it to the cross " of Christ. We feel that St. Paul is akeady passing on from the earnest pleading of advocacy of the freedom of the gospel to the judicial calmness which was here- after to toll how " the law is good if a man use it lawfully " (I Tim. i. 8). Judaism has, in great measure, at least in the Eastern churches, changed its character. St. Paul's earnest pleading for Christ as all in all has similarly changed its direction and its tone. Against new idolatiies it is still necessary to tight to the death. But the old battle is substantially won ; on the old field no more is needed than to maintain the vic- tory. (2) The Doctrine of the Catholic Church. — Nor is it less interesting to note how in these Epistles, and especially in the Epistle to the Ephesians, the prominence of the idea of the Kingdom of God has marvellously increased. The Gala- tian and Roman Epistles (as the history of the Reformation of the sixteenth century showed) are the treasure-house of the truths of personal Christianity ; for the very thought of justification, dominant in them, brings each soul face tc face with its own sin and its own salvation, in that supreme crisis of life and death in which it is con- scious of but two existences — God and itself. These later Epistles are equally the storehouse of the less vivid, yet gTander, conception of the Holy Catholic Chm-ch. The central idea is of Christ the Head, and the whole collective Chris- tianity of the Church as His Body. He is conceived not solely or mainly as the Saviour of each individual soul, but rather as "gathering up" all humanit}', or even all created being, "in Himself." The two conceptions are, of course, in- separable. In the earlier Epistles the Church is constantly recog- nised ; in these the individual relationship to God in Christ is never for a moment ignored. But the proportion (so to spoak) of the two truths is changed. What is primary in the one case is secondary in the other. It is obvious that this is the natural order. The Christian unity is directly the unity of each soul with Christ, the Head ; indirectly the unity of the various members in one Body. When the gospel of salvation first speaks, it must speak to the individual. When the grace of Christ draws all men unto Him, each individual must move along the line of his own spiritual gravi- tation. But when the truth has been accepted in a faith necessarily individual ; when the Saviour has been found by each as the Christ who liveth "in me" — then the question arises. What are His truth and His grace to that great human society, to which we are bound by a network of unseen EPISTLES OF ST. PArL'S FIRST CAPTIVITY 193 spiritual ties ? The first and jjroper answer to that question is the doctrine of the Holy Catholic Church. There is a second answer, larger, but less distinct, which goes even beyond this, to contemplate our Lord as the Head of all created being. The relation, therefore, of these Epistles to the earlier group is profoundly natui'al, even on the ; consideration of the right and necessary course of idea. But here, again, it is impossible not to trace in these Epistles a special appropriateness to this period of St. Paul's life and work. Of the three great threads of ancient civilisation — the Hebrew, the Greek, and the Roman — two had already been laid hold of by Apostolic hands, and fastened to the cross of Christ. Now, as " am- bassador for Christ," although "in bonds," St. Paul had been permitted to " see Rome ; " the circumstances of his imprisonment had placed him in the PrcBtorium, in the very citadel of the Imperial grandeur, and had given him access to " those of Csesar'shousehold." TheEpistles of the former group had been written from cities where Greek thought reigned supreme — from Ephesus, from Philippi, from Co- rinth. These later Epistles came from the centre of Imperial Rome. Now, it is a commonplace to re- mark that the main element of all Greek thought was the freedom and sacredness of the individual, whether in the realm of thought, or of imagination, or of action. But the mission of the Roman (as Virgil has, with a true insight, declared in well-known lines) was to teach the greatness of the com- munity — the family, the state, the whole race of humanity ; to give laws which were to be the basis of 13 the " law of nations ; " to unite all peoples in one great empire, and, perhaps, by an inevitable inference, to deify its head. It can hardly be accidental that, while the former Epistles dealt with the individual, pointing him to the true freedom and the true wisdom, which Greek philosophy sought for in vain, these Epistles should similarly face the gTeat Roman problem, and sketch out that picture which was hereafter to be wrought into the chief masterpiece of Latin theology — the picture of "the city of God.'' We note in the Epistle to the Ephesians the emphatic reference to the three great social relation- ships, so jealously and sternly guarded by Roman law — the re- lations of parents and children, husbands and wives, masters and ser- vants — as deriving a higher spiritual sacredness, above all law and con- vention, from the fact that they are t^-pes of the rekitions of man to God in the gTcat unity in the Lord Jesus Christ. We read in the Epistle to the Philippians of the " city in heaven " — not now the " heavenly Jerusalem " of Jewish aspiration, but simply the city of which all are citizens, whether "Jew or Greek, barbarian, Scy- thian, bond or free." We find, both in the Ephesian and Colossian Epistles, a constant recurrence to the thought of all as " one body " or "one temple" in Jesus Christ — supplpng that supreme personal relation, which changes the shadowy dream of a divine republic, where the individual is lost, to the solid reality of a well-centred Kingdom of God, preser^-ing at once perfect individuality and perfect unity. We are reminded at every step of the "fifth empire" — "a stone cut out without hands" from the 1S>4 NEAV TESTAMENT INTEODUCTloXS. mountain of the Lord, and grow- ing till it displaced the artificial fahrics of the kingdoms of the world, and iilled the whole earth. We contrast the inevitahle idolatr}" of the Roman emperor — ^remember- ing that, by a strange irony of circumstance, that emperor was now a Nero — with the worship of the true Son of Man and Son of God, of which aR such idolatries are perverted anticipations. I pass over minor points of coincidence between idea and circumstance — such as the remarkable metaphor of the Christian ^rmour, working out a figure previously touched by St. Paul, with an ob\dous detailed reference to the armour of his Roman jailor; or the adaptation of Stoic ideas and phrases in the Epistle to the Philippians, bearing (as Dr. Lightfoot has shown) peculiar resemblances to the later Stoicism of Seneca, then the leader of Roman thought. But taking only the main idea of these Epistles, and comparing it with the main principle of Roman great- ness, it is impossible again not to be struck with a coincidence— which must surely be more than mere coincidence — between the teaching and the circumstances of this period of the Apostle's life. (3) The advanced Christology. — There is another true development, of infinitely greater importance and deeper interest, in respect of what is called the "Christology" of these Epistles. At all times the preaching of Christianity is the preaching of " G-od in Christ." But attentive study of the New Testament shows that gradually, line by line, step by step, the full truth was revealed as the world was able to bear it^passing, ac- cording to the true order of teach- ing, from visible manifestations to invisilde realities, guarding at every step the supreme truth of the unity of the Godhead, so jealously cherished by the Jew, so laxly disregarded in the elastic Pol5i:hcisms of the Gentile world. The manifestation of Christ in the Incarnation, the Atonement, the Resurrection, and Ascension, is, of course, really one. Yet at different times each of the different steps of that one manifestation appears to have assumed greater prominence in Christian teaching; and it may be noted, that as, when we dig through the strata of the earth, we uncover first what is latest, and come only at last to what is earliest in deposition, so in the reahsation of gospel truth, the order of preach- ing is the reverse of the order of actual occurrence of the great facts of the divine manifestation. First, as is natuial, came the preaching of " Christ risen; " for the Resur- rection — the great miracle of miracles — was the seal of our Lord's Messiahship, declaring Him who was '' of the seed of David, according to the flesh " to be " the Son of God with power." As risen and exalted to the right hand of God, in fulfilment of oft-repeated ancient prophecy. He was de- clared to be both " Lord and Christ." Even clear-sighted hea- then ignorance could declare that the great question between Chris- tian and unbeliever was then — as, indeed, it is now — "of one Jesus who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive." But then, when men were called to receive in the risen Christ remission of sins, to see in His resurrection the pledge of a spiritual resuiTCction for them- selves here, a resuiTCction of body and spirit in the hereafter, came EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL'S FIRST CAPTIVITY. 195 the question, How can this be ? To that question the answer is found in the one truth which St. Paul declared that in his teaching at Corinth, and (we may add) in his teaching to the Galatians and Eomans, he cared to know — the truth of " Jesus Christ, and Him as crucified." The Pesurrection, in itself, was accepted as known ; to unfold its meaning it was neces- sary to go hack to the Atonement. Hence the great teaching of these Epistles is of Christ as the one Mediator between God and the countless souls which He has made. That mediation is described some- times in the phrase " through Christ," bringing out the access through His atonement to the Father who sent Him; sometimes in the phrase "in Chi-ist," dwell- ing not so much on our justifica- tion as on our regeneration in Him to the new life. Perhaps in the gTcat struggle for Justification by Faith the former idea was the more prominent. In either phase, how- ever, it is the sole and universal mediation of Christ which is the one leading conception of Apostolic teaching. But, again, the question arises, Who is He who thus is — what surely no merely created being can claim to be — a mediator between God and all human souls, in all lands and in all ages of the world ? To answer that question it was needful to go back once more to "Christ Incarnate:" i.e., ultimately, to Christ as He is, not in manifestation, but in His own true being, before He was pleased to stoop to earth, and since He has ascended again to His own glory in heaven. It is on this last phase of thought that the Epistles of the Captivity appear to enter, standing in this respect parallel with the Epistle to the Hebrews, leading on to the yet fuller teaching of the Epistles and Gospel of St. John. We notice that it is always through the knowledge of His mediation that they lead us into the region of yet higher truth. St. Paul, in brief yet exhaustive description of that mediation, tells us of Christ, as One "in whom we have redemption through His blood, even the remission of sins." We notice, also, that the phrase " in Christ," rather than "through Christ," is the dominant note in these Epistles. As we have seen already in relation to justification and sanctifi cation, so we find in relation to the objective truths corresponding to them, that it is not so much on " Christ crucified " as on " Christ living in us " that he emphatically dweUs. But the especial point of transcendent im- portance is that he leads us on from the fact of this mediation to draw out explicitly what such mediation implies. The Philip- pian Epistle, simple and practical as its purpose is, recites, in the gTeat passage of its second chapter (chap. ii. 5—11) the whole creed of our Lord's Nature and Ofiice — the distinctive creed of Chris- tianity. It marks the two -fold humility of His mediation for us : first, the "taking on Him the form of a servant ; " next, the " hum- bling Himself to the death of the cross." It turns next to the cor- responding exaltation of His human nature in the Mediatorial kingdom (described in 1 Cor. xv. 20 — 28), so that " in the name of Jesus every knee should bow." But it does more than this. It speaks of Him as being essentially " in the form," that is, in the nature, " of God," in the eternal glory of which " He 196 XFAV TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. stripped Himself '' for us; it tells us that to Him is given " the name which is above every name " — the \ a^vf ul and incommunicahle name of Jehovah. In that deeper teaching it tells us, not of His office, but of Himself ; not of His mediation, but of the divine nature which alone made such mediation possible. Again, in the Epistle to the Ephe- sians, starting from " the redemp- tion in His blood, the remission of sins," the idea of our Lord's me- diation is infinitely enlarged and exalted in the conception, that " in Him all things are gathered in one head, both which are in heaven and which are on earth ; " that "He fiUeth aU in aU;" ''ascend- ing above all heavens," " descend- ing into the lower parts of the earth," "that He might thus fill aU things." That He is, indeed, the Head of the Church we are told again and again in various forms of expression ; but He is more. In Him all created being is summed up ; He is, in aU that relates to it, the manifestation of God. As in the unity of the Church, so in the wider unity of all creation, we have, co-ordinate with one another, the " one Spirit," the " one Lord," the " one God and Father of aU." But far even beyond this, the Epistle to the Colossians can-ies the same higher teaching. Standing face to face with an incipient Gnosticism, stiftened to some degxee into a Jewish type, but presenting aU the essential' features of the Gnostic idea — of one supreme God and many emanations, all real and all imperfect, from the divine fulness — St. Paul declares explicitly all that the earlier teaching had im- plied with ever increasing clear- ness. Our Lord is not only " the firstborn of God before all crea- tion," "in whom," "through whom,'' "for whom," "all things in heaven and earth, visible and invisible, were created," and in whom "all things consist." In this the Colossian Epistle would but draw out more forcibly the truth taught to the Ej^hesians of His relation to all created being. But what is He in Himself? St. Paul answers, " the image " — the substantial manifestation — " of the invisible God," in whom "all the fulness of the Godhead dwelleth bodily." The parallel is singularly close with the Epistle to the Hebrews, which, in similar con- nection with the great mediation of His one priesthood and one sacrifice, declares Him (chap. i. 3) to be " the brightness of the glory of the Father, and the express image of His person" (the "sub- stance," Dr esse7ice, of the Godhead). There remains little beyond this to bring us to the full declaration of "the "Word" who "was in the beginning," who "was with God, and was God." These Epistles of St. Paul correspond, with marvel- lous appropriateness, to that inter- mediate period, when his great evangelising work was almost done, and the time was coming for the growth of the school of deep thought on a now acknowledged Christianity, which was to sur- round the old age of " St. John the Divine." (4) The Condition and Trials of the Church. — The examination of the substance of the Epistles would not be complete without some brief reference to the condition of the Church which they disclose. In this view, also, we trace the same coincidence with the natural growth of events. The whole tenor EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL'S FIE^T CAPTIVITY. 197 of the Epistles indicates that the Church had reached a condition in which the consideration, not so much of its extension, as of its unity, hecame the prominent idea. With hut little hyperbole, St. Paul could say that the gospel had come into " all the world " of the Eoman empire. His own career of active evangeHsation had been stopped ; in his prison at Rome, the centre of communication with all nations, he would, no doubt, hear of the growth and the trials of other Churches, as we know that he heard of Philippi and Colossae ; he looked eagerly, as from a distance, on the building up of the Temple of God, which was going on by many hands and under many con- ditions. The one thought and prayer of his captivity was that it should grow as one, "fitly framed and joined together," on the one foundation, and in the one comer- stone. To the Philippian Church the burden of his exhortation is to unity of spirit. In the Ephesian Epistle the great central passage is that which brings out, with all the incisive emphasis of a creed, the description of the " one body " and the "one Spirit"; and the fundamental concejjtion of the gospel, as the reconciliation of the soul to God in Jesus Christ, carries with it as a perpetual undertone, the union of Jew and Gentile in the covenant of God. Even in the Colossian Epistle, although there the main idea of the sole headship of Christ assumes a more absolute predominance, yet the great anxiety of St. Paul for Colossae and its sister Churches was that their hearts might be " knit together in love " and the "full assui-ance of the knowledge " of a common gospel. The whole tenor of these Epistles, standing in contrast with those of the earlier group, thus corresponds with the needs of the more advanced period of Church history. Nor is this coincidence less evident in relation to the forms of danger, by which the progress of the Church is here seen to be menaced. The old leaven of Judaism still works in the "so- called circumcision," which now deserves, in St. Paul's eyes, only the name of "concision," or self- mutilation. But it has changed its character. The Pharisaic idol- atry of the Law, as a law by obedi- ence to which man might work out, if not his own salvation, at least his own perfection, has passed away in the East, though it lingers in the simple, unspeculative Christi- anity of Macedonia. Perhaps by the very extension of the Church the providence of God had clenched the victorious argument of St. Paul. A Church truly catholic could hardly rest on a rigid code of law, or find the spring of a world-wide salvation anywhere, except in the grace of God accepted by faith. But now, as the Epistle to the Colossians shows, Judaism had allied itself with those wild specu- lations, weaving the gospel into philosophical or mystic theories of religion, which arose ine\'itably, when Chi'istianity, assuming to be the religion of humanity, naturally came in contact with the various philosophies and religions of all mankind. Dr. Lightfoot has shown, with much probability, that one I form in which it adapted itself to the new condition of things was the form of the old Essenic mysticism. The Epistle to the Hebrews sug- gests that, on the other hand, it had also fixed its faith on the ritual and sacrifice from which the Essenes 198 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. shrank — doubtless as having in themselves a mystic efficacy, per- haps as enabling men to enter into the region of mystic specula- tion, where they might learn the secrets hidden from the mass of Chiistiaus, and revealed only to the perfect. In both forms it is seen as gradually dissolving its old rigidity and carnality, and claim- iug, in accordance with the spirit of the age, the title of spirituality and mystic perfection. Still more is the progress of the times shown in this very tendency, to which Judaism so strangely and incongTuously allied itself. Gnos- ticism, in later days, marked the attempts — sometimes serious, some- times fantastic — to weave Christi- anity into systems designed to solve the insoluble problem of the relation of the infinite God, both ia creation and manifestation, to His finite creatm-es ; to fix the place to be as- signed to matter and spirit in the universe; to answer the question how far evil is necessarily associ- ated with matter ; and in contem- plation of the gospel itself, to determine the relation between the Old and New Covenant, and to define or explain away the mystery of the Incarnation. To what wild developments it ran is told in the true, but almost incredible, record of a subsequent chapter of Church history. But it showed itself — we may almost say that it could not but have shown itself — at the close of the Apostolic age : as soon as the gospel showed itself to be not only a divine life, but a diviue philo- sophy, to an age radically sceptical, both in its eagerness of inquiry and its discoutent with all the answers hitherto found. We find traces of it — easily read by those who have studied its after-develop- ment — in the "endless genealogies," the false asceticism, or still falser antinomianism of the later Epistles of St. Paul and St. John, in the denial that "Jesus Christ was come in the flesh," and the idea that '* the Resm-rection was passed already.'* In these Epistles of the Captivity there arc similar traces, but less fully developed, especially in the Colossian Epistle. The spurious claims to spiritual " per- fection ; " the " deceits by vain words;" the "systematic plan of deceit" of a specious antinomian- ism, for which St. Paul can hardly find language of adequate condem- nation ; the " philosophy and vain deceit " of the traditions of men, with its mere '* show of wisdom" and its "intrusion" into the regions of the invisible ; the sup- posed emanations from the God- head taking the angelic forms of " thrones and principalities and powers "—all these mark the first beginning of that strange progress which ran its pretentious course in later times. To this time of St. Paul's history they belong, and to no other. Thus, as it seems every way, a careful study of the style and sub- stance of these Epistles not only confirms the external testimony which refers them to St. I\iul, but illustrates to us the course of the development of the gospel, the pro- gress and the trials of the Church. They light up the historical dark- ness in which the abrupt close of the record of the Acts of the Apostles leaves us : they are f uU of those lessons for our own days in which the [close of the Apostolic age is especially fruitful. Y. The Order of the Epis- tles.— That the Epistles to the EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL'S FIRST CAPTIVITY 199 Ephesians, to the Colossians, and to Philemon belong to the same time, and were sent by the same messengers, is tolerably clear. The one question is, whether the Epistle to the Philippians precedes or follows them ; and this question can only be answered by probable conjecture. It is obvious, from the progTess already made (Phil. i. 12 — 18), from the whole descrip- tion of the mission and the sickness of Epaphroditus 'Phil. ii. 25—30), from the anticipation of release (Phil. ii. 24), that some time must have elapsed between St. Paul's arrival at Rome and the writing of this Epistle. It has also been noticed, as at least a remarkable coincidence, that Aristarchus and St. Luke, who accompanied the Apostle to Rome (Acts xx^ii. 2), are named in the Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon (Col. iv. 10, 14; Philemon verse 24), and not in the Epistle to the Philippians. But this last may be a mere co- incidence; and the fact that the Philippian Epistle was not written early in the imprisonment deter- mines nothing as to its priority or posteriority to the other Epistles. The only strong argument on the subject — which has been admirably worked out by Dr. Lightfoot in his Introduction to the Epistle to the Fhilippians, sect. II. — is the re- markable similarity in word and style between it and the Epistle to the Romans, its position as a link between the strong individuality of the earlier teaching and the charac- teristic universality of the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians, and its dealing with trials and difBculties more nearly resembling those of an earlier time. The argument is strong, yet not neces- sarily conclusive, for much in all these points depends on the char- acter, and even the geogxaphical position, of the Church addressed. To it, however, in the absence of any solid controverting CA-idence, we may give considerable weight, and perhaps incline, without abso- lute decision, to place the Philip- pian Epistle before the other group in the Epistles of the Captivity. [In relation to the treatment of the Epistles of the Captivity, it seems right to acloiowledge the deep obligation of the -vsTiter to the Commentaries of Ellicott, Alford, Wordsworth, jNIeyer, Harless, and, above all, to the admirable and exhaustive treatment by Dr. Light- foot of the Epistles to the Philij)- pians, Colossians, and Philemon; i to Conybeare and Howson, and I Lewin, for their full and learned I summaries of all that illustrates ! the life and, in less degree, the j wi'itings of St. Paul ; but perhaps I not least to the Homilies of St. j Chrysostom — simply invaluable as a commentary, venerable in its j)re- servation of ancient tradition, criti- cally precious as dealing with the Greek as still a living language, and yet nKjdern in that breadth and simplicity of treatment which contrast with the frequent mystic- ism of great ancient commentators. EPHESIANS. By the Eight Eev. ALFRED BAREY, D.D. I. The Date and Place of "Writing. — This Epistle, for reasons hereafter to he considered, has few detailed indications, either of the personal condition of the writer or of the circumstances of those to whom it is addressed. But one point is made perfectly clear, that it was wx-itten by St. Paul when he was the '' prisoner of Jesus Christ" (chaps, iii. 1 ; iv. 1), suffering- some special " tribulations for them," which he bade them consider as " their glory " (chap, iii. 13), and being an "ambassador for Christ in a chain " (chap. vi. 20) — the word here used being the same as in Acts xxviii. 20, and being a word almost technically describing the imprisonment "with a soldier that kept him " (Acts xxviii. 16). All these things j)oint unmistakably to what we have spoken of in the General Introdnc- tion as the first Ixoman captivity. That captivity began about a.d. 61, and lasted, without change, for at least "two full years." In the Letter to Philemon, sent by One- simus, who is associated with Tychicus, the bearer of this Epistle, in Col. iv. 7 — 9, St. Paul prays him to "prepare him a lodging" against ! the speedy arrival, which he then j confidently expected. Hence our ' Epistle must be placed late ia the capti\dty — not earher than a.d. 63. II. The Church to which it is addressed. — The Epistle has borne from time immemorial the name of the " Epistle to the Ephesians." To the Church at Ephesus most certainly, whether solely or among others, it is ad- Ephesus. — Of St. Paul's preach- ing at Ephesus we have a detailed account in the Acts of the Apostles. At the close of his second mission- ary circuit he had touched at Ephesus, and " entered the syna- gogue " to "reason with the Jews." In spite of their entreaty, he could not then remain with them, but left Aquila and Priscilla there. From them, probably, with the aid of their convert Apollos, the Christianity of Ephesus began its actual rise. It is not, indeed, im- possible that there may have been some pre%dous preparation through the disciples of St. John the Bap- tist. The emphatic allusion to him and to the simply preparatory character of his work in St. Paul's sermon at Antioch in Pisidia (Acts xiii. 24, 25), seems to point to knowledge of him in Asia Minor. We know that afterwards St. Paul EPHESIAXS. 201 found some disciples at Ephesus, baptised only with St. John's bap- tism (Acts xix. 3) ; and we note that Apollos, while " knowing only the baptism of John," yet still "teaching the things of the Lord," found a ready acceptance at Ephesus (Acts xviii. 24, 25). But however this may be, the full de- velopment of the Christianity of Ephesus was made under St. Paul's charge in his third missionary cir- cuit. His first circuit had been an extension of that Asiatic Gentile Christianity which began from Antioch ; his second was notable as the first i)lanting of European Christianity, having its chief centre at Corinth ; now his headquarters for the evangelisation of the Roman province of Asia were fixed for three years at Ephesus, a city specially fit for the welding together of Asiatic and European Chiistianity — for there Greek ci\TQisation met face to face -vsdth Oriental supersti- tion and magical pretensions, in that which was made by Eome the official metropolis of pro-consular Asia ; and the strange union is curiously symbolised by the en- shrining in a temple which was the world-famed masterpiece of Greek art of an idol — probably, some half-shapeless meteoric stone — • " which fell down from Jupiter." The summary of his work there — his re-baptism with the miraculous gifts of the disciples of St. John Baptist : the " special miracles " wrought by his hands ; the utter confusion both of Jewish exorcists and of the professors of those "curious arts " for which Ephesus was notorious ; the sudden tumult, 80 skilfully appeased by the "town clerk," who must surely have been half a Christian — make up (in Acts xix.) one of the most vivid scenes in St. Paul's Apostolic history. Another — not less striking and infinitely pathetic — is drawn in Acts XX. 16 — 38, in the farewell visit and address of St. Paul to the Ephesian presbyters at Miletus, indicating, alike by its testimony and by its warnings, a fully- organised and widely-spread Chris- tianity — the fruit of his three years' labour. AATiat had been the extent of the sphere of that labour we know not. We gather, with some sui'i^rise (Col. ii. 1), that the Churches of the valley of the Lycus — Laodicea, HierapoHs, Colossa? — had not been ^'isited by him personally. Yet, whether by his own presence, or through such delegates as Epaphras (Col. i. 7), " all which dwelt in Asia had heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks " (Acts xix. 10). They might well " sorrow " and *' weep sore " at the thought that they should " see his face no more." Now, in his captivity, certainly to Ej^hesus, and (as we shall see hereafter) probably to the other Churches of Asia, he writes this Epistle — itseK a representative Epistle, almost a treatise, bearing to the doctrine of the Holy Catholic Church a relation not unlike that which the Ej)istle to the Romans bears to the funda- mental truths of personal Christi- anity. After this, in the interval be- tween the first and second cap- ti\dtv, we find (see 1 Tim. i. 1 ; 2 Tim. i. 18) that St. Paul did revisit Ephesus at least once ; that, in his deep anxiety for its weKare, he placed it under the quasi-epis- copal charge of his " own son j Timothy ; " and that, in his last I captivity, ho sent Tychicus, the 202 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. bearer of this Epistle, to Ej)]iesus again (2 Tim. iv. 12), perhaps in view of the coming absence of Timothy in obedience to the Apos- tle's summons. From that time Ephesus passed into the charge of St. John, as the first of the seven churches of Asia (Rev. ii. 1), commended for its steadfastness, but yet rebuked as "having fallen from its lirst love." Of this phase of its Christianity, and its subsequent importance in the future history of the Church, especially as the scene of the Third great Council and the previous Latrocinium, it would be out of place here to dwell. The Churches of Asia. — But while there is no doubt that the Epistle was addressed to Ephesus, there seems very strong reason for the opinion, now held by many commentators, that it was an ency- clical letter to the churches of Asia, of which Ephesus M-as the natural head. The evidence of this ojnnion may be thus summarised : — Direct Evidoice. — Taking first the direct evidence, we observe (1) that in the opening salutation, which in the ordinary reading is addrsesed to " the saints which are at Ephe- sus, being also faithful in Christ Jesus," the words " at Ephesus " arc omitted in our two oldest MSS. (the Vatican and the Sinaitic), and in both supplied by a later hand. This omission is exceptional, all other MSS. and versions inserting the words. But it agrees with two remarkable ancient testimonies. Origen, the first great Biblical critic in the early Church (a.d. 186 — 254), (as appears from a frag- ment quoted in Cramer's *' Catena3 in Pauli Epistolse," p. 102, Oxford edition, 1842), noticed that in the Ephesian Epistle alone there was the " singular inscription," " to the saints who are, being also faithful." Basil of Caesarea (a.d, 329 — 379) ex- pressly says (in his treatise against Eunomius, Book ii., c. 19), "this reading was handed down by those who have gone before us, and we ourselves have found it in the ancient MSS." Now (2) the effect of this omis- sion is to make the passage obscure, if not unintelligible ; for the only simple rendering of the Greek would be to " the saints who are also faithful," and this would give an impossible vagueness and gener- ality to the address. Accordingly, ancient criticism (perhaps derived from Origen in the first instance) actually faced the difficulty by giv- ing a mystic sense to the passage. St. Basil, in the passage above quoted, explains it tlius : — "But, moreover, \ riting to the Ephesians as to those truly united by full knowledge to Him who is, he gives them the peculiar title of the * saints who are.' " To this interpretation, also, St. Jerome refers thus (in his Commentary on E^jhesians i. 1) : — '' Some, with more subtletj'- than is necessary, hold that, according to the saying to Moses, Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel, He who is hath sent me unto you, those who at Ephesus are holy and faithful are designated by the name of essential being, so tliat from Him WHO IS these are called They who are ; " and adds, with his usual strong critical ^ood sense, " others more simply hold that the address is not to Those who are, but to Those who are at Ephesus." Cer- tainly, nothing could show a firmer conviction that the omission of tlie words "at Ephesus" was necessi- tated by MS. authority, than the EPHESIANS. 203 desperate attempt to meet the diffi- culty of rendering by this marvel- lous interpretation. But (3) we also find that ^Marcion the heretic, by Tertullian's twice- repeated testimony (in his work aaainst Marcion, Book v., cc. 11, 16), entitled this Epistle, "The Epistle to the Laodiceans." "I omit," he says, " here notice of another Epistle, which we hold to have been written to the Ephesians, but the heretics to the Laodiceans ; " snd he then proceeds to refer to our Epistle. In another place : — " In the true view of the Church, we hold that Letter to have been sent to the Ephesians, not to the Laodi- ceans ; but Marcion has made it his business to interpolate an address in it, to show that on this point also he is a most painstaking" critic." Now (as Tertullian adds) the ques- tion of the address was of no doctri- nal importance ; accordingly, Mar- cion could not have been tempted in this respect to falsify or invent. He gave the address on critical grounds ; and Tertullian says that he "interpolated" it, presumably where there was a blank, Epipha- nius, also (320 ? — 402), in his notice of Marcion, [adv. Jlrnr., Lib. L, Tom. III., xii.), after quoting "one Lord, one faith, one baptism," &c., adds : — " For the miserable Marcion was pleased to quote this testimony, not from the Epistle to the Ephe- sians, but from the Epistle to the Laodiceans, which is not in the Apostle's writings." He appar- ently refers to an apocryphal letter, of which he sa^s elsewhere that " Marcion received fragments ; " and such a letter is noticed in the Muratorian Canon. But looking to Tertullian's clear declaration, we may, perhaps, see here a confused reraimscence of this same critical achievement of Marcion. INIarcion, no doubt, was led to it by a con- sideration of the well-known pas- sage in the Colossian Epistle (chap. iv. 16) speaking of the " letter from Laodicea," which he (it would' seem, correctly) identified with our Epistle. (4) Now, all these things lead plainly to one conclusion — that, while an unvarying tradition de- clared that the Letter was " to the Ephesians," yet there was a blank ia the oldest M.SS. after the words " which are," generally filled up (as in most of our later MSS.) with the words " in Ephesus ; " but by ^Marcion, with no MS. authority, simply on grounds of critical infer- ence, with the words " in Laodicea." That this insertion of Marcion, if intended to infer that the Letter was addressed specially to the Lao- dicean Church, was unwarrantable, appears obvious, from the whole stream of ancient tradition assign- ing the Letter to the Ephesians, and the absence of any vestige of such a reading in the existing MSS. But if the Epistle were a circular letter, of which many copies were sent at one time, it would be at least probable that blanks might be left, to be filled up in each case with the prupcr name of the Church ; and this supposition, which has been adopted by many, would fur- nish a very simple explanation — indeed, the only simple explanation — of this perplexing J\LS. phe- nomenon. Indirect Evidence. — This being the state of the case in relation to direct evidence, we naturally pass on to consider what may be ga- thered indirectly, either to confirm or to confute this supposition, from the Epistle itself. Now, the study oc the Epistle, as 204 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. a whole, must surely convey to the mind the impression of a certain generality and abstractness of char- acter. It approaches closely — at least as closely as the Epistle to the Romans — to the character of a treatise, dealing, with a singular completeness, accuracy, and sym- metry of handling, with a grand spiritual truth — the doctrine of the Holy Catholic Church. The very opening — strongly reminding us in form, though not in substance, of the opening of the General Epistle of St. Peter to these churches and other churches of Asia Minor (1 Pet. i. 3 — 7) — is a complete and exhaustive statement of the mys- terious truth of the election of the whole Church, as gathered up in Christ and redeemed by Him, in the eternal counsels of God. The celebrated passage (chap. iv. 4 — 6) on the unity of the Church, while it is full of an almost poetic beauty, has all the fulness and precision of a creed. The practical exhortations of the Epistle are drawn, with a philosophic generaUty, from the fundamental conception of religious unity. Nor can we fail to notice that the Epistle is entirely destitute of any reference — such as is invari- able in St. Paul's other Epistles — to the particular condition, bless- ings, trials, graces, or defects, of those to whom it is addressed. They are simply spoken of as " you Gen- tiles," in contradistinction to the children of the old covenant. The sins against which they are warned are the typical sins forbidden in the Second Table, or the sins specially rife in the heathen society of that time in general. The comparison in this respect with the Colossian Epistle is most in- structive. Everywhere the Ephe- sian Epistle is general and (so to speak) philosophical in treatment ; while in the parallel passages the other Epistle is particular and practical. Now it so happens that in the Epistles of this period we have the Philippian, written to a Church personall)^ known and loved, while the Colossian is addressed to a Church known perhaps well, but indirectly, and not by personal intercourse. The former Epistle is pervaded from beginning to end with the personality of the writer, as fully as the Corinthian or Gaia- tian Epistles themselves. The lat- ter is more distant and more general, introducing the special warnings of the second chapter with a half- apologetic reference to the deep anxiety felt " for them, and for the Laodiceans, and for those who had not seen his face in the flesh." The Church of Ephesus must have been even more intimately known and bound to St. Paul than the Church at Philippi. How near it lay to his heart we know by the pathetic beauty and yearning tenderness of his address to the elders at Miletus. An Epistle written to this Church should surely have had all the strong personality of the Philippian Epistle ; yet our Epistle, on the contrary, is infinitely less direct, personal, special, than the Epistle to the Colossians. The inference, even from these general considera- tions, seems unmistakable — that it was not addressed to any special Church, but least of all to such a Church as Ephesus. But there are also some indica- tions in detail, looking in the same direction, which cannot all be specified in an Introduction. Such, for example, is the vagueness which has been noticed in the two passages (chaps, i. 15; iii, 2), "after I heard of your faith in the Lord EPHESIANS. 206 Jesus,'' and " if yc hare heard of the dispensation of the grace of God given me to you-ward." It is true that the former may be ex- plained of St. Paul's hearing of them since he had left them ; and, if confirmed by the parallel case of the Colossians (Col. i. 4), may be neutralised by comparison with Philem. verse 5 (" Hearing of thy love and faith"). It is also true that in the latter case the " if " of the original is not, except in form, hypothetical, and the verb may be ''heard," not "heard of." But, making all reservation, there still remains a vagueness, hardly con- ceivable in reference to such a Church as Ephesus, especially when we remember how St. Paul in parallel cases refers to his former preaching. (See, for example, 1 Cor. ii. 1—4; 2 Cor. i. 12—19; xi. 6—9; xiii. 2; Gal. iv. 13; Phil, iv. 9; 1 Thess. ii. 1—12; iii. 4; 2 Thess. ii. 5.) Such, again, is the generality, absolutely without parallel elsewhere, in the salutation "which is the token in every Epistle" — "Grace be to all them who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity " — compared with the "Grace be with you" or " with your spirit" of the other Epistles. The conclusions, again, of the Ephesian and Colossian Epistles may be compared. I do not lay stress on the simple absence of greetings, for it has been shown (by Alford), by comparison with other Epistles, that this argument is precarious. But it is impossible not to be struck with the vague generality of the one, as compared with the fulness of detail and strong- personality of the other. They coincide verbally in the quasi- official commendation of Tychicus, and in this alone. These indications may be thought to be slight, but they all point one way, and their combined force is not to Idc lightly put aside. ^ The indirect evidence, therefore, appears strongly to confinn the supposition which alone gives any simple explanation of the MSS. phenomena. But is there any trace of such an encyclical letter ? That there was an "Epistle from Laodicea" to be read by the Colos- sians, we know ; and the context shows conclusively that this was an Epistle of St. Paul himself. Lao- dicea was near Colossae, and evi- dently in close union with it. The special warnings of the letter ad- dressed to the Colossian Church were probably applicable to it also, and accordingly it was to be read there. But why should Colossae read the " Epistle from Laodicea ? " Had it dealt with the peculiar needs of that sister Church this would be inexplicable ; but if it were what our Epistle is — general in character, and dealing with a truth not iden- tical with the main truth of the Colossian Epistle, but supplement- ary to it — then the direction is intelligible at once. It is not (it will be observed) an " Epistle to the Laodiceans," but an Epistle " coming from Laodicea," which would be reached from Ephesus before Colossae, and which, being the larger and more important town, might naturally be made the recipient of a letter intended for it and Colossae, and perhaps Hiera- polis. It may be asked, if this be so, why have no MSS. any other address than to the " saints at Ephe- sus ? " and why has tradition in- variabh'' called this " The Epistle to the Ephesians," and nothing else ? The answer which has been 206 NEW TESTA:MENT INTRODUCTION'S. often given a])pcars to be entirely sufficient. Ephesns was, as the metropolis of Asia, the natural fontre of the Apostolic ministry, and the natural leader of the Asiatic churches : standing, as in the apocalvptic epistles (Rev. i. 11), at the head of all. There the Epistle would l)e first read ; thence it would go out to the other Asiatic churches ; there it would he best treasured up, and copies of it multiplied; and through these it would be likely to become Icnown to the European churches also. It must have been quoted by some title. What title so natural as " To the Ephesians ? " The use of this title evidently pre- ceded the insertion of the words " in Ephesus" in the text. This is natural. We remember that no extaut MS., except the Vatican and Sinaitic, is earlier than the begin- ning of the fifth century. By that time most of the Asiatic churches had sunk into insignificance. The ti-adition alread}' prevalent of the address to the Ephesians would naturally express itself hj the in- sertion of the words, without which the context of the opening passage is hardly intelligible. This supposition seems also to be confirmed by the occasional appro- priation to Laodicea ; for — though after a long interval — Laodicea comes next after Ephesus in im- portance in Church history. On that ground St. Paul made it the centre of the churches of the Lycus valley. On that ground, also, some claim to the Epistle as an Epistle to the Laodiceans may have sur- vived till the time of Marcion. It is curious that the Muratorian Canon (a.b. 170 ?), after noting the Epistle to the Ephesians among St. Paul's Epistles, adds: "There is in circulation also an Epistle to the Laodiceans . . . forged in the name of Paul, to aid the heresy of ]\Iar- cion . . . which cannot be received into the Catholic Church." Now the Apocryphal Epistle to the Lao- diceans, still extant, is cleaily of later date, made up of quotations or imitations of ^various passages of St. Paul's Epistles, and in no way bearing on Marcionism. It may perhaps be conjectured that Mar- cion, not content with altering the title of our Ej)istle, tampered with it and mutilated it, as we know thit he did in the case of other New Testament books. There may be in the Canon (as afterwards in Epiphanius) a reference to this corrupted form of our Epistle, as a separate work ; and this would be a kind of sur\'ival of the designa- tion of it as an Epistle to the Lao- diceans. On all these grounds, therefore, we must hold it at least highly probable that we have in it an encyclical letter to Ephesus and the sister churches of Asia. III. The Genuineness of the Epistle. — External Evidence. — The external evidence, as has been already said (see Introdaction to the Epistles of the Captivity), is strong — as strong as for any other of St. Paul's Epistles. Among the Apostolic fathers there seem to be unquestionable allusions to passages in it : as in Clement of Rome, chap, xlvi., dwelling on " the one God, one Christ, one spirit of grace . . . one calling " (comp. Eph. iv. 4—6) ; and in Polycarp, chap, xii., uniting the two quotations : "Be ye angry and sin not," " Let not the sun go down upon your wrath" (comp. Eph. iv. 26, 27). In Ignatius (to the Ephesians, chap, xii.) we have EPHESIANS. 207 a remarkable reference to the Ephcsians as '* fellow- mystics " with St. Paul, sharing the mystery of the gospel with him (comp. Eph. i. 9 ; iii. 4—9 ; vi. 19) ; and he adds of St. Paul that, "in all his letter he is mindful of you in Christ Jesus." In the "longer Greek " version of the same Epistle — interpolated at a later date- there is in ohap. vi. a direct quotation, "as Paul wrote to you — one body and one Spirit " (Eph. iv. 4 — 6), and a clear reference to the address (Eph. i. I) in chap. ix. Passing on to a later date, we have the Epistle formally recog- nised in the Muratorian Canon (a.d. 170), apparently representing the tradition of the Church of Rome : quoted repeatedly, and in some cases unmistakably, by Irenseus in the Church of Gaul (about A.D. 130—200) ; quoted also by Clement of Alexandria (about A.D. 150—210), and Tertullian (a.d. 160—240), representing the opposite school of Carthage. It is found in all ancient versions ; and henceforth held without doubt among the acknowledged books in the Church. Dr. Westcott has also shown (*' Canon of the New Testament," jDp. 314, 323, 338) that it is quoted by the heretical and Gnostic writers — the Ophites, Basilides, Yalentinus, and others. Marcion's recognition and criticism of it we have already seen. Internal Evidence. — The doubts of its genuineness which have been advanced in our own times turn entirelj^ on internal evidence. (1) The differences in style and substance between these Epistles of the Captivity and the earlier Epistles of St. Paul have been already discussed. I have ventured to urge that, corresponding as they do to the time and circumstances of the captivity, marking a true and natural development of doctrine, abounding in points both of simi- larity and independent originality, those differences are decisive against the idea of imitation, and strongly confirmatory of Apostolic author- ship. To the Epistle of the Ephesians these remarks bear a special application, for this Epistle bears most distinctly of all the marks of St. Paul's later manner. I may add, also, that in a very special degree the grandeur and profoundness of treatment, which make it one of the gTcat typical Epistles of the New Testament, speak for themselves as to its Apostolic origin. To lose it would be to leave a strange gap in the development of Christian doctrine, and to mar the harmony of the individual and corporate elements in the Scriptural exposition of the concrete Christian life. To ascribe it to the weaker hand of a mere disciple of St. Paul might, but for actual experience, have well been thought impossible. (2) But this Epistle in particukir has been described as simjily an elaborate reproduction of the Colos- sian Epistle, and accordingly represented as of doubtful origi- nality. It is, of course, obvious (as will be shown in the Introduction to the Epistle to the Colossians) that there is a very marked similarity, sometimes in idea, sometimes in actual expression, between the two Epistles. But the more both are studied, the more it must be seen that this similarity is exactly such as belongs to contemporaneousness, and is utterly incompatible with dependence of either upon the other. 208 XE^V TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. In the first place, it is found that there are sections of the Colossian Epistle to which there is nothing to correspond in the Ephesian Epistle, and that these sections are principal and not subordinate. Such are, for example, Col. i. lo — 17 (on the nature of the Lord Jesus Christ), Col. ii. 8 — 18 (the warning against mingled Judaism and Onosticism), and Col. iv. 9 — 17 (the special salutations and cautions). The absence of these in the one case, and their presence in the other, are perfectly intelligible on the theory of contemporaneousness, entirely inexplicable on the theory of dependence. On the other hand, there are sections in the Epistle to the Ephe- sians of the most emphatic origi- nality, which have no counterpart in the other Epistle. Such are the great opening on the " election of God and the gathering up of all in Christ^' (Eph. i. 3—14); the su- blime Apostolic prayer in Eph. iii. 14 — 21 ; the celebrated and ex- haustive passage on the unity of the Church in God (Eph. iv. 4 — 6) ; the profound comparison of marriage to the union of Christ with the Church in Eph. v. 23—33 ; the magnificent description of the Christian armour (Eph. vi. 13 — 17). To these the same remark must apply : to suppose these the work of a copyist appears all but prepos- terous. Next, a careful study shows repeated!)^ and rmmistakably that these differences are not accidental; they arise from a fundamental dis- tinction between the leading ideas in the two Epistles. The Epistle to the Ephesians is the exposition of the reality, the blessing, and the glory, of the Catholic Church as the body of Christ. The famous image of the spiritual temple (in which, perhaps, we may trace some recollection of that magnificent Temple of Artemis, "which aU Asia and the world worshipped") belongs to this Epistle (chap. ii. 20 — 22), and has no place in the other. The passage to which all else works up as a climax is chap, iv. 4 — 6, on the " one Body and the one Spirit." Even the ordinary moral duties and social relations of life are treated in chaps, iv. and v. with a characteristic reference to this great principle of rmity with man in Christ, which is wanting in the parallel passages of the Colos- sian Epistle. On the other hand, the Colossian Epistle, ha\'ing to deal with an incipient Gnosticism, is specially emphatic on the sole headship and the true Godhead of Christ. Its great teaching is of Him, as ''the image of the in- visible God," "in whom all the fulness (the pleroma) of the God- head dwells bodily ' ' (Col. i. 1 5 — 1 7 ; ii. 3 — 8, 10). The passage which occupies the chief place, corre- sponding to the great passage on Unity in the Ephesian Epistle, ia that which dwells on our life as risen with Chiist, and hid in God with Him, who Himself "is our Hfe" (Col. iii. 1—4). But besides this, it may be seen from quite a number of passages that, on the one hand, in detailed passages parallel to each other, the similarity is almost always mingled with clear and character- istic difference, marking an inde- pendent coincidence ; and on the other, that identical expressions occur again and again in entirely different contexts, and in different degrees of prominence. These are exactly the phenomena we may expect when two letters are written EPHESTANS. 20d at the same time to churches which are neither \vhoUy identical nor wholly dissimilar in character, and under the giiidance of dis- tinct, yet complementary, ideas. They are wholly incompatible with dependence or deliberate coi:»yism. On this particular subject, there- fore, 1 cannot but draw the same conclusion as on the general sub- ject of the Epistles of the Cap- tivity, viz., that the indirect evidence which has been thought to weaken, will be actually formd to confirm the strong external evidence for the genuineness of the Epistle. IV. The Contents of the Epistle. — The general character and substance of the Epistle have been already glanced at. It will be sufficient here simply to repeat that the Epistle falls into two great sections — namely, Doctrinal and Practical. In both the one great subject is the Unity in Christ, in some sense of all created being, in a closer sense of humanity, in the closest and most sacred sense of the Holy Catholic Church. In the doctrinal section (chaps. i. 1 — iv. 16) we find this unity noticed in the first chapter as ordained in the eternal predestin- ation of God's love, and manifested in the actual communication to His members of the Eesurrection, the Ascension, and glorification of Christ their head. Next it is shown (in chap, ii.) how the Gentiles are called into this regenerating unity out of the deadness of their old life; and thus at once brought into the covenant of God, and so united with His chosen people of Israel that all alike, as living stones, are built into the great Temple of God. Then (in chap, iii.), after an emphatic declaration of the newness of this mystery of grace, and of the special com- mission for the revelation of it entrusted to St. Paul, there follows a solemn and fervent Apo- stolic prayer for their knowledge of the mystery, not by human wisdom or thought, but by the indwelling light and grace of Christ. Finally, the whole is summed up in a gi-and passage (chap, iv. 1 — 16), which brings out in perfect completeness the whole doctrine of this xmity — first in its grounds, its means, and its con- ditions; next in its variety of spiritual gifts; lastly, in the oneness of the object of all, in the reproduction of the life of Christ in the individual and the Church. The practical section (chaps, iv. 17 — vi. 24) opens with an unique treatment of morality and of human relationship, as dependent upon the mysterious unity of man with man and of man with God. First (chaps, iv. 17 -v. 21), that unity is made the basis of ordinary moral duties towards man, and the safeguard against the besetting sins of heathen society — bitterness, impurity, and reckless excess. Next (chaps. V. 22 — vi. 9), it is shown as the secret of the sacredness of earthly relations of man-iage, of fatherhood, and of mastership. In the fii'st case the idea is worked out with a transcendent beauty and solemnity which have beyond all else hallowed Christian marriage ; in the others it is more briefly touched upon, with a view chiefly to temper and soften the sternness of 14 210 NEW TESTAI^IENT INTRODUCTIONS. a recognised authority. Finally (chap. vi. 10 — 24), this portion of the Epistle is wound up by a magnificent and elaborate descrip- tion of the full panoply of God; and the Epistle then ends, briefly and rather vaguely, with commen- dation of Tychicus and a general form of salutation. The general sketch of this most wonderfxd Epistle will, it is believed, be best explained by the very brief analysis which is here- with subjoined : — 1. Doctrinal Section. (1) The Introduction (chap, i.) : (a) Salutation (chap. i. 1,2); (b) ThanJcsgiving for the elec- tion of the whole Church in God's love, given through redemption by unity with Chi'ist, shown in the calling and faith both of Jew and Gentile (chap. i. 3 — 14) ; (c) Frayerfor their fuller know- ledge of this unity with the risen and ascended Christ, the Head of the whole Church (chap. i. 15 — 23). (2) The Call of the Gentiles (chap, ii.) : (a) Out of the deadness of sin and power of Satan into the new life of the risen Christ, accepted in simple faith, wrought out in good works (chap. ii. 1—10) ; ip) Out of alienation from the covenant, into perfect unity with God's chosen people, all division being broken down, and full access given to the Father ; so that Jew and Gentile alike, built on the one foundation, grow into the living Temple of God (chap. ii. 11—22). (3) Prayer for their Fuller Knowledge (chap, iii.) : {a) The mystery of the universal call, new in revelation, specially intrusted to St. Paul (chap. iii. 1 — 13) ; {b) Fray er for their full know- ledge of it {though passing knoivledge) through the in- dwelling of Christ, acce2)ted in faith and love (chap. iii. 14-19) ; {c) Boxology to the Father through Christ Jesus (chap, iii. 20, 21). (4) Final Summary of Doctrine (chap, iv.) : (a) The unity of the Church in one Spirit, one Lord, one God and Father of all (chap. iv. 1 — 6) ; {b) The diversity of gifts in the glorified Christ (chap, i^. 7-11); (c) The unity of the purpose of all, viz., the individual and corporate regeneration (chap. iv. 12—16). 2. Practical Section. (1) The New Life : learning Christ and growing unto His image (chap. iv. 17 — 24). (2) Conquest of Sin : [a) The conquest of sin in virtue of the sense of unity with man in Christ (chaxj. iv. 25—30) ; [b) Conquest of special besetting sins of malice, impurity, recklessness of excess (chapy. iv. 31 ; V. 21). (3) Regeneration of Social Relations : [a) The relation of husbands and wives consecrated as a type of union of Christ with His Church (chap. v. 22, 23); EPHESIANS. 211 (b) The relation of parents and children halloiced as in the .Lord (chap. vi. 1^4) ; (c) The relation of masters and servants made a brother- hood of service to one Master (chap. vi. 5 — 9). (4) Final Exhortation : The armour of God and the fight against the j^ozvers of evil (chap. vi. 10 — 17). 3. Conclusion. {a) Special desire of their prayers for him in his captivity (chap. vi. 18 — 20); (i) Commendation of Tychicus (chap. vi. 21, 22); (c) Salutation and blessing {chai^. vi. 23, 24). In conclusion, I may add that it does not appear to me fanciful to suppose that the teaching- of this Epistle has as special an applicability to our age as the teaching of the Galatian or Roman Epistles had to the sixteenth century. For in all spheres of life — the political, the social, and the ecclesiastical alike — it would seem that our prominent questions are not those of indi- vidualism, but of socialism in the true sense of the word. Society is contemplated in its corporate life; in its rights over the individual ; in the great eternal principles which it truly embodies and par- tially represents ; and, moreover, this contemplation has a breadth of scope which refuses to be con- fined within the limits of family, or nation, or age. Humanity itself is considered, both historically and philosophically, as only the highest element in the order of the universe which is itself bo\ind together in a unity of unbroken connection and continuous develoj^ment. It is asked. What has Christianity to declare as a gospel to society at large, and as a key to the mys- terious relation of humanity with creation, and so with Him who created it ? To that question, per- haps, the answer is nowhere more truly given than in the Epistle to the Fphesians. AYe need a real and living imity; but it must be such as will preserve the equally sacred individuality of freedom. This Epistle presents it to us in its magnificent conception of the unity of all with God in the Loid Jesus Chi-ist. PHILIPPIANS. Bt the Eight Rev. ALFRED BARRY, D.D. I. Time, Place, and Occa- sion of the Epistle.— The indi- cations of the time and place of this Epistle are unusiially clear. It is written by St. Paul "in bonds" (chap. i. 7 — 13) ; in the Frcvtormm (chap. i. 13), that is, under the charge of the Prastorian guard; it sends greeting fi'om the "saints of Caesar's household" (chap. iv. 21) ; it expresses an expectation of some crisis in his imprisonment (chap. i. 20 — 26), and a confident hope of revisiting Philippi (chap. i. 26; ii. 24). All these indica- tions place it in the Roman im- prisonment of St. Paul — which we know (Acts xxviii. 30) to have lasted without trial or release for "two whole years," and which certainly began about a.d. 61. The date of the Epistle must there- fore be fixed somewhere about the year a.d. 62 or 63. Nor is the occasion of the Epistle less obvious. The Church at Phi- lippi now, as at an earlier time (chap. iv. 10—19), had sent contri- butions to St. Paul's necessities, under the distress and destitution of imprisonment, when he was unable to maintain himself by the labour of his own hands, as he had formerly done at Thessalonica, Corinth, and Ephesus. Epai)hro- ditus, their messenger, through his affectionate exertions on St. Paul's behalf, had fallen into dangerous illness, and on his convalescence had been seized with home- sickness, aggravated by the uneasiness of knowing that his danger had been reported to his friends at home (chap. ii. 2 5—30). St. Paul, there- fore, sent him back with this Letter, the immediate object of which was to convey his thanks and blessing for the generosity of the Philip- pians, and to commend warmly the devotion of Epaphroditus, which had been in gi'cat degree the cause of his illness. II. The Church to which it was written. — Of the first preaching at Philippi we have a full and graphic account in Acts xvi. The preaching began, as usual, from a Jewish centre, but this was only a proscuche, or oratory (Acts xvi. 13)— not, as at Thessalonica, a synagogue (Acts xvii. 1) ; and the whole history shows no indication of any strong Jewish influence. The fii'st convert named is Lydia, an Asiatic of Thyatii'a, not a Jewess, but "one who worshipped God," a "proselyte of the gate." The fia-st opposition came not from PHILTPriAXS. 213 the Jews, as at Thessalonica (Acts xvii. 5, 6, 13), but from the masters of the "damsel possessed with a spirit of divination," simply becaus*.- by the exorcism of the Apostle the "hope of their gain was gone." The accusation levelled against .St. Paul and his companion was one which was intimately connected with the peculiar position of Phi- lippi as a Roman colony — a frag- ment (as it were) of the imperial city itself. "We note, indeed, that at this very time (Acts xviii. 2) " Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Pome," and it is at least probable that this decree of banishment might extend to tlie Roman colonies as distinguished from the ordinary provincial cities. Accordingly, in the accusation itself stress was laid on the fact that the accused were "Jews," and the charge was that they preached a religio illicita, involving customs which it was "not lawful for the Philippians to receive, being Romans" (Acts xvi. 21). The Church was, therefore, mainly a Gentile Church — the firstfruits of European Christianity — and its attachment to the Apostle of the Gentiles was especially strong and fervent. The Philippians alone, it appears, ofiered — certainly from them alone St. Paul consented to receive — those contributions to his necessities, which elsewhere (see Acts XX. 33—35 ; 2 Cor. xi. 7—12 ; 1 Thess. i. 9 ; 2 Thess. iii. 8) he thought it best to refuse for the gospel's sake. The foundation of the Church had been laid amidst a persecution, in which the Roman magistrates, with a characteristic dislike of all foreign superstitions likely to lead to uproar, and a characteristic dis- regard of justice towards two or three obscure Jews, simply played into the hands of mob violence. The step which St. Paul afterwards took of asserting his citizenship and forcing the magistrates to confess their wrong-doing (Acts xvi. 37, 38) looks like a precaution to render the recurrence of arbitrary perse- cution less likely after his departure. But we gather from this Epistle (chap. i. 27—30) that the Church had still, like the sister Church at Thessalonica (1 Thess. i. 6 ; ii. 14) and the other Macedonian churches (2 Cor. viii. 2), to undergo " the same conflict" of suffering from "their adversaries," "which they had seen in him." It gi-ew up under the bracing air of trial, with a peculiar stedfastness, warm- heartedness, and simplicity, appa- rently unvexed by the speculative waywardness of Corinth, or the wild heresies of Ephesus or Colossne. Again like the Tbessalonian Church, its dangers w^ere mainly practical (see chap, iii.) ; the Juda- ising influence was probably foreign and not very formidable ; the ten- dencies to Antinomian profligacy (chap. iii. 17 — 21), to some division by party spirit (chaps, ii. 1 — 4 ; iv. 2, 3), to occasional despondency under trial (chap. i. 28), hardly appear to have affected the Church widely or seriously. In its condi- tion, accordingly, St. Paul could rejoice almost without reserve of sorrow or anxiety. Of St. Paul's subsequent visits to Philippi we have no full record. We cannot doubt that he visited the city on his way from Ephesus to Macedonia and Greece on the third missionary circuit (Acts xx. 3). The common tradition, exceed- ingly probable in itself, dates the Second Epistle to the Corinthians from Philippi on that occasion. 214 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. We know (Acts xx. 6) that it was from Philippi that he started, some months after, on his last journej' to Jerusalem. At a xoei-iod subse- quent to this Epistle, we learn (1 Tim. i. 3) that St. Paul, appa- rently after a visit to Ephesus, " went into Macedonia " after his first captivity, and so, no doubt, fulfilled his hope of revisiting this well-loved Church. After this we have no notice of the Church in history till we read of their kindly reception of Ignatius on his way to martyrdom, and study the Epistle of Polycarp to them, written shortly after, mainly practical and horta- tory, and implying, with but slight reservation, a still strong and vigor- ous Christianity, and a constant grateful memory of the gTcat Apostle. (See, for example, chap, i.— '* I rejoiced greatly with you in our Lord Jesus Christ, because ye have adopted the imitation of true love . . . because the firm root of your faith, celebrated from ancient times, remains even until now, and bears fruit unto the Lord Jesus Christ;" chap. iii. — "Neither I nor any like me can follow out fully the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul, who, when he came among you, taught accurately and durably the word of truth.") Ter- tuUian also alludes to it {cle Prcescr. xxxvi.) as one of the churches where the " authentic letters of the Apostles" — no doubt, this Epistle itself — were read. Afterwards we have little reference to it in Church history. Like Colossse, it sank into insigniiicance. III. The genuineness of the Epistle. — External Evidence. — The evidence for the genuineness of the Epistle is very strong. In all ancient catalogues, from the Muratorian Fragment (a.d. 170) downwards, in all ancient versions, beginning with the Peschito and the old Latin, it is placed among the undoubted Epistles of St. Paul. In Christian writings, before the end of the second century, know- lodge of it may be distinctly traced; after that time it is quoted continu- ally. Thus, in the Apostolic Fathers, to say nothing of slighter indications which have been noted (as by Dr. Westcott, Canon of the Neiv Testa- ment, chap, i., and Dr. Lightfoot, in his Introduction to this Epistle), St. Polycarp, in his Epistle to the Philip- j)ians (chap, iii.), expressly declares that St. Paul, ** when absent, wrote letters to them, by searching into which they can still be built up in the faith," and speaks of them as " praised in the beginning of this Epistle" (chap. xi.). Nor are there wanting expressions in his letter (su^-h as the "using our citizenship worthily of Christ," "the enemies of the cross," the "rejoicing with them in the Lord," the "not running in vain," &c.) which not obscurely indicate refer- ence to the text of our Epistle itself. Again Dr. Lightfoot quotes from the Testaments of the Tivelve Patriarchs, a Judieo-Christian work, dating early in the second centurj'-, certain expressions — " the form of God" and the "fashion of men" (see Phil. ii. 6), the "luminaries" of heaven (see Phil. ii. 15), and, above all, the unique phrase " the bowels {heart) of the Son of God" (see Phil. i. 8) — which indicate unmistakably knowledge of this Epistle. Perhaps the earliest direct quota- tion of it is in the celebrated Epistles of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne (a.d. 177), on the martyrdoms in the persecution of PHILIPPIANS. 215 Marcus Aurelius (Eusebius, Ecclesi- astical History, V. 2) — where we find the great passage : " He being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to bo equal with God," &c. Then, as in other cases, the habit of quotation begins in Irenteus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertul- lian, and continues afterwards unbroken. Tertullian, as we have already seen, apparently speaks of the Letter as being read as an Apostolic letter in the Philippian Church ; and in his controversy with Marcion (v. 20) so quotes it as to show that it had escaped the destructive criticism and arbitrary mutilation in which Marcion so constantly anticipated the critical scepticism of later tim(?s. Internal Evidence. — But, strong as external evidence is, it is in this case far weaker than the internal, which may be said to rise almost to demonstration. The strong marks of personality which we trace in every line, the unstudied frequency of historical allusion and of un- designed coincidences with histori- cal records, the simple and natural occasion of writing, in the reception of _the offerings and the illness of Epaphroditus, the absence of all formal doctrine or ecclesiastical purpose, the fulness and warmth of personal affection,— all are unmis- takable marks of genuineness, all are fairly inconceivable on the supposition of imitation or forgery. The character of St. Paul, as uncon- sciously drawn in it, is unquestion- ably the same character which lives and glows in the Corinthian and Galatian Epistles ; and yet there is in it an indescribable growth into greater calmness and gentle- ness, which corresponds remarkably •Nvith advance of age and change of circumstances. There are also marked similnritics, both of style and expression, with the earlier Epistles, and, above all, with the Epistle to the Romans, the last of the earlier group, which will be found noted in detail on the various passages.* There is also that min- gling of identity and development of idea which is notable in all the Epistles of the Captivity. But in this case, perhaps, the similarity is greater, and the diversit}^ less, than in the other Epistles of the same period. It is, therefore, not surprising that, even in the freest speculation of the higher criticism, there are but few examples of scepticism as to the genuineness of this Epistle. IV. The main Substance of the Epistle.— (1) The Ticture of the Writer and the licceivers. — The first and simplest impression made by this Epistle is the vivid portraiture which it gives us of St. Paul himself — especially in the conflict of desire for the death which is the entrance to the nearer presence of Christ, and for the longer life, which will enable him to gather a fuller harvest for Christ — ^in the striking union of affection and thankfulness towards the Philippians, with a dignified inde- pendence and a tone of plenary authority — in the sensitiveness to the soiTOw and inactivity of im- * Perhaps the most notable are : — (o) Phil. ii. 10, 11, compared with Rom. xiv. 11. Qj) Phil. iii. 10,11, compared with Rom. Y\. 5. (c) Phil. iii. 19, compared with Rom. x^i. 18. {(J) Phil. iv. 18, compared with Rom. xii. 1. (e) Phil. iii. 5, 6, compared with 2 Cor. xi. 22, Rora. xi. 1. It maybe noted that in all these cases there is sliiiilarity with difference -the characteristic uf indepen- dent coincidence, not of imitation. 216 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. prisonment, overcome and finally absorbed into an almost unequalled fulness of joy in the Lord. Side by side with this we are next struck with the picture which it gives us of the Macedonian Christianity at Philippi— not unlike that of Thessa- lonica, though, it would seem, less chequered by fanaticism or disorder, and certainly singularly accordant with the Macedonian character, as it paints itself at once speculatively inferior and practically superior to the Greek, in the pages of history. The Philippian Christianity is pre- eminently vigorous,loyal,and warm- heai'ted, courageous and patient, little disturbed either by speculative refinements or speculative inven- tions, hardly needing any warning, except against the self-assertion which is the natural excrescence of earnestness, or any exhortation, except to a deeper thoughtfulness, wliich might " overflow into know- ledge," and prove ''the things which are really excellent." There is no letter of St. Paul's so absolutely free from the necessity of rebuke, and, accordingly, there is none so full of 3 oj'-, in spite of all the cir- cumstances of suffering and anxiety under which it was written. (2) The Condition of the Church at Rome. — The next great subject of interest is the light thrown by this Epistle on the progress of the Church at Eome during St. Paul's imprisonment. Of his preaching to the Jews, the Asiatic Gentiles, and the Greeks, we have plain historical record in the Acts of the Apostles. That record fails us at the moment when he reaches the gTcat centre of heathen civilisation at Rome, simply telling us that his imprison- ment was not allowed to be a hin- drance to his preaching, first (as always) with the Jews, then, on their rejection of the gospel, to the Gentiles who were " willing to hear it." Now, we know by the history of the Neronian persecution in Tacitus that, less than ten years after St. Paul's arrival in Rome, the Christians were already " a vast multitude," not only in the Eastern home of their religion, but in the metropolis itself. While we per- ceive from St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans that, before that arrival Christianity was firmly established in Rome, and suspect that the ignor- ance of the Jewish leaders con- cerning " the sect everywhere spoken against " (Acts xxviii. 22) was in great degree affected, yet we cannot but see that these ten years must have been years of rapid progress, in order to justify, even approximately, the description of the Roman historian. NaturaUj'-, we conclude that St. Paul's pre- sence, even in his prison, must have given the chief new impulse to such progress, and inquire eagerly for any indications of his actual discharge to the Romans of the debt of gospel preaching which he had long ago acknowledged as due to them (Rom. i. 14, 15). .To this inquiry almost the only answer is found in the Epistle to the Philippians. There we learn that, as we might have expected, St. Paul's bonds "turned out" to the great *' further- ance of the gospel." Wherever his prison actually was, it gave -him opportunity of influence over the Praetorian guards, and all the rest of the world, civilian or military, who frequented their quarters ; it gave him access, moreover, to those of Caesar's household — that large community of the domiis Augusta which in- cluded all varieties of occupation, PHILIPPIANS. 217 character, and rank. That the earlier Christianity of Rome was largely under Jewish influence we learn from the whole argainient of the Epistle to the Romans ; and it has heen often remarked that the names included in the long list of salutations in the last chapter show a preponderance of Greek nation- ality in the converts themselves. But of those who came under the spell of St. Paul's presence, prob- ably comparatively few would be Jews, although indeed at this time, through the influence of Poppasa, the Jewish element might be more than usually prominent in Caesar's household ; and while the greater number of that household who came in contact with him would be slaves of various nationalities, still, in the higher officers and among the Prae- torian soldiery, many would be of true Roman origin. Remembering the friendship of Seneca for Burrhus, the Praetorian Prefect at the time of St. Paul's arrival, and the former conduct of Gallio, Seneca's brother, towards the Apostle at Corinth, many ha-^'e delighted to speculate on the pro- bability of some direct intercourse between the Apostle of the Gentiles and the philosopher of the later and more religious Stoicism, who was then the leader of higher Roman thought. But, however this may be, and whatever may be the real weight of the various apparent similanties to familiar Stoic phrase- ology which may be traceable in the Epistle, those who have any remembrance of the eagerness of Roman society at this time for new religions, new mysteries, and even new superstitions, from the East, will find no difficulty in believing that one who was placed, by the circumstance of his imprisonment, in the imperial court itself, might easily have produced a deep im- pression on men of Roman birth, perhaps of high Roman rank. This new Christianity would therefore probably be of a type, more purely Gentile, less predomi- nantly Oriental, than the Chris- tianity to which the Epistle to the Romans was addressed. Of the division between the old and the new the Epistle shows traces, in the description of those who preached Christ "of good will" to St. Paul, and those who i)reached in "factiousness and vain-glory;" for it seems clear, from his rejoic- ing that "every way Christ was preached," that the division was as yet one of mere faction and party, not of the contrast of false with true doctrine, which we know that he treated with stern, uncompro- mising severity. (See 2 Cor. xi. 1—4 ; Gal. i. 6—9.) Like aU such divisions, it probably marked and justified itself by some differences in religious teaching and religious life : but if these existed, they did not go down to the foundation. The time, indeed, was not far distant, when the fall of Jerusalem, and the obvious passing away of the whole Jewish dispensation, struck the final blow to the existence of Judaism in the Christian Church. In spite, therefore, of this division, it seems clear that at the time of the Philippian Epistle Christianity had advanced, and was advancing, with rapid strides. "The city which is in heaven" was already beginning to rise from its founda- tions in the " great Babylon of the Seven Hills," now the very type of the kingdom of the earth, destined hereafter to be, even visibly, the metropolis of Western Christi- anity. 218 NEW TESTAMENT INTKODUCTIONS. (3) The main Subjects of the Epistle. — Turning- to the teach- ing of the Epistle itself, the main interest centres round the great passage in the second chapter (ii. 6 — 11), which is the very creed of the Incarnation, Passion, and Exaltation of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is a feature which has been noticed already in the General Introduction to the Epistles of the Captivity. Here, therefore, it is only necessary to remark that its advanced Christology is made the more striking by the occasion of its occurrence, which is, in point of form, simply incidental, in enforcement of the familiar exhor- tation to follow the mind of Christ Jesus in humility and self-sacrifice ; and that the singular simplicity and clearness of its enunciation of truth stand to the profounder and more mysterious teaching on the same subject in the Epistle to the Colossians, much as, in later times, the simplicity of a Western creed stands to the greater subtlety of an Eastern. Next in interest, though after a long inter- val, is the light thrown (in chap. iii.) on the obstinate persistence in Macedonia of the old Judaising influence, elsewhere decaying or passing into new forms ; and the appearance both of the pretensions to perfection (chap. iii. 12—16) and of the Antinomian reckless- ness (chap. iii. 17 — 21) — a reck- lessness that is sometimes in asso- ciation with these pretensions and at other times is in open revolt against them — with which we are but too familiar in subsequent Church histoiy. (4) Analysis of the Epistle. — A short general sketch of the con- tents of the Epistle is here sub- joined: — 1. The First S3ction (original Letter ?). (1) Introduction. [a) Salutation (chap. i. 1, 2) ; [b) Thanksgiving for their ^'fel- lowship " in the xoork of the gospel., specially shown towards himself (chap. i. 3 -8); {c) Prayer for their fuller know- ledge and increase of fruit- fulness to the end (chap. i. 9—11). (2) Declaration of the Posi- tion AT Rome. (a) The progress of the gospel throughhisbonds, stimulat- ing preaching of the gos- pel, partly in good will, partly in strife, but in any case a cause of joy (chap. i. 12—18) ; {b) His own division of feeling, between desire to depart, and a willingness to remain for their sakes, which he knows ivill be realised (chap, i. 19—26). (3) Exhortation : {a) To steadfast boldness under persecution, noiv present or imminent (chap. i. 27 — 30); {b) To unity of spirit in the humility and self-sacrifice of " the mind of Christ Jesus ^^ (chap. ii. 1 — 4). (4) The Doctrine of Christ. («) His humility in the Incar- nation : stooping from the form of God to the form of man (chap. ii. 5 — 7) ; (b) His second humility in the Passion (chap. ii. 8) ; (c) His exaltation above all created being (chap. ii. 9 — 11). (5) Original Conclusion of the Epistle. (a) 'Final exhortation to obe- PHILIPPIAXS. 219 dlence, quietness, puritj/, joy with him in sacrijice (chap. ii. 12—18) ; {b) Mission and commendation of Timotheus as St. FauVs forerunner (chap. ii. 19 — 24); (c) Mission and commendation of Epaphroditus (chap. ii. 25—30) ; {d) Final ^^ farewell in the Lord'^ (chap. iii. 1). 2. The Second Section (Post- script ?). (I) Practical Wahnings : (a) Against Judaism, by the example of his oun renun- ciation of all Jewish privi- lege (cbap. iii. 2 — 10) ; {h) Against claim of perfection, again enforced by his oun example (chap, iii. 11 — 16) ; (c) Against Antinomian pro- fligacy, as univorthy of the " citizens of heaven " (chap, iii. 17— 2 i). (2) EXHORTATIOXS Rkxew'eu : (-7) To unity (chap. iv. 1 — S) ; lb) To joy, t ha nlf Illness, and peace (chap. iv. 4 — 7) ; {c) To following of all good, in the fulness in which he had taught it (chap. iv. 8, 9). (3) ACKXOWLEDGMEXT OF OF- FERINGS. {a) Rejoicitig in their reneiced care for him (chap. iv. 10 -14) ; {b) Eemembrance of their for- mer liberality (chap. iv. lo -17); {c) Thanks and blesr,ing (chap, iv. 18—20). (4) Cox-cLL-DiNG Salutation and Blessing. COLOSSIANS. lir THE Right Eev. ALFEED BARRY, D.D. I. The Time, Place, and Oc- casion of "Writing. — There are in this Epistle indications of the time and place of writing similar to those already noticed in the Epistles to the Ephesians and Phi- lippians. It is written in prison : for St. Paul bids the Colossians "remember his bonds" (chap. iv. 18), and designates Aristarchus as his "fellow-prisoner " (chap. iv. 10). Like the Epistle to the Ephesians, it is sent by Tychicus, with pre- cisely the same official commenda- tion of him as in that Epistle (chap. iv. 7, 8 ; comp. Eph. vi. 21, 22) ; but with him is joined Onesimus, the Colossian slave, the bearer of the Epistle to Philemon. The per- sons named in the concluding- salutations (chap. iv. 7 — 14) — Ai^s- tarchus, Marcus, Epaphras, Luke, Demas, and " Jesus, called Justus " — are all, except the last, named in the corresponding part of the Epistle to Philemon (verses 23, 24) ; two of them, Aristarchus and St. Luke, are known to have accom- panied the Apostle on his voyage, as a captive, to Rome (Acts xxvii. 2) : and another, Tychicus, to have been his companion on the journey to Jerusalem, which preceded the beginning of that captivity at Csesarea (Acts xx. 4). A direction is given to forward this Epistle to Laodicea, and to obtain and read a letter from Laodicea (chap. iv. 16), which is, in all probability, our Epistle to the Ephesians— an Epistle (see the Introduction to it) addressed, indeed, primarily to Ephesus, but apparently also an Encyclical Letter to the sister churches of Asia. All these indications may be said to point to one conclusion — not only that the Epistle is one of the Epistios of the Roman captivity (about A.D. 61 — 63), but that it is a twin Epistle with the Epistle to the Ephesians, sent at the same time and by the same hand, and designed to be interchanged with it in the Churches of Colossae and Laodicea. These indications are confirmed most decisively by the substance of the Ej)istle itself, which (as will be seen below) pre- sents, on the one hand, the most striking similarities to the Epistle to the Ephesians, and, on the other, differences almost equally striking and characteristic — thus contradict- ing all theories of derivation of one from the other, and supi^orting very strongly the idea of indepen- dent contemporaneousness and co- incidence of thought. The occasion of writing seems evidently to have been a visit to the Apostle from Epaphi-as, the COLOSSIANS. 221 lirst preacher of the gospel at Colossse, and the profound anxiety- caused both to him and to St. Paul (chaps, ii. 1 ; iv. 12, 13) by the news which he brought of the rise among the Colossians (and prob- ably the Christians of Laodicea and Hierapolis also) of a peculiar form of error, half Jewish, half Gnostic, which threatened to be- guile them from the simplicity of the gospel into certain curious mazes of SjDCCulation as to the God- head and the outgrowth of various emanations from it ; to create a separation between those who be- lieved themselves perfect in this higher knowledge and the mass of their brethren : and, above all, to obscure or obliterate the sole divine mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ. To warn them against these forms of error — the last development of the Judaism which had been so formidable an enemy in time past, and the first anticipation of an in- tellectual and spiritual bewilder- ment which was to be still more formidable in the future — St. Paul writes this Letter. The Colossian Church was indeed to receive a copy from Laodicea of our Epistle to t ho Ephesians ; but in an En- cyclical Letter this peculiar form of heresy could not well be touched upon. Epaphras was for the pre- sent to continue at Rome, and (see Philem. verse 24) to share St. Paul's imprisonment. Mark, the nephew of Barnabas, then with St. Paul, was perhaps coming to Co- lossa3 (chap. iv. 10), but not yet. Accordingly, by Tychicus, the bearer of the Encyclical Letter, and Onesimus, a fugitive Colossian ^lave, whom the Apostle was about to send back to Philemon, his master, this Letter is despatched. Partly it repeats and enforces the teaching of the other Epistle, but regards these common truths from a different point of view, designed tacitly to correct the errors rife at ColossBB ; partly it deals directly with those errors themselves, im- ploring the Colossians to break through the delusions of their new "philosophy and vain deceit," and to return to the simplicity of the gospel, in which they had all been one in the one mediation of the Lord Jesus Christ. II. The Church to which it is addressed. — The Church of ColossGe, unlike the Churches of Ephesus and Philippi, finds no re- cord in the Acts of the Apostles ; for, although this city is not very far from Ephesus, we gather that it was not one of the churches founded or previously visited by St. Paul per- sonally (chap. ii. 1 ; comj). chap. i. 4). But it appears, from what is apparently the true reading of chap. i. 7, that Epaphras, named as its first evangelist, and still, to some extent, in charge of it and the neighbouring churches of Laodicea and Hierapolis (chap. iv. 12, 13), was not only a fellow-servant but a representative of St. Paul in his mission to Colossae. We can, therefore, hardly be wrong in re- ferring the conversion of the Co- lossians to the time of St. Paul's three years' stay at Ephesus, during which we are expressly told that * ' all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks " (Acts xix. 10), and supposing that indirectly through Epa]3hras the Christianity of the Colossians was due to the in- fluence of that great Apostolic preaching under which " the word of God grew mightily and pre- vailed." ^iVe find also that St. 222 NEW TESTAMENT INTKODUCTIONS. Paul had intimate personal ac- quaintance, and what he calls em- phatically " partnership," with Philemon (see Philem. verse 17), apparently a leading memher of the Church at Colossae. It is not unlikely that through him also the Apostle had been able to influence ■^ the foundation or growth of that Church. These circumstances ex- plain the style and tone of this Letter, which seems to stand mid- way between the personal famili- arity and imhesitating authority of such Epistles as the Epistles to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Grala- tians, and PhiHppians, addressed to churches founded directly by St. Paul, and the courteous reserve of the Epistle to the Eomans, ad- dressed to a Church over which he could claim none of the authority of a founder. This is, perhaps, especially notable in chap, ii., where St. Paul prefaces his de- finite and authoritative denun- ciation of the peculiar errors be- setting the Colossian Church with the half-apologetic introduction : *' I would that ye knew what great conflict I have for you, and for them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not seen my face in the flesh." The position and history of Colossae are admirably described by Dr. Lightfootin his Introduction to this Epistle, sect. 1. It lay in the valley of the Lycus, a tributary of the Masander, near Laodicea and Hierapolis. These two cities stand face to face, about six miles from each other, on opposite sides of the valley, and ten or twelve miles farther up, on the river itself, lies Colossae, so that any one approach- ing it from Ephesus or from the sea-coast woidd pass by Laodicea. The three cities thus form a group, so that they might naturally re- ceive the gospel at the same time, and the Christian communities in them might easily be under the same general charge. They seem to have been poUtically united under the Eoman Government, and to have been distinguished by a common trade ; like Thyatira, they were known for their manufacture of dyes, especially purple dyes, and derived considerable wealth there- from. Colossae had been once a place of importance. It is described by Herodotus (chap. vii. 20) as being, at the time of Xerxes' in- vasion of Greece, " a great city of Phrygia," the site of which is marked by a subterranean dis- appearance of the river Lycus; and by Xenoj)hon {Anab. i. 2, § 6), atjout a century later, as " a city great and prosperous." But at the time at which this Epistle was written C'^lossa3 Avas of far less note than the wealthy Laodicea, the metropoHs of the district, or Hiera- polis, well known as a place of resort for medicinal baths, and consecrated both to the Greek Apollo and the Phrygian Cybele. In the Apocalyptic letters to the Seven Churches of Asia it finds no mention, being probably looked upon as a dependency of the proud and wealthy Church of Laodicea. After the Apostolic age, while Laodicea and, in less degree, Hiera- polis are well known, Colossre sinks into utter insignificance. It may possibly have been laid in ruins by one of the earthquakes which are known to have been common in these regions. Com- paratively few remains of it are now found, and the very ortho- graphy of the name {Colossa, or Colassce) has, it appears, been matter of dispute. It is notable COLOSSIAXS. 223 that a Church so much honoured and cared for by St. Paul should have had hereafter so ohscure and so adverse a future.* HI. The Genuineness of the Epistle. — External Evidence. — Speaking generally, the condition of the external evidence is much the same with this as with the other two Epistles. It is included imhesitatingly in all canons, from the Muratorian Canon (a.d. 170 r) downwards, and in all versions, be- ginning with the Peshito and the Old Latin in the second century. Quotations or references to it have not, however, been traced in any of the Apostolic fathers. The first distinct allusion to it is in Justin Martyr (a.d. 110 — 170 r), who says {Apol. i. 46, ii. 6 ; Dial. c. Try ph. c. 100):— "We were taught that Chi-ist is the first-bom of God;" "We have acknowledged Him as the first -bom of God, and before all creatui'es;" "Through Him God set all things in order." (Comp. chap. i. 15—17.) The nextisTheo- j philus of Antioch, who died about A.D. 180:— "God begat the Word, the first-bom before all creation." , After this, in Irenseus, Clement of > Alexandria, and Tertullian, direct \ quotation begins and continues ; uninterruptedly in all Christian | writings. (See Westcott, C^now o/j the Xiw Testametit.) The external I evidence is therefore strong. Kever until these later days of arbitrary criticism has the genuineness of the Epistle been questioned. Internal Evidence. — This Epistle, far more than the Epistle to the Philippians, perhaps a httle less * Views of the country near the sup- posed site of Colossae, aud of the rains of Tjaodicea and Hierapolis, are given in Lewin's St. Favl, Vol. II., pp. 357—360. than the Epistle to the Ephesians, bears traces of what I have ven- tured to call St. Paul's "third manner." To the correspondence of the change, both in style and substance, traceable in these Epistles, to the alteration of St. Paul's circumstances, and the natural development of the gospel and of the Church, I have already referred in the General Intro- duction to the Epistles of . the Captivity, and given reasons for maintaining that this change, which has been often made an argument against the genuineness of these Epistles, presents to us phenomena inexplicable on any supposition of imitation or forgery, but perfectly intelligible if we accept the Apostohc authorship. Some critics, however — of whom Dr. Holtzmann (in his Kritik der Epheser- und Kolosscr- briefe) may be taken as the chief representative — insist on tracing extensive inter- polations (almost amounting to a \'irtual reconstruction) in what they believe themselves able to discover as the originals both of this Epistle and the Epistle to the Ephesians. Except so far as these hj-potheses depend upon the supposed traces of a later Gnosticism in both Epistles, but especially in the Epistle to the Colossians, they seem to resolve themselves into the idea that every passage bearing strong similarity to the teaching of St. Peter and St. John must have been altered or interpolated with a view to accommodation. Without any his- torical evidence that is in any degi'ee substantial, ignoring both the probabilities of the case and the indii-ect evidence of Holy Scripture, and disregarding the utter absence of any support whatever in the witness of Chiistian antiquity, they 224 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. assume an absolute antagonism be- tween St. Paul and the Apostles of the Circumcision, and pronounce every indication of an underljdng unity, and a true development of common doctrine, which contra- dicts this assumjption, to be a mark of interpolation or falsification by a later hand. With the rejection of this arbitrary assumption, the greater part of the ingeniously - constructed fabric of destructive criticism falls to the groimd. But, indeed, it aj)pears difficult to conceive how any one attentively studying either of these Epistles, without any preconceived hypo- thesis, can fail to recognise the internal consistency and unity — all the more striking because indicatiag a free method, as distinct from a well - squared artificial system — which runs through the whole, and makes the theory of interpolation even more improbable than the theory of imitation or forgery. Nothing, for example, is more notable in this Epistle than the substantial unity, under marked difference of form, which connects the positive state- ment of doctrine in the first chapter (verses 14 — 23) with the polemical re-statement in the second chapter. In the former we trace anticipation of the latter, and (so to speak) pre- paration for the more explicit development of the attack on doctrinal error; in the latter, the very repetitions, with variations, of passages in the first chapter are indicative of a free treatment of the truths previously dealt with by the same hand, and are utterly unlike the tame reproductions or artificial modifications of a mere copyist. The remarkable indica- tions, again, of the co-existence of similarity and distinctness between this Epistle and the Epistle to the Ephesians (noticed in the Introduc- tion to that Epistle), as they preclude the theory of dependence or imita- tion in either, so are equally fatal to the idea of an artificial inter- polation and reconstruction by later hands. They indicate at every point a free, almost unconscious, coincidence, omitting or preserving the parallelisms of idea and expres- sion by a kind of natural selection. They mark a likeness of living organic gTOwths, not of artificial and heterogeneous fabrics. Nor should we omit to notice the sus- tained power of these Einstles, differing as to the peculiar style of each, but equally conspicuous in both. The Epistle to the Ephesians has about it a certain calm and almost mystic eloquence, a beauty of meditative completeness of idea, unbroken by necessities of special teaching ».>t special warning, which well suits a general Apostolic mes- sage to Christians as Chiistians, in which we seem almost to hear the utterance of an inspired mind, simply contemplating the divine truth in the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and speaking out, so far as they can be spoken, the thoughts which it stirs within — conscious of God and itself, only half conscious of those to whom the utterance is addressed. In the Epistle to the Colossians, on the other hand, we find a far greater abruptness, force, and earnestness. The free course of the Apostolic thought, which occasionally, perhaps, rises to an even greater height, is, on the whole, checked and modified by the con- stant remembrance of pressing needs and pressing dangers — ac- cordingly developing some elements and leaving others compai-atively undeveloped : and so, while perhaps COLOSSIAXS. 225 increasing intensity, certainly in- terfering to some extent -with, the majestic symmetry of the universal revelation. Each Epistle has its marked characteristics; and these, imquestionably, so run through the whole as to destroy even any show of plausibility in the theory of interpolation. With regard to the supposed ana- chronisms in the references to what afterwards became peciiliaiities of the Gnostic system, it .will here be sufficient to say that, on more attentive examination, not only do the supposed objections to the genuineness of the Epistle disappear, but the phenomena of the " philosophy and vain deceit " touched upon in this Epistle, ^hen compared with the opinions either of the past or of the future, accord so remarkably with the charac- teiistics of the period to which the Epistle claims to belong, as to add a fresh confirmation of the conclusions already deri^-ed from a consideration of the external B'S'idence, and by the study of the coherence and vigour of the Epistle itself. In this case, therefore, as in that of the others, we may without the least hesitation dismiss the ques- tions which have been ingeniously raised, and with imdisturbed con- fidence draw from the Epistle the rich treasui'es of Apostolic teaching. IV. The main Substance of the Epistle.— In considering the substance of the Epistle, we must distinguish bet^^eeu the large amount of matter common to it with the Epistle to the Ephesians and the portion which is peculiar to this Epistle alone. Iij regard of the common matter, it may be said generally that it is found treated with a greater width of scope and completeness of hand- ling in the Epistle to the Ephesians. It is best studied there in the first instance (see, accordingly, the Intro- duction and Analysis of that Epistle), and then illustrated by comparison and contrast with the corresponding passages in this Epistle. It will easily be seen that this illus- tration is at eveiy point full of suggestiveness and variety. Literal identities are exceedingly rare ; in almost e^'ery set of parallel passages the treatment in the two Epistles presents some points of character- istic variety, either in expression or in meaning. Speaking generally, this variety depends on two causes. The first turns on the speciality of the Epistle, addressed to a single Church, thoroughly, though indi- rectly, known to St. Paul ; and the generality of the other, approach- ing more nearly to the character of a treatise rather than that of a letter. The second and the more important cause of this variety is the subtle adaptation even of details to the characteristic doc- tiines which stand out in the two Epistles respectively. This last consideration leads on naturally to the examination of the portions of the Epistle to which there is nothing to correspond in the Ephesian Epistle. («) We have the passages in the first and last chapters which refer to the foundation of the Colossian Church by Epaphras, the declara- tion to them of the "truth of the Gospel," and the practical fruitful- ness of that teaching (chap. i. 6 — 11) ; next, to the deep anxiety felt by Epaj)hras and St. Paul himself for their steadfastness in the simple truths of the Gospel, 15 236 NEW TESTAMENT INTEODUCTTONS. against the speculations of a wild philosophy and the allurements of a mystic perfection in practice (chaps, i. 23, 24; ii. 1—4, 8—10, 16—23 ; iv. 12, 13) ; lastly, the particularity and strong personality of the salutations, directions, and hlessing at the close of this Epistle (chap. iv. 7—18), singularly con- trasting with the hrief generality of the other (Eph. vi. 21—24). All these correspond to the former of the causes ahove named. They mark the difference het ween a special and an Encyclical Epistle. (b) Of infinitely greater moment is the special prominence which is given in this Epistle to the doctrine of the sole Headship of Christ. The references to the Church as His hody, though not unfrequent, are brief, secondary, unemphatic; and thus stand in marked contrast with the vivid and magnificent descrip- tions in the Ephesian Epistle of the predestination and election of the whole hody of the Church in the eternal counsels "of the heavenly places" (Eph. i. 3—14): of the union of Jew and Gentile in the divine "commonwealth," all divisions being broken down which separated each from the other and both from God (chap. ii. 11 — 18) : of the great Temple, "built on the foundation of the apostles and pro- phets, Jesus Christ being the chief corner-stone" (chap. ii. 19 — 24) : of the "one body" and "the one Spirit," the "one Lord, the one God and Father of all" (chap. iv. 4 — 10). It is especially notable that to the last-named passage, which is the climax of the doctrinal teaching of the Ephesian Epistle, there corre- sponds in this the equall}'^ celebrated but wholly different passage (Col. iii. 1 — 4), which addresses the Colos- sians as " risen with Christ," having their " life hid with Him in God," looking for the time when He M^ho is their life shall appear, and they with Him in glory. The reason of the distinction is made clear at once by the indications of the pre- sence at Colossse of a tendency to vain speculations, to obsolete Jewish forms, and to half idolatrous super- stitions, all of which alike prevented them from "holding the Head," from " beiag dead with Christ " to the rudiments of the world, from being " risen with Him " to a com- munion with heaven (chap. ii. 8 — 23). Accordingly the sole Head- ship of Christ is dwelt upon — first positively (chap. i. 18 — 20), next polemically, in warning against error (chap. ii. 8, 16, 18). Both pas- sages are peculiar to this Epistle, as compared with the Epistle to the Ephesians. They deal with a sub- ject on which the needs of Colossse and its si'ter Chui'ches forced St. Paul to lay very special emphasis. (c) But this emphasis does but bring out with greater force what may be found elsewhere. The great characteristic feature of this Epistlo is the declaration of the nature of Christ in Himself as the " image of the invisible God ; " " firstborn be- fore all creation;" "by whom," " for whom," "in whom," " all beings were created in heaven and earth" and "all things consist;" " in whom dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily " (chaps, i. 15 — 17, 19 ; ii. 9). In this the Epistle may be compared with the Epistle to the Philippians (chap. ii. 6, 7). But the simple declaration there made of Christ as " being in the form of God " is here worked out into a magnificent elaboration, as- cribing to Him the "fulness of God- head" and the essential divine attributes of universal creation. It COLOSSIANS. 227 may be even more closely compared with, the Epistle to the Hebrews, which not only describes him as " the express image of the essence of Godhead," but with an emphasis which reminds us of the Judaistic angel-worship condemned in this Epistle, exalts His absolute supe- riority over all who, however glo- rious, are but creatures of God and ministering spirits (Heb. i. 1 ; ii. 4). It is evident, again, that it anticipates, yet with characteristic difference of expression, the doc- trine of the * '"Word of God " taught by St. John, and the ascription to Him of essential eternity and God- head, and both of physical and spi- ritual creation (John i. 1 — 5, 14). It is this which gives to our Epistle an unique doctrinal significance and value. Called out by one of the changeful phases of a pretentious, but transitory error, it remains to us an imperishable ti^easure. We cannot doubt that till the end of time it will have fresh force of spe- cial application, as ancient forms of error recur with more or less variety of outward aspect, and in their con- stant changes, developments, and antagonisms, stand in significant contrast with the unchanging gospel. Y. Analysis of the Epistle. —To this general description is subjoined, as before, an analysis of the Epistle : — 1. Doctrinal Section. (1) Salutation (chap, i 1, 2). (a) Thanksgiving for their faith, love, and hope, the worthy fruits of the truth of the gospel taught by Epaphras (chap. i. 3—8) ; {b) Fraycr for their fuller knoiu- ledge, fruitfulness, and pa- tience (chap.i. 9 — 12). (2) The Doctrixe of Christ (stated positively). {a) His mediation in, the for- giveness of sins (chap. i. 13, 14) ; (5) His divine nature as the image of God and the Creator of all things (chap, i. 15—17) ; (c) His Headship over the Church and over all created being (chap. i. 18—20); {d) Special application of His mediation to the Colossians, and declaration of the com- mission of the preaching of this mystery to St. Faul himself (chap. i. 21—29). (3) The Doctrine of Christ (btated polemically). {a) Declaration of St. PauVs anxiety for them that they should remain rooted and stablished in the old truth of the gospel (chap. ii. 1 -7)- {b) Warning against speculative error, denying or obscuring the truth — (o) Of Christ's true God- head. (jS) Of the regeneration of spiritual circum- cision in Him ; (7) Of His sole atone- ment and triumph over the powers of evil (chap.ii.8 — 15). (c) Warning against practical superstition — (o) Of trust in obsolete Jewish ordinances and mystic asceti- cism: 228 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. (3) Of superstitious wor- ship of ang-ols, trenching on the sole Headship of Christ (chap. ii. 16 -19). (d) Exhortation to be — (a) Dead with Christ to the rudiments of the world ; f)8) Risen with Christ to the communion with God in heaven (chaps, ii. 20 — iii. 4). 2. Practical Section. (1) General Exhortation — {a) To mortification of the flesh in all the sins of the old un- regenerate nature (chap, iii. 5—9). {b) To putting on the new man in all the graces of the image of Christ, receiving the peace of God, and doing all to his glory (chap. iii. 10 -17). (2) Special Duties of Human Relationship — [a) Wives and husbands (chap. iii. 18, 19) ; (i) Children and parents (chap. iii. 20, 21) ; [c) Slaves and masters (chap. iii. 22— iv. 1). (3) Conclusion. {a) Exhortation to prayer and watchfulness (chap. iv. 2 -6); {b) Mission of Tychicus and Onesimus (chap. iv. 7 — 9) ; (c) Salutations from St. PauVs companions (chap. iv. 10 -14); [d) Charge to exchange Epistles with Laodicea (chap. iv. 15—17) ; {e) Final salutation (chap. iv. 18) . VI. Comparison with Epis- tle to the Ephesians. — To this outline of the Epistle may also be added a tabular comparison with the Epistle to the Ephesians, noting the general lines of parallelism and peculiarity. [In the following Table whatever is common to the two Epistles is printed in ordinary type, and whatever is peculiar to each in italics."] SPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS. EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. 1. Doctrinal Section. 1. Doctrinal Section. 1. («) Salutation (chap. i. 1, 2). 1. {a) Salutation (chap. i. 1, 2). {b) Doxology and thanksgiving for the divine election (chap. i. 3—6). (c) Prayer and thanksgiving [b) Prayer and thanksgiving for them (chap. i. 15 — 18). for them (chap. i. 3 — 5, 9—12). (c) Special reference to the teaching of Epaphras and its effect (chap. i. 6 — 8). 2. (a) Declaration of the "gather- 2. (a) Declaration of the univer- ing up of aU in Christ," sal mediation of Christ, of His universal media- and His headship over the COLOSSIAXS. 229 tion for Jew and Gentile, and His headship over the Church, which is His Body, " the fulness of Him who fiUeth aU in aU" (chap. i. 7—14, 19—23). (b) Fuller declaration of the union of Jew and Gentile in one covenant and temple, on sole condition of faith in Christ (chap. ii. 1 — 20). («) The commission to St. Paul of the mystery of the call- ing in of the Gentiles^ once hidden, now revealed to men and angels (chap, iii. 1—13). (i) Frayer that they may know that which passeth knorr- ledge, hy the indwelling of Christy and be filled to the fulness of God (chap. iii. 14—21). 3. SuMMAiiY OF Doctrine: (a) The unity of the Chvrch in God ; {b) The diversity of gifts ; (c) The one object of all — per- sonal and corporate edifica- tion (chap. iv. 1 — 16). 2. Practical Section. 1. {a) General exhortation to put off the old man and put on the new, by learning Christ and being taught in Christ (chap. iv. 17 — 24). {b) "Warning against various sins, as breaking xinity with man (chap. iv. 25 — 30). (c) Special tvarnings against bitterness, against impurity and lust, and against reck- less excess and drunkenness (chap. iv. 31— V. 21). Church and over all created being (chap. i. 13, 14, 18 — 22). {b) Declaration of the true God- head and creative power of Christ (chap. i. 15—17). (c) The commission to St. Paul of the preaching of the mystery once hidden, now revealed, '■'■which is Christ in you the hope of glory " (chap. i. 23—29). (d) Special warnings against 2)eculiar forms of specula- tive error and practical superstition, draiving them from Christ, and obscuring Fis sole mediation and true Godhead (chap. ii. 1 — 23). 3. Summary of Doctrine : The unity of the soul with Christ, in which it is risen and exalted to heaven in Him (chap. iii. 1 — 8; comp. Eph. ii. 5, 6). 2. Practical Section. 1. (ff) General exhoriition to mortify our earthly mem- bers, to put off the old man and put on the new (chap. iii. 5 — 11). {b) Warning against various sins, as unicorthy of '•'■the elect of God " (chap. iii. 5, 8, 9, 13—17). 230 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. 2. Human Relationships : {a) Wives and husbands (chap. V. 22—33). {The sacred- ness of marriage as a type of the union between Christ and the Church.) {h) Children and parents (chap. vi. 1—4). (5) Slaves and masters (chap, vi. 5—9). 3. Conclusion. (a) Exhortation to put on the whole armour of God (chap. vi. 10—17). {b) Request for their jjrayers (chap. vi. 18—20). {e) Commendation of Tychicus (chap. vi. 21, 22). {d) ' ' Peace be to the brethren. ' ' " Grace be with aU them who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity " (chap. vi. 23, 24). 2. Human Relationships: (a) Wives and husbands (chap, iii. 18, 19). (b) Children and parents (chap. iii. 20, 21). (c) Slaves and masters (chap. iii. 22— iv. 1). 3. Conclusion. {a) Request for their prayers (chap. iv. 2—6). (b) Commendation of Tychicus and Onesimus (chap. iv. 7 -9). (c) Salutations from the brethren (chap. iv. 10—14). {d) Message to Laodicea and A^'chijjpus, and direction as to the letter from Lao- dicea (chap. iv. 15 — 17). (c) "Remember my bonds. Grace be with you " (chap, iv. 18). [For the Epistle to Philemon, see p. 250] I. THESSALONIANS By the Ebv. Canon MASON, D.D. In the earlier part of the year 52, St. Paul, in the course of his second journey, arrived at Thessalonica, the modern Saloniki — then, as now, one of the largest and most im- portant cities of the Levant. The wounds which the converted gaoler of Philippi and St. Lydia had tended (Acts xvi. 33, 40) can hardly have heen healed, when the Apostles Paul, Silas or Silvanus, and Timo- thy,* jouru eying rapidly through Amphipohs and Apollonia, came to found their second European Church (1 Thess. ii. 2). The Jews (who to this day form, it is he- Heved, a moiety of the population of Saloniki) were massed there in great niunhers, and had there "their s}'nagogue," — a kind of metropohtan church, contrasted with the mere chapels or "prayer- houses ' ' of Philippi and other Macedonian towns. To- this synagogue did St. Paul repair, and there he for "three Sabhath days" reasoned, as usual, with the Jews (1) on the Scriptural necessity for a suffering Messsiah; I (2) for a resurrection of the Mes- siah ; and (3) on the claim of Jesus ' to the Messiahship. We are not I informed how long the missionaries stayed at Thessalonica : probably a good deal more than the three weeks during which the preaching at the sjTiagogue continued.f Their converts from among the Jews of the sj-nagogue were few, though the proselytes and the ladies in con- nection with it joined them in large numbers. We can draw from the Epistles, in connection with the Acts, a clear picture of the Apostles' manner of life and preaching at Thessalonica. They lodged in the house of a be- lieving Jew of the name of Joshua, or (in the Graecised form) Jason (Acts xvii. 5; Eom. xvi. 21), but accepted nothing from him but their lodging. To none of the Thessalonians would they be in- debted (I Thess. ii. 9 ; 2 Thess. iii. 8), but maintained themselves, * Timothy's presence is not mentioned in the Acts, but seems implied by chaps, xvi. 3, 4 ; xvii. 14, and made absolutely certain by the Epistle, where the ' 'we "al- ways includes hirn. Howson, nevertheless, concludes from Phil. ii. 22 that he had been left bcliiudat Philippi. t Several facts indicate this : The good organisation of the Thessalonian Church (though this might be paitly owing to St. Timothy's subsequent visit) ; the fact that St. Paul had time to get regular artisan's work ; the repeated contributions from Philippi that reached him there (Phil. iv. 16) ; the way in which St. Paul speaks of his habitual conduct among them, and of what he " used to say " {e.g., 1 Thess. u. 9, 11 ; 2 Thess. ii. 5). 232 NEW TESTAIMENT INTRODUCTIONS. partly by the contributions twice forwarded to them from Philippi (Phil. iv. 16), but chiefly by hard manual labour, which occupied not the day only, but extended far into the night to make up for daylight hours devoted to preaching. They were determined to be model oper- atives (2 Thess. iii. 9), and not merely eloquent preachers. And this was not all ; besides the work of public preaching and teaching, the Apostles followed their usual method of dealing individually with the converts' sotds. The Thessalonian Christians— "every one" in his tm-n — thus received the encouragements and warnings of their ghostly fathers (1 Thess. ii. 11). If the pres- byters whom they left to carry on this work of admonition con- tinued it with the Apostles' zeal, they might indeed well bo de- scribed as " labouring among them." The preaching no doubt went on, not only on the Sabbaths, but on the week-daj^s ; for though the Acts tell us nothing of evangelistic eiforts among the G-entiles, except among the "devout" {i.e., the pro- selytes), the whole tone of the Epistles proves that the Thes- salonian Church was almost wholly Gentile. Besides which, the account in the Acts of the subjects of the three sermons preached on the three successive Sabbaths does not by any means include all that we find mentioned as the staple of the Apostles' preaching there. Thus, it is clear that they had spoken strongly of the regal aspect of oiu- Lord's work. The charge on which they were arraigned was the charge of proclaiming " another king" (or emperor, for the word is the same in Greek), " one Jesus." It was, in fact, the proclamation of what is specially distinguished as the "gospel of the kingdom" (Matt, iv. 23 ; ix. 35 ; xiii. 19 ; xxiv. 14 ; Luke viii. 1, Greek; xvi. 16), that is, not only the good news of Jesus Christ's complete empire over the individual soul, but the good news that He has organised us all into a well- disciplined Church (Kev. i. 6, Greek; comp. John xi. 52), which was to form an imperium in im- perio within the Eoman dominions. And accordingly we find the Thes- salonians reminded that one of the best blessings which God had be- stowed upon them was His calling them into "His kingdom " (1 Thess. ii. 12), and encouraged by the thought of God's counting them "worthy of the kingdom of God, for which they suffered" (2 Thess. i. 5) . The full development of this " kingdom," at the King's return, was indeed very probably the main subject of fhe preaching. On this point the Thessalonians appear to have had the most accurate in- formation (1 Thess. V. 2). St. Paul assumes that they thoroughly be- lieved the doctrine (1 Thess. iv. 14). They not onlj'- knew the very form in which our Lord Him- self had taught the impossibility of forecasting the date, but they had been told again and again (2 Thess. ii. 5) what changes must take place before the Advent of the kingdom was to be expected. At every turn in the Epistle it is mentioned. And the moral laws of the kingdom of God had been taught in the most explicit manner (1 Thess. ii. 11), not only with reference to sins which the Gentile world permitted freely (1 Thess. iv. 1, 2), but also with regard to strenuous industry (2 These, iii. 6, 10). And as in Galatia I. THESSALONIANS. 233 (Acts xiv. 22) 80 here, the sufferings that fenced the entrance of that kingdom were fully prophesied (1 Thess. iii. 3, 4). This teaching, delivered with all the tenderness of a nursing mother, and aU the authority of a father, and all the devotion of a fiiend (1 Thess. ii. 7, 8, 11), yet sternly and unflatteringly (I Thess. ii. 5), told upon the Thessalonians with great eti'ect. The Apostles themselves were in the most exalted and con- fident frame of mind (1 Thess. i. 5), and their hearers, in spite of many difficulties (1 Thess. i. 6 ; ii. 2. U), received with enthusiasm the in- struction as proceeding from God and not from man) (1 Thess. ii. 13). The difficulties, however, soon increased. The Jews grew jealous of the work going on among the Gentiles, es- pecially among their prosel^'les (Acts xvii. 5), and vehemently set themselves to forbid such preach- ing (1 Thess. ii. 16). The abandoned Greeks who idled in the market-place were stirred up to make a riot against these disturbers of the world, where- upon the Greeks, with the pas- sionate servility which usually marked what was called under the Empire a free Greek town,* took up eagerly the cry that to preach Jesus as Emperor was treason to Claudius, and began a prosecution of Jason before the politarchs. * The city of Thessalonica had heen made a libera civitas because of the sup- port it had given in the civil wars to the cause of Octavian and Antony. Such cities were exempt from the interference of the provincial government, and had their own forms of administration. Thes- salonica had her popular assembly, and for supreme officers certain magistrates called politarchs— a name elsewhere un- known. The prosecution only resulted in Jason's being bound over to keep the peace ; but the irritation was so great that it was judged expedient for the Apostles to leave the city and proceed south- ward. From Thessalonica St. Paul travelled to Berrea, from Beroea to Athens, and from Athens to Cor- inth. But though he had quitted Thessalonica, he had not forgotten his infant Church, and had not in- tended to be absent from it long. Twice at least (1 Thess. ii. IS) he had seriously endeavoured to make his way back, " but Satan hindered" him. The persecution of the Church had by no means been appeased (as they had hoped) by the ex- pulsion of the missionaries ; and St. Paul dreaded lest the temptation should have been too fiery for Christians so imperfectly taught and organised (1 Thess. iii. 10). In his extreme agony of mind for them, unable himself to travel northward, he determined, at the cost of utter loneliness in a strange and most unsympathising town (Acts xvii. 16 ; 1 Thess. iii. 1), to send Timothy to see how they fared, and to help them. To St. Paul's great relief, the yoimger Apostle brought back, on the whole, an excellent report. True, there were several most grave faults to be found with the Thessa- lonian Church, which will be best understood from the table of the Epistle's contents, but the practical St. Paul had evidently not exjjected even so much progress as had been made, and was overjoyed (1 Thess. iii. 8). And this Epistle — the earliest of all that are preserved of its author, perhaps the earliest book of the New Testament — contains 234 XEW TESTA^IEXT INTRODUCTIONS. St. Paul's comments on Timothy's report. The question now occurs, At what point of the narrative in the Acts is the writing of this Epistle to he placed? Was it written at Athens, or at Corinth ? Almost all critics agree that it was written at Corinth* The difficulty, it may here be pointed out, consists in identifying the return of St. Timothy with his report (1 Thess. iii. 6), with the coming of Silas and Timotheus in Acts xviii. 5. The narrative of the Acts seems, at first sight, to exclude' the suppo- sition that Silas or Timothy had paid a visit to St. Paul between the time of his leaving Beroea and the time for their rejoining him at Corinth ; while the words of 1 Thess. iii. 1 — 5 seem as urgently to require that Timothy at all events should have been with St. Paul at Athens. But, on closer inspection, the Acts prove rather to favour this supposition ; they teU us that * The subscription at the end of the Epistle has no weight whatever, not re- presenting even a tradition, but being merely an uncritical inference from chap. iii. 1. The onlj' way in which any case can be made out for the Athenian date is to suppose that the past tenses in iii. 1, 2, 5, are what is called in Greek the e2nsto- lary aorist, equivalent to our present, as e.g., where St. Jude (verse 3) says, " I gave all diligence," "it was needful," or St. John (1 John ii. 14), " I have written,'' literally, I wrote. Thus it would mean tliat Timothy has just obeyed St. Paul's hasty summons, and arrived at Athens by way of Thessalonica, as (from Beroea) he naturally might. "Being no longer able to forbear, I am determined to be left at Athens alone, and I send Timothy; I send to know your faith, lest through the tempter's temptation of you our labour shoiild prove in A'aiu." The following verse will then mean— "Not that I seriously distrust you ; for the other day when Timotheus came," &c. St. Paul sent a peremptory and immediate summons to his two col- leagues whom he had left in Mace- donia (xvii. 15), which summons they promptly obeyed, and if so, would no doubt reach him long before the meeting at Corinth mentioned in Acts x^dii. 5 ; besides which, the very words, "while Paul u-aited for them at Athens," seem to imply that they came to that city. A few other points may be mentioned which help to fix the date. On the one hand, the letter cannot be placed later than the de- parture from Corinth, for we never read of St. Silas being with St. Paul after that time. For the same reason it must have been written some ivhile before the departure from Corinth, as the Second Epistle (which equally bears Silvanus' name) was also written thence. But on the other hand, it must not be placed too early. For (1) the Thessalonian Church had had time to extend its missionary zeal over all Macedonia, and indeed over all Greece ; (2) the Jewish persecu- tions had had time to gain crush- ing force and consistency ; (3) errors and disorders had had time to spoil the faith and morals of the community; (4) at any rate, a few of the believers had fallen asleep, which, considering the probable numbers and natui-e of the mem- bers of that young Church, requires a probable lapse of some months. The contents of the Epistle bear every sign of an early date. None of the great doctrines which are considered specially Pauline are touched upon in it, such as " faith," in its special sense, or " justifica- tion." There is no Judaic legalism to oppose, as in Galatians ; St. Paul " cj'.n still point to them " — • the churches of Judcea — "as ex- I. THESSALONIAXS. 235 amples to his converts at Thessa- lonica " (chap. ii. 14). There is no Gnosticism to confront, as in the Epistle to the Colossians or to St. Timothy. Again, the great promi- nence given to the doctrine of the Advent seems an indication of what St. Paul calls " the beginning of the gospel" (PhH. iv. 15). The earliest gospel must needs consist in teaching that Christ was alive from the dead, and gi\TJig each Christian a vital interest in His present life, and this cannot be effected without much preaching of the Advent. It has already been remarked that the Thessalonian Church con- sisted almost wholly of Gentiles. This may be easily seen from the Epistle. There are no quotations from the Old Testament, nor argu- ments foimded upon it. The name of Satan (1 Thess. ii. 18) is the only approach to a reference to Scriptural knowledge. The earliest revela- tion with which the Church is sup- posed to be acquainted, and which forms the canonical standard of re- ference, is the tradition which the Thessalonians have received from their founders bv word of mouth (2 Thess. ii. 5). The Thessalonians are never credited with any expe- rience like "turning from dead works," but, on the contrary, they had " turned to God from idols " (I Thess. i. 9). The fierce and bitter invective against the Jews is far different in its language from what it would have been had any large proportion of the Church been but neoph}i;es from Judaism ; and, indeed, the Jews are clearly distinguished from " your own countrymen" (chap. ii. 14). The difiiculty with which the young Church accepted the doctrine of the resurrection also points in that direction, as well as the dulness of conscience with regard to the sin- fulness of fornication (chap. iv. 5). The Epistle, which is entirely practical throughout, divides itself more clearly into its component sections than perhaps any other of St. Paul's Epistles. There are two main portions. The first (chaps, i., ii., iii.) is narrative and personal, designed to attach the Thessalo- nians more closely to the writers' persons by the ties of common memories, of imparted information, and of sympathy over the news which had been brought from Thes- salonica. Attention having been thus secured, the two remaining chapters are occupied with instruc- tions upon special points in which the Church was deficient. The contents (after the salutation) may be tabulated thus : — I. The Narrative Portion (chaps, i. 2 — iii. 13). A. Containing reminiscences of the apostolic sojourn at Thes- salonica (chaps, i. 2 — ^ii. 16). (1) Thanksgiving for the dis- play of GocVs power and love both in the mission- aries and in the converts (chap. i. 2—10). (2) Eeminder of the mission- aries' conduct there (chap. ii. 1—12). (3) Acknowledgment of the Thessalonians' hearty re- sponse (chap. ii. 13 — 16). B. Containing an account of the Apostles' (especially St. Paul's) anxieties and efforts for the Thessalonians since they left them (chaps, ii. 17— iii. 10). Then follows a prayer for tbem, which connects the first portion naturally with 230 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. the first subject of instruc- tion in — II. The Educational Portion (chaps, iv. 1 — V. 28). (1) The necessity of ahstaining from fornication (chap. iv. 1-8). (2) The extension of soher church feeling (chap. iv. 8—12). (3) Discussion of certain points connected with the Ad- vent : — {a) The respective part there- in of the quick and the dead (chap. iv. 13—18). (b) The uncertainty of its date, and consequent need of vigilance (chap. v. 1-11). (4) Duty to the Presbyters (chap. V. 11 — 13), who are charged to see that orderly discipline is en- forced (chap. V. 14, 15). (5) Various spiritual direc- tions, chiefly with regard to public worship (chap. V. 16—28). The goiuincness of the Epistle can scarcely be said to have been ever seriously doubted. Though there are no certain patristic quo- tations from it, or allusions to it, earlier than the end of the second ccntiuy, it has passed unchallenged (even by Marcion) until the pre- sent century. Schrader and Bam- in this century have argued against its Pauline authorship, alleging the absence of "Pauline" theology, contradictions to the account in Acts, marks of date which they suppose to be subsequent to the fall of Jerusalem, &c. But the internal evidence is so convincing that even such a sceptical critic as M. Penan has no hesitation in ad- mitting both Epistles to the Thes- salonians into his second class of Epistles, which he calls " Un- doubted Epistles, although some ob- jections have been made to them," and his words are as follows: — "The difficulties which certain modems have raised against them are but those light suspicions which it is the duty of criticism to express freely, but without being stopped by them when there are more powerful reasons to draw one on. And these three Epistles {i.e., 1 and 2 Thess. and Phil.) have a character of authenticity which overbears every other considera- tion." The attack upon the Epistles was renewed in the summer of 1877 by Holsten, in the German Annual of Protestant Theology. [The principal works which the author has made use of are the Commentaries of Liinemann and his English follower Ellicott, as well as those of Hammond and of Wordsworth, together with such works as Kenan's and Howson's accounts of St. Paul, and MS. notes from lectures of Professor Lightfoot.] 11. THESSALONIANS, Bx THE Eev. Canon MASON, D.D. We may confidently assert that this Epistle was written by St. Paul from Corinth during his residence there of a year and a half, within a few months of the First Epistle : that is, in the year 53. Not only are all its main features so like those of the First as to suggest a very close connection in time, but it is despatched by the same apos- tolic group — Paul, Silvanus, and Timotheus ; and, as we have re- marked in the Introduction to the First EjJistle, we have no reason to believe that Silvanus was in St. Paul's company later than the de- parture from Corinth in 5-i. It suits well with this date that the Apostle is in fear of certain ' ' mon- strous and depraved persons " (chap. iii. 2), who may well be the Jews who brour-ht him before Gallio. The circumstances which called forth the Letter were as follows. Since the First Epistle had been despatched St. Paul had been able to receive fresh tidings of the state of the Thessalonian Church, concern- ing which he was naturally anxious. as it was so young when he had been forced to leave it to itself and to God. The tidings were both good and bad. On the one hand, there was marked progress in some of the points which had before caused soHcitude. St. Paul uses enthusi- astic language (chap. i. 3) of the advance made in faith (comp. 1 Thess. iii. 10), and in individual brotherly charity (comp. 1 Thess. iv. 10), and also of their steadfast- ness in persecutions which were still afflicting them (chap. i. 4) — persecutions in which, apparently, both the Jews and the Gentiles joined. "We may likewise gather, from the silence of the present Letter, that St. Paul's instructions on the state of the departed faithful had taken good efEect : this being, perhaps, the special increase in faith mentioned above. We find, moreover, that there is no further need of warnings on the subject of purity or of submission to ecclesi- astical authority. On the other hand, there were three great faults to find. (1) The tendency to disorders 238 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. and idleness, which had been cen- sured both directly and indirectly in the former letter, had become stronger instead of receding. Some considerable number of the little Church had become mere " busy- bodies " — had left off work, expect- ing maintenance at the public ex- pense of the comnumity while they indulged themselves, probably, in what seemed more religious pur- suits. (2) We can trace more clearly in this Epistle than in the former the doctrinal ground on which such disorders were justified by those who were guilty of them. They had been " shaken from their reason," and were still "in trepida- tion" (chap. ii. 2), from a behef that "the day of the Lord "was already upon them. Panic and exultation alike had the effect of making the Thessalonians think it not worth while to attend to tbe things of a doomed world. (3) This belief had been, if not created, yet confirmed by some audacious forgeries and fictions (chap. ii. 2). Even in the First Epistle St. Paul gives signs of un- easiness, as though he were not sure of the honesty of some of his correspondents in their use of his name and writings (1 Thess. v. 27). Now it is clear that, in more than one way, persons (who might be only half conscious of their fraud) had attempted to impose on their brethren. They had pretended to a direct inspiration or angelic visi- tation, which had revealed to them the innnediate nearness of the Ad- vent. They had misrepresented the oral teaching given by St. Paul during his stay at Thessalonica. They had, perhaps, wrested the words of his First Epistle, which had certainly given a colourable pretext for what they now taught. More probably still, from the pre- caution given in chap. iii. 17, they had actually written a letter, or letters, purporting to be from the Apostle, in which the doctrine was definitely taught. To all these three faults the writer opposes the authority of what they knew to have genuinely proceeded from himself. He has nothing to unsay. They are to "hold fast the traditions" (chap, ii. 15) which, written or unwritten, were his. (1) He reminds them not only of his example (as in the First Letter), but of his teaching levelled at their dissipated religi- ousness : *' Withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradi- tion which they received of us" (chap. iii. 6) ; " Even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any has no mind to work, neii-ier let him eat " (chap, iii. 10). (2) He recalls the very definite instructions which showed that the end was not by-and-by. The Roman empire was still stand- ing, and therefore the Man of Sin could not be revealed as yet, and therefore Christ could not be on the point of coming. " Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things ? " (chap. ii. 5.) (3) He enforces, against their forgeries, his present Letter, even at the risk of provoking an open rebellion : " If any man obey not our word by this Epistle, note that man, and have no fellowship with him " (chap. iii. 14). The style of the Epistle (except in the studied obscurity of the pro- phetic passage) is clear and easy, like that of the First ; and the structure is also very simple, as will be seen from the following analysis, II. THESSALOXIANS. 239 and marked by the same character- istic feattire as the First : i.e., the ^jvaycr which leads on from one sec- tion of the Letter to another : — I. The Salutation (chap. i. 1, 2). n. The Retrospective PoETioy (chap. i. 3—12). (a) Thanksgiving for progress made (chap. i. 3, 4). {^) Hopes thus afforded against the Advent Day (chap. i. 5—10). (c) Prayer for continuance in so happy a state (chap. i. 11, 12). III. The Instrl'ctive axd Horta- tory Portion (chaps, ii. 1 — iii. 18). (1) On the date of the Advent. {a) Caution against beheving the Advent close at hand (chap. ii. 1 — 3). (i) ii\Tiat must happen first (chap. ii. 3—10). (c) Terrible fate of the apos- tates (chap. ii. II, 12). {d) Thanksgiving that the Thessalonians' fate is so different (chap. ii. 13, 14). {e) Exhortation and prayer (chap. ii. 15 — 17). (2) On the necessity of work. {a) Eequest for prayers for himself, which skilfully serves to predispose the readers to obey the ensuing commands (chap. iii. 1 {b) Prayer for the same pur- pose (chap. iii. 5). (c) Commands to make all work, and to excommuni- cate the refractory (chap. iii. 6—15). [d) Prayer for tranquillity (chap. iii. 16). {e) Final benediction, with at- tention drawn to the autograph (chap. iii. 17, 18). The genuineness of this Letter, like that of the First, is practically uncontroverted. "SVe seem to have very early testimony to its use — St. ' Poly carp appearing in two places to quote it, though anony- mously, according to his custom; and St. Justin, speaking of the Man of Sin in a manner which might indeed be explained by say- ing that that doctrine was common to the Catholic Church, not special to St. Paul, but which is more simply referred to this Epistle. The objections of a few modem scholars (Baur, Schrader, &c.) are chiefly drawn from the prophecy in chap, ii., from supposed contra- dictions between this J^pistle and the First — especially in regard to the date of the Advent ; from fan- cied allusions to the persecution of Xero ; from a mistaken notion that the doctrine of an Antichrist (which was in reality pre-Christian) was only invented by the Montanists. Doubts have been entertained by a few critics, who acknowledged the genuineness of both, which of these Letters is the earlier in date. Ewald, the greatest of these critics, jjlaced the Second Epistle first. It was, he thought, placed second in the Canon because, as a rule, the shorter letters in the Canon follow the longer. The arguments, how- ever, which he adduces are scarcely worth considering, in face of the fact that in 2 Thess. ii. 15 we have an allusion to a former Epistle. All the historical portion of the First Epistle (especially 1 Thess. ii. 240 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. 17; iii. 11) bears evident tokens of being tbe earliest communication that had passed between St. Paul and his spiritual children since he had left them. [The chief books consulted by the author have been those already- mentioned in 1 Thessalonians : — The Patristic commentaries, partic- ularly St. Chrysostom; Hammond, Liinemann, EUicott, and others; and the posthumous edition (which appeared too late for use in annotating the first Epistle) by the Presbyterian Professor Eadie. His notes are, however, little but a reproduction of Bishop Ellicott's, without their concentra- tion.] I. TLAIOTHY. By the Vert Eev. H. D, M. SPENCE, D.D. I. Timotliy.— Timothy was a native of the province of Lycaonia in Asia Minor — most probably of Lystra, a small town some thirty miles to the south of Iconium, the modem Konieh. His father was a pagan, but his mother and grand- mother, Lois and Eunice, were Jewesses, evidently devout and earnest in the practice of the re- ligion of their forefathers. They became Christians, apparently, at the time of St. Paul's first visit to Asia Minor in company with Bar- nabas (a.7). 46), (Acts xiv. : 2 Tim. i. 5 ; iii. 15). From Lois and Eunice Timothy no doubt learned the rudiments of the faith of the Lord Jesus. Some five years later, in company with Silas (a.d. 51), St. Paul paid a second visit to Asia ]Minor. ]Moved probably by the devotion and earn- estness of the young son of Eunice, and seeing in him the promise of a loving and heroic life, St. Paul took Timothy in the place of Mark, whose heart had failed him in the presence of so many difficulties and dangers. From this time (a.d. 51) Timothy's life was closely associated with that of his master. He was with the Gentile Apostle in Macedonia and Corinth (a.d. 52 — 53), (Acts x^di. 14 ; xAiii. 5 ; 1 Thess. i. 1) ; wdth him at Ej)he- sus, whence he was sent on a special mission to Corinth (a.d. 55 — 56), (1 Cor. iv. 17 ;• xvi. 10) ; with him when he wrote from Macedonia the Second Corinthian Letter (2 Cor. i. 1) ; with him at Corinth when he wrote to the Eoman Church (a.d. 57), (Rom. xvi. 21) ; with him when he Avas returning to Asia, where he was arrested prior to the long cap- tivity at Caesarea and Eome (a.d. 57—58), (Acts XX. 4). We find him again specially mentioned as the Apostle's companion during that long Roman imprisonment (a.d. 61—63). (See the Epistles written at that period — Col. i. 1 ; Philcm. verse 1 ; PhH. i. 1.) After the Apostle's release from his first great captivity (a.d. 63), (see General Introduction to the Pas- toral JEpistles), Timothy, still St. Paul's companion (1 Tim. i. 3), was left in charge of the Ephesian Church (probably about a.d. 64). While fultilling this work he re- ceived the two Epistles of St. Paul (a.d. 64 — 65) which bear his name. In the Epistle to the Hebrews (xiii. 23) Timothy is alluded to as having been imprisoned and again libe- rated. This solitary notice, how- ever, throws but little light on the life of the Apostle's famous dis- ciple, excejDt that it seems to tell us that the pupil's life was full of hardsliip and danger, as was the master's, and that the younger man had well learned the lesson of St. Paul, who bade him with his dying breath (2 Tim. ii. 3) " endure hard- ness as a good soldier of Jesus Christ." Nicephorus and the ancient mar- tyrologies tell us that Timothy died by mart}Tdom under the Emperor 16 242 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Domitian some time before a.d, 96. Baronius, however, puts his martyr- death a little later — a.d. 109 — when the Emperor Trajan was reigning. The accompanpng table will assist the reader in following the life of Timothy :— Roman A.D. Emperor Reigning. 48 Claudius. First meeting between Paul and Timothy, stUl a child, at Lystra — prob- ably in the house of Eunice and Lois. 51 Paul and Silas take Timothy with them from Lystra. 52 Timothy accom- panies Paul in his j ourney through Mace- donia. 53 Timothy is with Paul at Corinth. 54—5(5 Nero. Timothy is with Paul at Ephe- .sus. 67 Timothy is with Paul at Corinth. Paul writes Epistle to Ro- mans. 58 Timothy is with Paul in the jouniey from Corinth to Asia. 62—63 Timothy is with Paul during the Roman impri- sonment. &i Paul leaves Tim- othy at Ephe- sus. 05-66 Timothy receives the two Epistles fiom Paul. Not later ) Domi- ( Alleged martyr- than 96. j" tian. ■( dom of Timothy Or, ac- S cording to Baronius, i Trajan. Alleged martjT- dom. 109 ) II. Date of the Epistle. — The First Epistle to Timothy was writt'^n apparently in the year 65 — 66, while the Apostle was passing through Macedonia, after a prob- able journey into Spaia and a return to Ephesus, at which city. he had left Timothy in charge of the Church. III. General Contents of the Epistle. — No systematic ar- rangement is followed in this Epistle. Its contents may be roughly divided into six general divisions, coinciding with the six chapters : — 1. — St. Paul reminds Timothy of his especial commission at Ephesus — the repression of a school of false teachers which threatened to subvert the Church. This leads to a brief re- view of the Apostle's own pabt history (chap. i.). 2. — The second division is occupied with directions respecting the public worship of Chris- tians, and the parts which each sex should take in public prayer (chap. ii.). 3. — Treats of the office-bearers in the Church — bishops (or, elders), deacons, and dea- conesses (chap. iii.). 4. — Again St. Paul refers to Timothy's commission in respect to false teachers. He dwells upon the decep- tive teaching of asceticism, showing the dangers which accompanied such doctrine. The practical godly life of Timothy and his staff would, after all, be the best anti- dote to the poison dissemi- nated by these unreal, un- true men (chap. iv.). I. TIMOTHY. 243 5. — Treats {a) of the behaviour of the Church officials to the flock of Christ ; (b) of the public charities of the Church in connection with destitute and helpless women ; {c) of a certain order of presbyteral or elder widows, which, in connection with these chari- ties, might be developed in such a Chi'istian community as Ephesus; {d) rules for Timothy, as chief presbyter, respecting ordination and selection of colleagues in the ministry, «S:c. (chap. v.). 6. — A few plain comments on the great social question of slavery. How Chiistian slaves were to beha\e in their, condition. The false teachers must be stcmly combated in their teaching on this point. Timothy is warned with solemn earnest- ness against covetousness. This, St. Paul argues, was the root of all false teaching (chap, vi.) One golden thread seems to run through this, and, it may be said, through the other two Pastoral Letters. St. Paul's earnestness in these last days of his life seems rather to expend itself in exhorta- tions to Chi-istian men and women to live a good, pure, self-denpng life. Doctrine, in these last words of the noble, generous toiler for the Lord, retreats a little into the background. It is true that he reiterates in several places the gTOunds of a Christian's belief — that he rehearses in plain and evidently well-known phrases the gTcat articles of the Christian faith ; but his last words dwell rather on life than on theology. The errors of the false teachers whose deadl}- influence Timothy was to counter- act belonged rather to an evil life than to a false belief. The pure and saintly conduct, the pattern home life — these things, Timothy and his colleagues must remember, were the surest antidote against the poison- ous teaching and the selfish practice of the enemies of the Lord Jesus. II. TIMOTHY. By the Vert Eev. H. D. M. SPEiNCE, D.D. I. Contents of the Epistle.— Like the First Epistle, the Second Letter presents no regular plan. 1. — ^It commences with expression of deep love to Timothy (chap. i. 1 — 5) ; 2. — And then passes on to exhort- ation to a fearless and faith- ful discharge of his duties (chap. i. 6— 14). 3. — ^These exhortations are inter- rupted by the Apostle's memory of many faithless ones, and of one faithful friend (chap. i. 15 — 18). 4. — The Apostle renews his exhor- tations to Timothy to a hrave endurance, even if suffering come on him. He tells his disciple Timothy what has nerved him, Paul, to endure to the end. Then he renews his pleading, that Timothy should he careful in guarding against a reli- gion of mere words — ^in- stancing what such a teach- ing might end in (chap. ii. 1—26). 5. — Again St. Paul interrupts his exhortation hy writing down his sad forebodings of evil times (chap. iii. 1 — 9). G. — Then he encourages his dis- ciple by recounting his own suffering and deliverances. Timothy too must suifer, only let him remain stead- fast in the faith (chap. iii. 10—17). 7. — The Apostle closes -with a solemn command that his disciple should teach earn- estly, for he, the old master, was at the end of his course. He would, if possible, see his dear friend once more, so he prays him to come speedily, weU nigh all ha^*ing deserted him. He ends with a touching remi- niscence of his first trial in the Eoman court of justice, and with a few greetings (chap. iv. 1—22). This second Ej^istle to Timothy has been well termed the "will or testament" of the master, addressed to his favourite disciple, and con- taining his last wishes, written as it was under the shadow of approach- ing death. It is full of light and shade ; the tone of the exhortation, the warning and the encourage- ment constantly changing. Now the words are sad with a strange parting solemnity, now bright with the glorious sunshine of the Apos- tle's immortal hopes. Yet in every hne of this most touching of all II. TIMOTHY. 245 the Pauline writings we cannot fail to perceive something of the gloom which, owing to desertion of so many friends, had saddened that gallant, loving heart of St. Paul. He was well-nigh quite alone, almost friendless in the midst of mortal foes, an old man, worn out with toil, weakened hy illness and privation, expecting a death of agony ; and yet in spite of his sur- roundings, in spite of his own seeming failure, in spite of his own baffled hopes, he writes to his best- loved disciple in sure confidence, that he, Timothy, will war the same warfare as his master Paul had warred; that he, Timothy, though by nature peihaps timid and shrinking, will, undeterred by dangers, sufferings, and the sad prospect of a painful death, bravely carry on the work he has seen his master do, and for the sake of which he has seen his master die. He writes to him in sure confidence that the teaching respecting the mystery of the atoning blood, the doctrine of Christ, and the Hfe lived by Christ, the sum of the sacred deposit of the Catholic Faith com- mitted to his charge, would be pre- served intact and safe by him, and by him then handed down, when his life-work was done, to other faithful hands. The Epistle, though ringing with a ring of hope, yet paints the future of the Chui'ch in sombre colours. The enemies would increase, and the love of m'lny would wax cold, and in coming years the man ci God would be exposed to persecu- tion, hatred, and to cruel sxijf ering : and yet though all this is found in this strangely touching little writ- ing, no one who has read these dying words of .St. Paul can lay the Letter down without a prayer of thanksgiving for this Epistle of immortal hope. 11. Date of the Epistle.— The Second Epistle to Timothy was w^ritten by St. Paul from Home during his second imprisonment in that city, about the year a.d. 66. We may suppose that shortly after the writing of the First Epistle to Timothy the Apostle had been ar- rested at Xicopolis, " the city of \'ictory," in Epirus (see Titus iii. 12), probably on the capital charge of being connected with the burning of Kome (a.d. 64), and after a short delay had been conveyed to Italy. The words of chap. iv. 16 refer to the first hearing of his cause, either by Xero himseli, or, more probably, by the«infamous Tigellinus, tlio Praetorian Prefect. It was no doubt shortly after this first hearing, that St. Paul, feeling that the end for him was at hand, wrote this Second Epistle to Timothy. The exact date of the martyr's passing to his rest is unknown. The last hour probably came before he looked for j it, for, notwithstanding the urgent ' summons, no tradition speaks of I Timothy again looking on the face of his beloved master. TITUS. By T!!E Vket Eev. H. D. M. SPENCE, D.D. I. Titus.— Among the early Christian leaders of the school of Paul, Titus, to whom one of the three Pastoral Epistles of the Gen- tile Apostle was addressed, must have occupied a prominent position. For some unknown reason his name never occurs in the Acts (save, perhaps, in the doubtful reference, Acts xviii. 7, on which see below); but from a few scattered notices in the Epistles of St. Paiil we are able to gather some notion of the work and influence of this distin- guished and able teacher of the first days. The silence of St. Luke in the Acts with reference to one who evidently played so important a part in the days when the founda- tions of the Christian Church were being laid, has been the subject of much inquiry. Attempts have been made, but with little success, to identify Titus with one or other of the characters prominent in the Acts story — with Luke himself, for instance, or Silvanus (Silas). The only possible identification, how- ever, is with the " Justus " of Acts xviii. 7, to which name, in some of tlio older authorities, the name " Titus'' is prefixed. The circum- stances, as far as we know them, connected with Justus would fit in with this identification. This Justus was, like Titus, closely connected with Corinth ; and like Titus, too, was an imcircumcised Gentile, at- tending the Jewish ser-vnces as a prosel)-te of the gate. That these two were identical is possible, but nothing more. Titus was of Gentile parentage, and probably a native of Antioch — the great centre of that early Gentile Chi'istianity of which St. Paul was the first teacher, and, under the Holy Ghost, the foimder. Some time before a.d. 50 — 51 the master and scholar had come to- gether. In that year he accompa- nied Barnabas and St. Paul to the council of Apostles and elders which was convened at Jerusalem to consider the question of the general obligations of the JMosaic law. The result was the draw- ing up of the charter of Gen- tile freedom from aL the re- straints of the Jewish lau-. (Sea Acts x\.; Gal. ii. 1 — 3.) From this time (a.d. 50 — 51) the glad tidings that Christ was indeed a Light to the Gentiles (Isa. xlix. 6) spread through Asia, North Africa, and Europe with a strange and marvelloxis rapidity. There is no doubt, from the scattered notices in the Epistles of St. Paul, that Titus was one of the most active agents in the promulgation of the gospel story among the peoples that had hitherto sat in darkness and in the shadow of death. The following table will give TITUS. 24? some Idea of Titus' connection witli St. Paul :— Date. Before A.D. 50—61 50-51 54r-55 58 £7 65—66 00—67 Empeeob OF EOME. Claudius. Nero. Titus meets with and is instructed hj St. Paul at Autioch in the faith. (Comp. Tit. i. 4: "My own son in the faith." Titus accomiiaules St. Paul and Barnabas to the council of Apostles and elders at Jerusalem (Acts XV. ; Gal. ii. 1). Probably with St. Paul during part 'of his second missionary journey. He is evi- dently well known to the Galatians, from the familiar reference to him in the Epistle to that Church. Perhai)she is r.lluded to in Gal, iii. 5. With St. Paul at Ephesus. Thence sent on a special mission to Corinth, proliably bearer of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (2 Cor. xii. 18). With St. Paul in Mace- donia (2 Cor. vii. 6 —15), and perhaps with St. Paul at Corinth, if identical with .Justus, accord- ing to the reading of some of the older authorities. Titus is superintend- ing presbyter in Crete. At Rome with St. Paid ; thence sent to Dalmatia (2 Tim. iv. 10). [Tradition speaks of Titus as returning from Dalmatia to Crete, where he died in extreme old age as Archbishop of GortjTia.] Titus, as we have seen, was a Gentile — was the one chosen by the great Apostle in very early days as the example of Christian freedom fi'om Je-tt-ish rites and customs. At first the pupil, then the friend of St. Paul, we find him, in the hrief notices in the Epistles, evidently occupying a position quite inde- pendent of, and in no wise subject to, his old master. He is St. Paul's "brother," "companion," "fellow- labourer" (2 Cor. viii. 22, 23) ; St. Paul's trusted and honoured friend. His missions of investigation and love, his arrangements for the famous collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem, were appa- rently imdertaken spontaneously, rather than by the direction of a superior and elder officer of the Church. (See, for instance, 2 Cor. viii. 6, 16, 17.) Is'ow the Acts ia confessedly a very early writing, and must have been put forth not later than a.d. 62 — 63 ; would it not be very probable that, in such a work, so prominent a Gentile, who had publicly, with St. Paul's consent, held himself free from all Jewish restraints, and by his pro- minent example preached the per- fect equality of the Gentiles in the kingdom of God — would it not be very probable that in the Acts the name and work of such a person would be omitted ? The fierce hos- tility of a largo section of the Jewish race to St. Paul on account of this very teaching of equality is well known ; it probably compassed in the end his death. The gentle, loving spirit of St. Luke, while telling the story of the foundation, of the Christian Chiu'ch with scru- pulous accuracy, would be likely to avoid such passages of the early history which would tend to alien- ate any. (He never, for instance, 248 NEW testa:\ient inthoductions. hints at such scenes as the, Galatian Epistle, chap, ii., relates so gi-aphi- cally.) This same spirit, which ever sought to win rather than to alienate, induced him, perhaps, to avoid the mention of the famous Gentile leader Titus at a period when the fierce hostility of the Christians of the Circumcision was endeavouring to compass the fall of St. PatJ and the disruption of the school of Gentile Christianity. The Holy .Sj^irit loves to work, we know, by purely human in- struments — now by the tender conciliatory pen of a Luke — now by the fiery zeal of a Paul, which refuses to recognise danger, or to ac- knowledge the possibility of failure. Later on, the appointment of the brilliant and successful Gentile or- ganiser to the chief superintendence of the churches of Crete was one of singular fitness. "There was," as it has been well said, "a strange blending of races and religions " in the island which boasted the pos- session of the birthplace of Zeus (Jupiter), and rejoiced in the vile mysteries practised in the worship of Dionysus (Bacchus). There were many Jews, we know, at Crete, but the Gentile population, of coui-se, far outnumbered them. The congi'egation seem to have been numerous and full of life, but dis- organised and troubled with dis- order, misrule, and even dishonoured with many an excess utterly at variance with their Christian pro- fession. Who so fitted to restore order and to enforce a sterner rule in such communities as the friend of St. Paul, who had worked already so great a work among the tm'bulent and licentious Chi-istians of Corinth, and had persuaded by his marvellous skill so many Gen- tile congregations to unite in help- ing with a generous liberality the pressing needs of their proud and haughty Jewish brethi-en who had treated them with dis- dain? After the year a.d. 65 — 66 the story of Titus is uncertain. We know he rejoined the Apostle at Rome, and left him again for Dal- matia (2 Tim. iv. 10). Then traditionary recollections which lingered in Crete tell us how he returned from Dalmatia to the island, where he worked long and presided over the churches, and died at an advanced age. The chm-ch of ]\Iegalo-Castron, in the north of the island, was dedicated to him. In the ]\Iiddle Ages, his name was still revered, and his memory hon- oured. The name of Titus was the watchword of the Cretans when they fought against the Venetians, who came under the standard of St. Mark. The Venetians themselves, when here, seem to have transferred to him part of that respect which elsewhere would probably have been manifested for St. Mark alone. Diu-ing the celebration of several great festivals of the Church the response of the Latin clergy of Crete, after the prayer for the Doge of Venice, was, Sancte Marce tu nos adjuva ; but after that for the Diike of Candia, Sancte Tlte tu nos adjuva (Pashley's Travels in Crete^ quoted by Conybeare and Howson, St. Paul). II. Contents of the Epistle. — After a formal salutation and greeting St. Paul reminds Titus of his special work in Crete, viz., that the government of the various chui'ches must be properly organ- ised — a body of elders, or presby- ters, must be ordained and set over the congregation. The qualifica- TITUS. 249 tions of these officers are then de- tailed. They are for the most part of a moral nature ; hut these elders must also possess the power neces- sary for teaching and influencing such a people as were the Cretans (chap. i. 1 — 16). Rt. Paul passes on to the special kind of in- struction Titus and the elders must impart to men and women of varied ages, sexes, and ranks in the Cretan churches — to aged men, to aged women, to the young of both sexes, to slaves — and then pro- ceeds to show the 'reason why such instruction must he given. God's grace, he says, has appeared in the work of redemption, hriniiins: sal- vation to all — old or young, free or slaves ■ (chap. ii. 1 — 15). St. Paul now points out to Titus how the Christian community must conduct themselves towards the heathen world. There must he no thought of rebellion among the worshippers of the Lord Jesus. Again he en- forces these solemn admonitions by an appeal to the loftiest Christian truths. He closes his Letter by re- minding his friend that this prac- tical teaching, based on gospel truth, must be the standard of in- struction ; no time must be wasted on useless theological questions. A few personal requests are added (chap. iii. 1 — 15). PHILEMON. Br THE Eight Ekt. ALFKED BAEEY, D.D. I. The Date, Place, and Occasion of the Epistle. — These are all perfectly clear. The Ej)istle is of the same date as the Epistle to the Colossians, sent hy Onesimus, who was one of the bearers of that Epistle (Col. iv. 9) ; dwelling emphatically on St. Paul's imprisonment (verses 1, 9), looking forward confidently to a speedy re- lease and a return to Asia (verse 22). Even the salutations, with one exception, are the same in both (verses 23, 24, comp. with Col. iv. 10 — 14). It is "^Titten to intercede with Philemon for Onesimus, his slave — formerly " unprofitable," a runaway, and probably a thief, but now converted to a new life by St. Paul at Eome, and after his conversion becoming at once "pro- fitable " to St. Paul for ministration in his captivity, and likely to be profitable also to his old master, to whom, accordingly, St. Paul sends him back, with this letter of inter- IL The Persons to whom it is addressed. — All we know of Philemon is gathered from this Epistle. It is nowhere actually said he was a Colossian ; but this is in- ferred from the fact that Onesimus, lis slave, is described as of Colossse (Col. iv. 9). It is clear that he was St. Paul's convert ; but, as the Apostle had not visited Coloss;u (Col. ii. 1), we may probably con- jecture that he had been brought under his influence during his long stay at Ephesus. Possibly, like Epaphras (Col. i. 7), he had been, under St. Paul's auspices, an evan- gelist of his native place. For he is evidentl ,- a man of mark ; " the Church" gathers " in his house ; " he is able, by his love, " to refresh the hearts of the saints," probably by temporal as well as spiritual gifts ; to him St. Paul entrusts the charge of preparing a lodging for his hoped-for visit, and describes that visit as " being granted," " tlirough his prayers," to him and his. We note also that the Apostle treats him as almost an equal — as a "brother" (not "a son"), as "a fellow-labourer," and as a "part- ner." This last phrase — used distinc- tively, and without any words of limitation to some particular work — is unique. It occurs in close connection with the promise on St. Paul's part to take upon himself the pecuniary responsibility of any default of Onesimus — a promise emphasised by the writing of a bond of obligation in legal form. Ac- PHILEMON. 251 cordingly, it has Leen supposed that Philemon was St. Paul's partner in the " tent-makmg- " by which he maintained himself with Aquila and Priscilla — first, certainly, at Corinth (Acts xA-iii. 3), and afterwards, as it appears (Acts xx. 35), at Ephesus ; that he may have still had in his hands some of the money earned by that common labour, and that from this St. Paul offers to discharge the obligation taken upon himself for Onesimus. The supposition is ingenious, and certainly quite pos- sible ; but it revolts against all our conceptions of St. Paul's character to suppose that he would work be- yond what was actually necessary for maintenance, so as to accumixlate money, and keep a regular debtor and creditor account with Philemon. Nor is it easy to see why, if this was so, he should have so ui^gently needed in prison the supplies sent from Philippi (Phil. iv. 10—13). Accordingly, it seems better to refer the "partnership" or com- munion " (see verse 6 of the Epistle) principally, if not exclusively, to some united work of evangelisation or beneficence (possibly demised during the common labour at Ephesus) for the Churches of Asia, and especially for the Church of Colossae. Ecclesiastical tradition, as usual, makes Philemon the Bishop of Colossae in the hereafter. Of Apphia we know nothing, except that tradition, and the style in which the Epistle mentions her, both support the idea that she was Philemon's wife. Archippus, a minister of the Church, either of ColossaB or of Laodicea (see Col. iv. 7), is on the same gTOund sup- posed to have been his son. The tone of the whole Epistle gives the impression of some wealth and dig- nity in the family, nobly used for the relief of necessity and the knit- ting closer of^the bonds of Christian unity. III. The Genuineness of the Epistle. — It is notable that, un- like the other two personal Epistles — the Second and the Third of St. John, if, indeed, the Second be really personal — this Epistle found its place in all catalogues, from the Muratorian Canon downwards, and in all the ancient versions. We might have supposed that, in re- spect of such reception, it would have suffered from the improba- bility of any public reading in the Church, from the want of adapta- bility to theological or ecclesiastical uses, and from the idea which seems to have prevailed — which is noticed by St. Chiysostom on the Epistle, and which St. Jerome in. his j)reface to the Epistle (vol. A'ii., p. 742, ed. Vallarsii, 1737) refutes with his usual strong sense and trenchancy — that the occasion and the substance of the Epistle were too low for the Apostolic inspira- tion. "They will have it," St. Jerome says, "either that the Epistle which is addressed to Phile- mon is not St. Paul's, or that, even if it be his, it has nothing in it tending to our edification ; and that by many of the ancients it was re- jected, since it was written for the purpose merely of commendation, not of instruction." But this kind of criticism did not prevail against the common acceptance of its authenticity. Even Marcion did not tamper with it, as Tertullian {adv. Marc. v. 42) and St. Jerome expressly declare. Origen, the great critic of the East, as St. Jerome of the West, quotes it with- out hesitation. In the Church generally it remained unshaken as 252 NEW TESTAIMENT INTEODUCTIONS. one of the Epistles accepted by all. In the larger criticism of modern times the very reasons which in- duced doubt in the fourth and fifth centuries will be accepted as the strongest internal evidence of its genuineness. The utter impro- bability of the forging of such an Epistle, which admits of no contro- versial or directly theological use, the exquisite beauty and natural- ness of the whole style, even the vivid pi +ure which it gives of an ancient Christian family — all have been felt to preclude any except the most wanton scepticism as to its genuineness. It is hard to con- ceive how any one can read it with- out feeling that we have in it a picture of the Apostle of the Gen- tiles, wliich we could ill afford to lose, but which no hand, except his own, would have ever ventured to paint. IV. The Substance of the Epistle. — The great interest of this Epistle is two-fold — (1) in its personal relation to St. Paul's life and character, and (2) in the light which it throws on the attitude of the gospel towards slavery. (1) It is the only strictly private Letter of St. Paul — the one sur- vivor, we may suppose, of very many — preserved to us in the Canon of Holy Scrij)ture. For all the other Epistles are either Letters to the Churches, or Pastoral Epis- tles of authoritative direction. Ac- cordingly it exhibits the Apostle in a new light. He throws off, as far as possible, his Apostolic dignity, and his fatherly authority over his converts. He speaks simply as Christian to Christian. He speaks, therefore, with that peculiar grace of humility and courtesy, which has, under the reign of Christi- anity, developed the spirit of chivahy, and what is called "the character of a gentleman" — cer- tainly very little known in the old Greek and Eoman civilisations — while yet in its graceful flexibility and vivacit}' it stands contrasted with the more impassive Oriental stateliness. It has been customary and natural to compare with it a celebrated letter of the younger Pliny on a like occasion [Ep. ix. 21, quoted in Dr. Lightfoot's In- troduclion). But in Pliny himself there was a tone of feeling differ- ing very much from the more an- cient Roman character, approach- ing more nearly to the modern t}^e. It would be curious to in- quire whether, in this tone of cha- racter, as in the actual tenets of the later stoicism, there might not be some unknown and indirect influ- ence of the Christianit}^ which as yet would have been probably de- spised. Nor will the comparison for a moment place even the highly accomplished and cultivated Koman on a level with the Jewish tent- maker of Tarsus. There is to us a vivid interest in the glimpse thus given into the private and personal life of St. Paul. We note, for example, the difference of tone — the greater pathos and the less unqualified re- joicing — in which he speaks of his captivity. We observe the glad- ness with which, when he rightly may, he throws off the isolation of authority, and descends into the familiarity of equal intercourse, lingering with an obvious delight in the very word "brother," which breathes the very spirit of freedom and equality. We see how, under the Apostolic mission, as under the Apostolic inspiration, PHILEMON. 253 free play of personal character and of familiar companionsliip could still live and flourish. We seem to know St. Paul better, even as an Apostle, because we are allowed to see him when he chooses not to be an Apostle, but a *' partner," and, moreover, " such an one as Paul the aged, and the prisoner of Jesus Christ." But, even beyond this, we may fairly draw from this Epistle a priceless lesson as to the place wliich true courtesy and delicacy occupy in Clmstian character, and especially as to their entire "compatibility with high Apostolic enthusiasm, with a keen insight into realities as distinct from forms, and with the greatest j)ossible plainness of speech in due season. We feel, as we read, how little it accords with the idea that Christian men and Christian ministers " have nothing to do with being gentlemen." We understand how true courtesy, as distinct from artificial and technical culture of manners, is the natural outgrowth of the " lowliness of mind " in which " each esteems other better than himself," and of the sympathy of love which *< looks not only upon our own things," but, even in greater degree, " upon the things of others." (2) But of far greater interest still is the illustration of the atti- tude assumed in the New Testament, and in the early Church, towards the monstrous institution of slavery. How deeply that institution of slavery was engrained in all the history of antiquity, both Eastern and Western, we know well. Nor will this surprise any one who re- members that inequality — physical, mental, and spiritual — is, quite as truly as equality, the law of human life. Ser\dce and lordship, in some sense, there must always be ; and it is absui'd to deny that this law is, because we wish that it were not, or perhaps think that it ought not to be. But equality is the law of the primary qualities and rights of nature ; inequality only of the secondaiy qualities and rights. If this relation be reversed in prac- tice, we pass from what is natural to that which, however fi'equent, is yet fatally unnatural. Slavery is just such a reversal. Because one race is stronger, abler, more com- manding, more civilised than another, this is made a ground for crushing out, in the weaker race, all the essential attributes of hu- manity. Primarily by the imna- tural agency of war, secondarily by systematised organisation in peace, the slave is made to cease to be a man : he is treated simply as a brute beast of somewhat higher organisation and usefulness than his fellows, or even " as a living chattel or machine " — having no rights whatever, except those which humanity may teach towards the lower creatures, or expediency en- force in relation to the machinery of the prosperity and progress of the master. Since, in some sense, freedom of action and cultivation bring out natural inequalities more and more strikingly, slavery, in the absence of some comiterbalancing power, rather advanced than re- ceded with the progress of heathen civilisation. Tinder the Eoman Empire, depending mainly on or- ganised force rather than on intel- lectual cultivation, it presented this characteristic and intolerable in- congruity, that it held in bondage men at least as noble in race as their conquerors, men even more highly crdtivated, and heirs of more an- cient civilisations. 254 XEW TESTAilENT INTRODUCTIONS. That the Old Testament should recognise the existence of slavery, especially in inferior and degraded races, was only to be expected. That slavery under the patriarchal simplicity should have heen lighter than under the higher civilisation of the nation of Israel, though at first sight startling, is j^et, on more careful thought, seen to be natural. That the Mosaic law should at- tempt only to mitigate the irre- sponsible despotism of the master, and that in this respect it should make a marked distinction between the Israelite and the foreigner, is thoroughly accordant with our Lord's declaration, that it was made " for the hardness of men's hearts," and with the exclusiveness of privilege which it claimed in all things for the chosen race. Slavery, according!}'-, continued in the Jewish people, though— thanks to those mitigations of the Law, to the protest against oppression and cruelty so familiar to us in pro- phecy, and to the very influence of a spiritual religi-on, wherever this was really accepted — it was actually very far milder than under Greece or Eome. Still it did exist. Nor will this surprise those who have duly weighed — what advocates and opponents of slavery, in dealing with the Old Testament, have con- stantly failed to weigh — the essen- tially imperfect and preparatory character of the Jewish covenant. But what line would Christianity take ? Nothing, of course, could be clearer than that it was radically opposed in principle to the whole conception and practice of slavery. For it brought out the fimdamental equality or brotherhood of all, in the regenerate human nature, in which "there was neither Jew nor Greek, barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free." It devoted itself with a verj'- special earnestness to redress all existing inequalities, by exalt- ing the humble, by glorifying weakness, by restraining the self- assertion of strength. Above aU, it consecrated that brotherhood in Jesus Christ ; its whole conception of the spiritual life consisted in the union of each individual soul with God in Christ, so giving to indi- viduality a sacredness utterly in- compatible with the very possibility of absolute despotism of one Chris- tian man over another. But of carrying out the principle there were two ways. One was, so to speak, *' of law," embodying it at once in a declaration of freedom, abrogating all slavery within the Christian Church, protesting against it, as against all moral evils, in the world at large. The other was *< of the Spirit," proclaiming the great truth of brotherhood in Christ and sonship or God, and then leaving it gradually to mould to itself all in- stitutions of society, and to eradi- cate whatever in them was against God's fundamental law, reasserted in the word of Jesus Christ. Now of these two ways it is not hard to see that to adojDt the former way would have been to revolutionise suddenly the whole of society, to preach (though unwillingly) a servile war, and to arm all existing goverrmients by the very instinct of self-preservation against the infant Church, which, even as it was, excited their suspicion and alarm. Independently of all thought of consequences, we could not but anticipate that by its very nature Christianity would take the way of the Spirit, rather than the Law. But there can be no doubt that, historically, this was the way ■\\ hieh it did take without hesita- PTirLE^^rox 2o5 tion or reserve. The princi'i^le Laid doN\Ti broadly hy St. Paiil (1 Cor. vii. 20 — 24) was that " every man should abide " in the outward condition "in which he was called," only "with God," in the new spiritual unity with God sealed to liim in the hlood of Jesus Christ; He apphed that principle to the cases of circumcision and uncir- cumcision, marriage and celibacy ; he did not shrink from applpng it for the Christian community to the case of submission to " the powers that be," even to death, and for the indi\ddual to the crucial and extreme case of slavery and freedom. However we may interpret the Apostl'd's words in 1 Cor. -sdi. 21, Ihey clearly imply that to one w^ho is at once " the Lord's freeman" and " Christ's slave " the outward con- dition matters comparatively little. It may be that in this case, as in the case of marriage, St. Paul was partly influenced by the considera- tion that " the time w^as short." Yet his teaching really depended, not on this expectation, but on the fundamental piinciple and method of Christianity. The declaration, "Not now a slave, but a brother " a " brother beloved," and " a brother beloved in the Lord," brought the forces of human duty and human affection, under the in- spiration of religious faith, to bear on the prison-house of slavery. Deeply founded as its walls were, and cemented by the use of cen- turies, they coiold not but fall under the combined attack of these three irresistible powers. Meanwhile the gospel set itself to two immediate works. First, to raise the self-respect of the slave, to comfort his sorrow, to nerve him to bear the hardships of his cruel lot. This it did sometimes by glorifying suffering, in the bold declaration to the slave that his suffering, whatever it was, wa.? a brotherhood in the suffering of the Lord Jesus Christ, who Himself "took upon Him the form of a slave," and " suffering for us left an ensample," in which even the helpless and despised slave could " foUow His steps " (1 Pet. ii. 18— 25) . Sometimes, on the other hand, by setting forth to him the spiri- tual freedom, which no "master after the flesh " could take away, and by declaring that all service was ultimately a service to the Lord, to be rendered not only " from the heart," but " of good will," and rewarded here and here- after with the heavenl}'- prize (Eph. vi. 5—8; Col. iii. 22—25). Under both these convictions it taught the slave still to be patient under "subjection," till the end should come. Next, Christianity turned to the masters. It bade them remember their responsibility to the same Master in heaven, under whom their slaves served, and who would certainly make, in His strict retribution, no "respect of persons ; " it claimed that they should "do the same things" to their slaves, recognising a mutual duty, and giving them all that was "just and equal," due to the inde- feasible rights of humanity ; above all, that they should recognise in them a common brotherhood in Christ. Now this is precisely the line which St. Paul pursues in respect of Onesimus. He, the runaway slave of Philemon, apparently an idler and a thief, had made his way to Eome, " the sink," as its writers bitterly complained, " of the civilised world." There St. 256 NEW TESTAMENT INTKODUCTIONS. Paul had somehow found him, and had regenerated the true humanity which had heen degraded in him. He had found him a dear son ; he had felt the comfort of his affec- tionate ministration. How deeply this had impressed on his mind the whole question of slaves and mas- ters we see bj^ the strong emphasis, marked hy almost verbal coinci- dence, with which, in the Ephesian and Colossian Epistles, he dwells on the subject generally. But, coming to the particular case, he bids Onesimus acknowledge the mastership of Philemon, and go back to submit to him, and to offer atonement for his past misdeeds and flight. He will not even in- terpose by authority, or, by keep- ing Onesimus at Ifome, put any constraint on Philemon's freedom to use his legal power. But he shows, by his own example, that the slave is to be treated as a son. He sends him back, not as a slave, but as "a brother beloved in the Lord." He " knew that Philemon would do even more than he said." He may ha^•e looked forward in prophetic foresight to the time when the whole Christian com- munity, like Philemon, should draw the inference, unspoken but irresistible, and set absolutely free those who were not slaves, but brethren. That expectation has been re- alised. It is remarkable that from very early days the iron cruelty of this Eoman slave law began to give way. We may allow much in this respect to the growing dominion of universal law, and to the influence of the nobler philosophies ; but we may be permitted to doubt whether the unacknowledged principles of Chi'istianity were not already leavening public opinion, and be- ginning to make the change even in law, which was afterwards seen in the codes of Christian emperors. But one thing is certain histori- cally, that in the abolition, cer- tainly of ancient serfship in Eu- rope, and pei-haps of modern serf- ship in Russia, in the prohibition of the slave trade, in the great sacrifices for emancipation made by England in the last generation, and the United States of America in this, it was Christianity, and not simple philanthropy, which actually did the beneficent work. The battle was the battle of humanity ; but it was fought under the banner of the Cross. Even while we wonder that the victory should have been so long in coming, we must confess that it has been won ; and against all forms of mitigated slavery in modern society, experience cer- tainly warns us to trust, not to the sense of common interest, the con- viction of mutual duty, or even the enthusiasm of philanthropy, but to the faith which recognises in the poorest and the weakest, even in the idler and the sinner, "a brother beloved in the Lord," HEBREWS. Et the Rev. F. W. MOULTOX, D.TJ. As the Epistle to the Hehrews is presented to the reader in our Entilish Bibles, various questions which beset many other books of the New Testament appear to have no place. It is entitled "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews " ; and from the subscrip- tion we learn that it was written in Italy and sent to its readers by the hand of Timothy. It is hardly necessary to say that, whether these statements have or have not a foim.dation in fact, they are wholly destitute of authority here ; for no ancient manuscript adds to the Epistle anything bevond the simple words "To the Hebrews," and even this inscription can scarcely have been affixed by the writer himself. Within the few pages at our disposal we can do little more than present a summary of the ancient evidence on the points in question and the chief results of modem investigation. I. Ancient Testimonies. Canonieity. — That the E]pistle was known and read before the close of the first century is beyond doubt. The earliest Christian writing beyond the limits of the New Testament is the Epistle addressed to the Church of Corinth (about A.i). 9-3), by Clement, writing in the name of the Eoman Church. This Letter contains no express quotation from any Book of the Xew Testament, and one only (the First Epistle of St. Paul to the I same Church) is mentioned by name. In several places, however, words from some of St. Paul's Epistles are interwoven with the text without formal introduction. In exactly the same manner, but to a greater extent, does Clement make use of the Epistle to the Hebrews, as the following quota- tion (from chap, xxxvi.) will show : "Through Him the Lord wiUed that we should taste the immortal knowledge ; who, being the bright- ness (or, effulgence) of His majesty, is so much greater than angels as He hath inherited a more excellent name. For it is thus written : He who maketh His angels winds (or, spirits), and His ministers a flame of fire. But iu regard to His Son thus said the Lord : Thou art My Son, I have this day begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I will give Thee nations as Thine inheritance, and as Thy possession the ends of the earth. And again He saith unto Him : Sit at My right hand, until 17 258 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. I have made Thine enemies a foot- stool of Thy feet." This passage does not standalone; but of itself it is sufficient to prove that the Epistle was -well known to the Roman Church at this envlj date. The traces of the Epistle in the second century are clear, hut not numerous until we reach its closing years. Quotations present themselves in the Homily which is commonly called Clement's Second Epistle, written at Corinth or Rome about A.D. 140 ; in writings of Justin Martyr (a.d. 145), Pinytus, of Crete (a.b. 170), Theophilus, Bishop of Antioch (a.d. 180). It is also impoi'tant to note that the Epistle was one of the twenty-two books included in the Syriac version of the New Testament, the date of which is probably not later than A.D. 150. That Marcion should have rejected the Epistle, and that it is passed over in the Muratorian Fragment (probably written at Rome about a.d. 170) are points of little consequence ; for Marcion is known to have rejected whatever conflicted with his system of doctrine, and the Latin document has not come down to us complete. One testimony belonging to the close of the second or the beginning of the third century is of great interest and importance. It is found in one of the works of Clement, who succeeded Panta^nus as head of the catechetical school of Alexandria, about a.d. 190. The work itself survives in fi-agments only; but the following passage is preserved by Eusebius {Eccles. History, vi. 14) : " And in his Outlines, to speak generally, he (Clement) has given brief exposi- tions of all canonical Scripture, not even passing by the disputed books — I mean the Epistle of Jude and the rest of the Catholic Epistles, the Epistle of Barnabas and the so-called Apocalypse of Peter. And, moreover, he says that the Epistle to the Hebrews was PauFs, but had been written to the Hebrews in the Hebrew language, and that Luke, having with great care trans- lated it, published it for the Greeks ; hence this Epistle and the Acts are found to have the same colouring of style and diction. He remarks that the Epistle does not begin with ' Paul an Apostle,' and with reason ; for (he says), writing to Hebrews, men who had become prejudiced against him and were suspicious of him, he acted very wisely in not rej)elling them at the outset by giving his name. Then a Httle below he adds : And as the blessed presbyter before now used to say, since the Lord, as Apostle of the Almighty, was sent to Hebrews, Paul through modesty, as having been sent to Gentiles, does not inscribe himself Apostle of Hebrews, because of the honour belonging to the Lord, and also because he went beyond his bounds in addressing Hebrews also, when he was herald and Apostle of Gen- tiles." We can hardly doubt that by "the blessed presbyter" is meant Panta^nus, whom Clement held in the highest esteem. "Thus" (as Dr. Westcott observes) "the tradi- tion is carried up almost to the Apostolic age." It will be seen that with a strong affirmation of the Pauline authorship of the Epistle is joined a distinct recog- nition of its unlikeness to the other writings of the Apostle. Of much greater importance is the testimony of Origen. Many passages from his writings might be quoted in which he speaks of the Epistle as HEBREWS. 259 St. Paul's, and many more in which. he appeals to it as to other portions of the New Testament, without any reference to authorship. In one of his latest works, however, Homilies on the Hebrews (written between a.d. 245 and 253), we have the complete expression of his views. The Homihes are not preseiwed to us, hut the passage is given by Eusehius in his Eccles. History (vi. 25), and is as follows : "That the style of the Epistle which hears the superscription To the Hchrcxcs does not exhibit the Apostle's plainness in speech (though he confessed himself to be plain in his speech, that is, in his diction), but that the Epistle is more Grecian in its com- position, every one who knows how to judge of differences of diction would acknowledge. And again, that the thoughts of the Epistle are wonderful, and not inferior to the acknowledged writings of the Apostle, this, too, every one who gives attention to the reading of the . Apostle's words would allow to be true." To this, after other remarks, he adds : " But if I were to give mj'-own opinion, I should say that the thoughts belong to the Apostle, but the diction and the composition to some one who wrote from memory the Apostle's teach- ing, and who, as it were, commented on that which had been said by his teacher. If, then, any Church holds this Epistle to be Paul's, let it be approved even for this. For not without reason have the men of olden time handed it down as I^aul's. But as to the question who wrote the Epistle, the truth is known by God (only) ; but the account which has reached us is a statement by some that Clement who became Bishop of Rome was the writer, by others that it was Lake, who wrote the Gospel and the Acts." The influence of Origen would naturally be great in removing doubts as to the acceptance of the Epistle. AArhilst the more thought- ful Avould learn from him to dis- tinguish between directly apostoUc authorsliip and canonicity, the effect of his opinion and example on the many would be to strengthen the belief that the Epistle should be accounted St. Paul's. From this time onwards the Church of Alex- andria, as represented by a succes- sion of wiuters, seems to have held the Pauline authorship as a matter free from doubt. It is otherwise with the Latin writers of jN orth Africa. Tertulhan (about A.D. 200), indeed, once quotes some verses of chapter vi., but assigns them to the Epistle of Barnabas to the Hebrews; an Epistle which, he says, deserves more re- spect than the Shepherd of Hermas, as being written by a man who learnt from Apostles and taught with Apostles. Xo other certain quotation from the Epistle presents itself in Latin writers for many years. At the close of the third century it would seem, as far as wo may judge from extant Christian literature, that the Epistle was known and received by the Churches of Alexandria, Sj^ria, Rome, and Asia ]Minor, and that in Alexandria and Syria it was regarded as a work of St. Paul. Writing before a.d. 326, Eusebius expressly mentions the Church of Rome as rejecting the Pauline authorship of the Epistle. It is not necessary to give any express quotations from wT-iters of the fourth century. By this time the doubts respecting the Epistle are confined to the Western Churches : in Syria, Palestine, Asia 260 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. IMinor, Alexandria, Constantinople, j the Pauline authorship appears to ' have heen universally admitted. The influence of Jerome and Augustine ultimately prevailed in the "West : neither of these eminent Fathers appears really to have re- garded the Epistle as St. Paul's, but they agree in the expression of a strong conviction of its canonical authority. The ohject of this summary of ancient evidence has heen to show how the Epistle won its way to universal acknowledgment as a part of sacred Scripture, and at the same time to present the chief testi- monies of the early Church on the other important questions which concern the Book. It cannot he thought siu'prising that for a time many should evince hesitation in regard to such a document as this — anonjTnous, peculiar in character, and addressed to a special and limited circle of readers. The douhts have in later times had little power. Their effect may, for the most part, he traced in a vary- ing estimate of the importance of the Book as compared with the un- doubted writings of St. Paul. II. Authorship. — In regard to the authorship of the Epistle, the most important ancient testimonies have heen cited already; and in them we find more or less clearly stated almost all the possible solu- tions of the prohlem. The charac- ter of the Epistle is heyond all question Paul-like (if we may so speak, to avoid the ambiguity of "Pauline"). If then it is not to be ascribed directly to St. Paul, we must suppose either (1) that it is a translation from a Hebrew original written by him; or (2) that, whilst the suhstance of the Epistle is his, the diction and style helong to one of his companions, who, for some unexplained cause, put the Apostle's thoughts into form ; or (3) that the Epistle was written hy a friend or disciple of St. Paul. Each of the four hypotheses may, as we have said, claim the evidence of early writers ; but it is a matter of ex- treme difficulty rightly to estimate the value of this evidence. That the Epistle was directly written hy St. Paul is an opinion of which we have no distinct evidence earlier than the third centmy. Even then the language used on the suhject is not perfectly clear ; for Ori gen's example proves that the quotation of the Epistle under St. Paul's name may mean nothing more than a re- cognition that its substance and teaching are his. If Origen had influence in producing the later consensus of opinion as to the authorship, that opinion may fairly he judged of (to a considerable ex- tent) hy reference to Origen's own explanation of the sense in which he ascribed the Epistle to St. Paul. At aU events, his plain statement of the case as it presented itself in his day seems distinctly to prove that there existed no such clear and authoiitative tradition in favour of the Pauline authorship as might claim our submission, upon the ordinary principles of literary criticism. To internal evidence Origen makes appeal : to the same test of internal evidence we beheve the case must now he hrought. Similar ohservations apply to the other hypotheses. Each of these appears earlier in existing docu- ments than that of which we have heen speaking. The opinion ex- pressed hy Clement, that the Greek Epistle is a translation, was proh- ably derived by him from Pantae- HEBREWS. 261 nus : the traditions mentioned by Origen cannot be of later date ; and TertuUian's reference to Barnabas carries back the last hypothesis to the close of the second century. But again it is impossible to say whether the ancient testimonies present in- dependent evidence, or are no more than conjectures to explain the patent facts. At all events, the variance in the traditions may leave our judgment free, especially as we can plainly perceive in what way the traditions might very possibly arise. If we now proceed to test each of the hypotheses that have been mentioned by the testimony which the Epistle gives respecting itself, the first question to be decided is, Have we the Epistle in its original form ? If the opinion quoted by Clement is correct — that the Greek document before us is a translation ■ — our right to argue from its characteristics will be materially affected. This opinion has not lacked advocates, and has been in recent years, maintained in an able but disappointing work by Dr. Biesenthal. "We have no space here for the discussion of such a question, and can only express in a word or two the results to which the evidence before us leads. We do not hesitate to say that the hypothesis appears absolutely un- tenable : for one diflBcuity which it removes, it introduces many more. Dr. Biesenthal' s own treatment of various passages is sufficient to show that those who regard the Epistle as translated from a Hebrew original must necessaiily regard it as a translation that is often in- accurate, and needs the correction of the commentator. Few will be prepared to surrender the Epistle to such treatment, unless' under constraint of argument Immeasur- ably stronger than any yet ad- duced. Our inquiry therefore is limited to the Greek Epistle as it stands. The questions at issue are very simple. What is there, either in the substance or in the diction of the Epistle, tbat may lead us to ascribe it to St. Paul ? What pecu- liarities of thought or language separate it from its writings ? In its general arrangement and plan the Epistle to the Hebrews cannot but remind us of St. Baul? It is true there is no opening s;ilutation or direct adckess, such as is found in all iSt. Paul's Epistles. These Epistles, however, differ greatly amongst themselves in this respect. Thus, in waiting to the Galatians, the Apostle is impatient of any- thing that may detain him from the great topics on which he is to speak ; and it is possible to imagine reasons which might lead him to avoid all mention of the Church addressed, and even to keep back his own name. But, waiving this, we recognise at once the familiar I)lan : first the discussion of dog- matic truth ; then the earnest ex- hortation based on the doctrine thus presented; and, lastly, the salutations, interwoven with per- sonal notices, with doxology and prayer. The main otithnes of theological teaching are in close accord with St. Paul's Epistles : chaps, ii. and v., for example, as strikingly recall Phil, ii., as does chapter xiii. the closing chapter in the Epistle to the Romans. Other points of special resemblance will easily suggest themselves, such as ■^he relation of the writer to those whom he addresses (chap. xiii. 18, 19, &c.) the mode in which he refers to Timothy (verse 23), his 262 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Pauline illustrations (see chaps, v. 12, 13; xii. 1 — 4), his clioice of Old Testament passages. Under the last head may he specially mentioned the quotation of Ps, viii. (1 Cor. XV. 25—28) and Deut. xxxiii. 30 (Rom. xii. 19); see chaps. ii. 6 ; X. 30. It is not necessary in this place to go into fiu'ther detail in proof of a position allowed hy all, that (as has heen already said) the Epistle, whether by St. Paul or not, is Paul-like in the general character of its teach- ing and in many of its special features. It is of much greater moment to examine those passages of the Epistle and those peculiarities of teaching or language which have heen adduced as inconsistent with the Pauline authorship. Resem- blance may be accounted for more readily than points of diiference ; for a disciple of St. Paul would hardly fail to exhibit many of the traits characteristic of such a master. Here, it will be seen, the distinction between style and sub- ject matter must be carefully ob- served. If this Epistle could be proved to differ in diction only from the acknowledged ^^^itings of St. Paul, some theory of mediate authorship (similar to that men- tioned by Origen) would be very possible ; if the discordances lie deeper, no such theory can be maintained. When an argument must rest on characteristics of Greek diction and style, it is very probable that different conclusions may be reached by different readers. This question, again, cannot be examined here in any detail. The writer can only state the impression made upon his own mind by the original text, and especially by the careful ! study pursued for the purpose I of this work. From poiut to point the general likeness of the Epistle to St. Paul's writings came out more and more plainly ; on the other hand arose a continually in- creasing wonder that the Greek sentences and periods should ever have been attributed to that Apos- tle's hand. We have before us Epistles belonging to 'every period during the last thirteen or fom-teen years of St. Paul's life, written under widely different circum- stances, — some during the enforced leisure of imprisonment, others amid active labour. We can trace differences of style resulting both from the time of writing and from the circumstances which called forth the Epistles ; but these differ- ences lie within a comparatively narrow compass. At whatever date St. Paul might be supposed to have wi'itten this Epistle, we can compare it with some other of his writings belonging nearly to the same period ; and the differ- ences of language and st^-le pre- sented by the two documents are, we are persuaded, far greater than those presented by the most dis- similar of the thirteen Epistles. Stress has been laid on the unique character of this Epistle, as the only one addressed to the Hebrews by the Apostle of the Gentiles ; but it has been well asked why St. Paul should adopt a more finished Greek style in addressing Jews than when writing to the Greeks of Corinth. For ourselves we must express our decided conviction that, whatever may be the relation of the Epistle to St. Paul, the composition of the Greek was certainly not his. The remaining points of differ- ence which (it is alleged) separate j this Epistle from St. Paul's writ- HEBREWS. 263 ings, may be ranged under the following heads : — (1) statements of fact which we cannot suppose to have proceeded from the Apostle ; (2) divergence in doctrinal view (3) peculiarities in the use of the Old Testament; (4) the use made of Alexandrian writers. (1) The most important passage is chap. ii. 3: "which (salvation) at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard."' In these words the writer appears distinctly to sever himself from those who had directly recei^•ed the word from the Lord. It is urged that he is here associating himself with his readers, as when in chap. iv. 1 he writes, "Let us therefore fear;" see also chaps, x. 24, 2o, 26 ; xii. 1, et al. We Avill not venture to say that an Apostle could not have thus written ; but, bearing in mind the necessity which lay upon St. Paul to defend his Apostolic posi- tion, and the claim which he con- sistently makes to have received his teaching by direct revelation (Gal. i. 1, 11, 12, et al), we must hold it extremely improbable that he should use words that might even appear to represent him only as a disciple of the Apostles. On the other passages which have been brought into this controversy a very difi^erent judgment must be passed. It is alleged that in the description of the Temple furni- ture (chap, i.x.) the writer falls into mistakes, asserting that the altar of incense (or, the golden censer) was placed in the Holy of Holies, that the ark contained the pot of manna and Aaron's rod, and that even in his o^vn day the ^lost Holy Place into which the high priest entered year by year still contained the cherubim and the ayk of the covenant. If the wiiter has in- deed fallen into these mistakes, we may safely say that he is not St. Paul. But, as it would not be difficult to show in detail, there is no real reason for im- pugning the accuracy of his words. Is part of his description relates to the Temple services or furnituie : he is occupied through- out with the injunctions of the Mosaic law and the arrangements of the Tabernacle. Even the asso- ciation of the altar of incense with the Most Holy Place may be very easily explained. If the view we have taken is correct, this argu- ment against the Pauline author- ship must fall to the ground. It is not necessary, therefore, to do more than mention the ingenious attempt of Wieseler to show that in the descriptions of chap. ix. the writer had in mind, not the Taber- nacle or the Temple of Jerusalem, but the temple built by Onias at Leontopolis in Lower Egypt (about B.C. 170). (2) The alleged differences of doc- trinnl statement are of three kinds. Of St. Paul's favourite toj^ics some are absent from this Epistle, some are treated in a different manner : and, again, certain themes here brought into prominence are not noticed in the Epistles of St. Paul. Thus we find only one passage in this Epistle in which the Resurrec- tion of our Lord, ever a prominent topic with St. Paul, is mentioned (see chap. xiii. 20) ; the law, faith, righteousness, are looked at from a different point of view ; the promi- nence here given to the High- priesthood of Jesus is foreign to St. Paul's P]j)i sties. It would require a volume duly to examine the various particulars adduced under this head; for the real question is not whether 264 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. the teaching is oji^^osed to St. Paul's, "but "whether the various themes are treated in the manner characteristic of the Apostle. We do not helieve that the most careful examination ■will detect any real discord between the dogmatic "teaching of this Epis- tle and that of St. Paul; hut the peculiarities of selection of topics and in mode of treatment are suffi- cient (even when all allowance has been made for the special position and aim of the Epistle) to suggest that, if St. Paul '• laid the founda- tion," it is another who " huildeth thereon," " according to the grace of God which is given unto " him (1 Cor. iii. 10). The resemblances in teaching may show the presence of the Apostle, but the new colour- ing and arrangement prove that he is present only in the person of a disciple on whom his master's man- tle has fallen, and who is taught by the same Spirit. (3) A similar conclusion is sug- gested by a review of the arguments that are founded on the difference in the use of the Old Testament. It need hardly be said that in the Epistle before us this subject is of the greatest consequence, for "the whole argument of the Epistle de- pends on the reality of the spi- ritual meaning of the Old Testa- ment." But the essential principle involved is found as truly in St. Paul (see 1 Cor. x. ; 2 Cor. iii. ; Gal. iv. ; Eph. v., et aL). The New Testament is not divided against itself in its recognition of the Old. As has been trul}^ said,* "The au- thority of Christ Himself encourages us to search for a deep and spiritual meaning under the ordinary words of Scripture, which, however, can- * Westeott, Introduction to tJie Gospels, Ji. 412. not be gained by any arbitrary alle- gorising, but only by following out patiently the course of God's deal- ings with man." But again when we come to details we find marts of divergence from St. Paul. In the Epistle to the Plebrews the word of Scripture is almost always quoted as the direct utterance of God (" He saith," " He hath said,") whereas St. Paul commonly uses the formula, "It is written," or '' The Scripture saith." The latter mode of introduction, which occurs about thirty times in the Pauline Epistles, is not once used in this ; and, on the other hand, such ex- amples as Eph. iv. 8 are very rare in St. Paul. The quotations in this Epistle, again, are commonly taken directly from the LXX., even when it differs from the Hebrew ; and for the most part agree with that text which is preserved to us in the Alexandrian, manuscript : St. Paul shows more acquaintance with the Hebrew. In each of these argu- ments (the former especially) there is force. The latter, however, has been pressed unduly; for an exa- mination of the quotations as they stand in the best text of the Epistle, will show not a few departures from the Greek version, and there are not wanting tokens of the writer's acquaintance either with the Hebrew original or with a more accurate translation of some passages than the LXX. affords. (4) One distinguishing peculi- arity of this Epistle is found in the many remarkable coincidences both of thought and of expression with the writings of Philo of Alexandria. In this Introduction we cannot quote exaniples ; and nothing short of a collection of all the points of simi- larity, as presented in the Greek text, will show this characteristio HEBREWS. 265 of the Epistle in its proper light. Both St. Paul and St. John exliibit acqiiaintance with the Alexandrian philosophy, but it has left compa- ratively slight traces in their writings. The resemblance in lan- guage in many passages of this Epistle is all tlie more remarkable because of the fundamental differ- ences in doctrine between the Christian teacher and the Alexan- drian philosopher. Another point of interest can only be briefly men- tioned — the many words and phrases common to this Epistle and the Book of "Wisdom. The reader is re- ferred to the remarkably interesting- papers by Professor Plumptre in vol. i. of The Expositor^ on " The Writings of Apollos." On a re-view of the whole case, there is only one conclusion that appears possible — thut the Epistle was wi-itten by one who had stood in a close relation with St. Paul, but not by St. Paul himself. It will be readily understood that the arguments given above are not ad- duced as being of equal weight : some are only confirmatory, and might not have very much force if they stood alone ; but all point with more or less distinctness to the conclusion which has been stated. Farther than this we cannot go with certainty; and it is perhaps the wisest to rest satisfied with this negative result. If we turn to the positive side, we have little to guide our judgment. Three names only seem to be mentioned by early writers —those of Barnabas,Clement of Eome, and St. Luke. The Epistle is quoted by Tertullian, as we have seen, as a work of Barnabas; and two later Latin writers, Philastrius and Jerome, mention tlie same tra- dition. In one passage Jerome says that very many (perhaps meaning many of the Greek ecclesiastical writers) assign the Epistle to Bar- nabas or Clement; in another he mentions TertulHan alone as an au- thority for this, and seems to attach no special importance to the opinion. It would seem that the tradition was very limited ; it is especially noteworthy that the name of Bar- nabas is not found in the passages quoted from Origen. We know too little of Barnabas to judge for ourselves of the intrinsic probability of the hypothesis : the so-called in- ternal arguments which have been adduced by some are of no worth. The Epistle which bears the name of Barnabas belongs, in all proba- bility, to the beginning of the second century, and has no con- nection with the companion of St. Paul. Tliat Epistle, therefore (which presents a remarkable con- trast to the teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews ; see Westcott On the Canon, pp. 43 — 45), yields no evidence in the present inquiry. In regard to Clement we can. speak with more confidence, as we possess one Epistle which is cer- tainly from his hand. That docu- ment contains passages belonging to our Epistle, but they are no doubt quotations from it, and the general style and character of Cle- ment's Letter forbid us to ascribe the two works to the same writer. Much more favour has in recent times been shown to the other tra- dition which Origen records — that the Epistle was written by St. Luke. The resemblance of language be- tween this Epistle and St. Luke's writings are numerous and striking ; but with all this there is great dis- similarity of style. The difference between a Letter such as this and historical or biographical memoirs must indeed be UL-ga into account; 266 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. but even when allowance has heen made for this, it is difficult to receive the writer of the Acts as the author of our Epistle. Another consideration also is of weight. We can hardly douht that we have hefore us here the work of a Jew ; but St. Paul's words in Col. iv. 11, 14, imply- that St. Luke was of Gentile birth. The subject is not one for con- fident assertion ; but we may ven- ture to strongly doubt whether the Epistle can be ascribed to any of those suggested by ancient %vi-iters. One other hypothesis m.ust be mentioned, which has commanded the adhesion of many of the ablest writers of recent times. Luther was the first to express (in his Commentary on Genesis) an opinion that the Epistle to the Hebrews was the work of Apollos. Some will mamtain that conjecture is inadmissible, but certainly all the conditions of the problem appear to be satisfied by this con- jecture. The record of St. Luke in Acts xviii. 24—28, xix. 1, supplemented by St. Paul's references in 1 Corinthians, might seem to have been expressly designed to show the special fitness of Apollos for writing such an Epistle as this. If it be not tmbecoming to go beyond the words of Origen on such a subject as this, and to favour an hypothesis for which no express evidence can be adduced from ancient times, we can have no hesitation in joining those who hold that it is the Jew of Alexan- dria, " mighty in the Scriptiu-es," "fervent in spirit," the honoured associate of St. Paul, who here carries on the work which he began in Achaia, when "he mightily con- vinced the Jews, showing by the Scriptures that Jesus was Christ." III. Readers. — The inquiry as to the original readers of the Epistle is even more difficult. It may be assumed with confidence that the present title of the Epistle is not that which it originally bore. There has sometimes been a dis- position to deny the propriety of the name Epistle ; and it has been thought that the peculiarity of the opening verses, containing, as they do, neither address nor author's name, maj'be most easily explained on the supposition that the work is a homily or general treatise. But a very slight examination will prove that such a theory has no foundation. The closing verses show that a particular community is dii-ectly addressed, a community well known to the writer, whose affection the writer knew himself to possess, though some individuals may have distrusted him and mis- judged his acts and motives. He complains of their declension in Christian knowledge, and points out its cause (chap, v.) ; thankfullj'- recognises their generous love to the brethren (chaps, vi. x.) ; and urges them to be true to their own past history (chap. x.). He cannot but have laiown that the trials and necessities of many other commu- nities were very similar ; but, like St. Paul, he addresses the wider only through the narrower circle. The immediate impulse was given by the news he had received re- specting brethren for whom he him- self had laboured, and over whose welfare he was bound diligently to watch. The Epistle needed no express inscription to make the first HEBREWS. 267 readers understand from whom it I came and to whom it was sent ; j and it is not imjDOSsihle that (as ' Ewald suggests) the watchfulness of enemies may have rendered some conceahneut a matter of prudence. The absence of the writer's name has heen considered confirmatory of the belief that ApoUos wTOte the Epistle. In one Church, as we know, rival factions had arisen, some saying, "I am of Paul," others " I am of Apollos ; " and the incident recorded in 1 Cor. xvi. 12 seems to point to the regret of Apollos that his name should have been so used. Such a feeling- may have continued to operate, and have led to this partial with- drawal of himself from view. (See Alford's Glc. Test. vol. iv, pp. 60, 61.) It is very plain that the Epistle is addi-essed to Jewish Christians, and its present name was probably given when the Epistle had passed into more general use, in order to make its destination clear. In the New Testament the name Hebrew is strictly opposed to Hellenist or Grecian Jew (Acts vi. 1), and de- notes one who adhered to the Hebrew language and usages ; there would therefore be some in- consistency between the name and the language of the Epistle, if the title proceeded from the writer himself. Again we are in the main thrown back on internal evidence ; but in this case the materials before us are very scanty, when doubtful or irrelevant passages have been set aside. One verse of the Epistle, and one only, contains any note of place : " They of Italy salute you " (chap. xiii. 24). IJnfortunately these words admit of two opposite interpreta- tions. Either the author is himsulf in Italy, and sends to the Hebrew Clrristians whom he addresses the salutations of an Italian church ; or, writing to Italy, he transmits the message which those "of Italy" who are now with him send to their fellow-Christians at home. Between these two interpretations it seems impossible to decide with any confidence ; though, in itself, the latter might be the more pro- bable. Perhaps the only other indication that we possess is the manifest destination of the Epistle for a community of Jewish Chris- tians, exposed to peculiar danger from the solicitations and the perse- cutions of the unbelieving Jews. Such a commimity would most naturally be found in Palestine, and accordingly the prevalent opinion has been that the Epistle was fii-st sent to Jerusalem, or to some neighbouring town. The words of chap. ii. 3 are perhaps less suitable to Jerusalem — a city in which there would still be li\dng many who had heard the word from the Lord Himself. In chap, vi. 10 the winter speaks of a minis- tration to the saints which at once recalls the efforts of St. Paul and others to send help to the Chi'istians of Jerusalem, who were oppressed by poverty. This passage may imply that the readers of the Epistle had engaged in that par- ticular labour of love, but it cannot be proved that the meaning is not perfectly general. The language of chap. X. 32—34 decides nothing, if the first member of verse 33 is to be understood figuratively: and verse 34, which has been urged in regard to the question of authorship, loses all such signi- ficance when the true reading is restored. From chap. xii. 4 has usually been di-awn the inference NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. that no memljers of the Church had suffered martyrdom : even here, however, it is not at all proLable that any such allusion is intended. On the whole, it is difficult to resist the impression that the ^ni-iter addi^esses some Church in Palestine, though Jerusalem itself may he ex- cluded hy chap. ii. 3. The readers seem to have lived under the shadow of Jewish power and in- fluence, where opposition to Chris- tianity was most bitter, the tempta- tion to unfaithfulness greatest, the abjuration required of the apostate most complete. The exhortation of chap. xiii. 13, the warning of chap. X. 25, the remarkable appro- priation of Old Testament pro- mises and threatenings which we find in chap. x. 27, 28, 30, would fall with wonderful force on the ears of men in whose very presence the spirit of Judaism was exerting all its power. That there are still difficulties must be felt by all. We should not have expected that a Letter addressed to such a Church would be written in Greek, or that the writer's appeal would be to the Greek translation of the Old Testa- ment ; but the phenomena which other books of the New Testament display forbid us to regard these difficulties as decisive. It is not possible here to enumerate the other opinions which have been main- tained. The reader will find an able argument in favour of Rome in Alford's Frolcgomena to Gk. Test., vol. iv. : others have argued the claims of Alexandria.* * Prof. Plimiptre's hypothesis that tliose addressed are Cln-istiaii ascetics of (or connected with) Alexandria is worked out by him in a very interesting manner (see Expos, i. 428 — 432), but does not appear to suit the facts of the Epistle as well as tho view defended above. IV. Date. — There is very little to guide us as to the time when the Epistle was written. Tjie present tenses of chap. ix. 2 — 9 are often understood as implying that the Temple ser-\dce stiU continued ; but there are strong reasons for explaining the verses other- wise. On the other hand, the general complexion of the Epistle is such as to convince us that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. Of the imprison- ment of Timothy (chap. xiii. 23) we know nothing from any other source. It has often been supposed that he shared St. Paul's im- prisonment in Rome (see the In- trodnctionto 2 Timothy). The date of the martyrdom of St. Paul is, however, imcertain ; and it does not seem possible to say more than that our Epistle was probably written some three or four years before Jerusalem fell — in other words, about a.d. 66. V. Object and Contents. — The discussion of the very important external questions which connect themselves with this Epistle has left us but little space for a notice of its internal character. By reason of the demands that it would make upon the space at disposal it is impossible to give an account of the pecidiar difiiculties which th" Epistle presents ; all other considera tions have therefore been sacrificed to the desire of exhibiting, as exactly as possible, the comiection and course of thought. The Christians addressed were in imminent danger of apostasy. The danger was oc- casioned partly by seductions from without, partly by weakness within. Even when the fabric of Jewish power was falling, the influence of its past history, its glorious trea- HEBREWS. 269 sure of promise, its unique associa- tions, retained a wonderful x)Ower. As we look back on the years pre- ceding the fall of Jerusalem the case of the people may seem to us hopeless ; but the confidence of the nation was unbroken, and even at that period we note outbursts of national pride and enthusiastic hope. Bitter hate and contempt for Christianity on the one hand, and the attraction of their ancestral worship and ritual on the other, had apparently won a victory over the constancy of some Christians belonging to this Hebrew com- munity. Where open opposition had not prevailed, the tone of Christian ■ faith had been lowered. The special temptation of these Christians seems to have been towards a loss of interest in the higher Christian truths, and a union of elementary Christian teaching with that to which they had been accustomed as Jews. The arguments of the first and other chapters show that they held the f ounclation truths ; the expos- tulation of the fifth and sixth chap- ters proves that the full signifi- cance of the doctrine they held was not understood, and that the doc- trine was near to losing its power. In no Epistle, perhaps, do we find a more carefully sustained argu- ment ; of none can be said as truly that the whiole Epistle is a " word of exhortation." The design of the writer is to show the superiority of Christianity over Judaism. He in whom God has in these last days revealed Himself to man is His Son, to whom the Scriptures themselves bear witness as exalted above the highest of created beings, the angels, who are but ministers of God (chap. 1.). The law was given through angels : salvation has now come through the Son, who, though Lord of the world to come, the Heir and Eulfiller of God's highest promises to man, submitted to suffering and death — not of neces- sity, but that He might by His atonement deliver man from sin and death, and might become a true High Priest for man (chap, ii.). As the faithful Apostle and High Priest He is exalted above God's most favoured servants upon earth, even above Moses (chap. iii. 1-6). This is the first division of the argument, designed to establish the supremac}'" of the revelation given through the Son of God, and to remove " the offence of the cross." Next follows a powerful section of exhortation and warning. Do not imitate the unfaithfulness through which Israel failed to enter into the true rest of God (chaps, iii. 7 — iv. 16). The second portion of the Epistle (extending to chap. x. 18) is oc- cupied wdth the Priesthood of Christ. Once only is the current of the argument interrupted. Aiter the first introduction of a prophecy which will form the theme of later chapters, the writer pauses to bring into relief the carelessness which his readers have shown, and the peril they have incurred ; the re- sult is to give most powerful effect to the argument for which he ia preparing them (chap. v. II — vi. 20). Jesus made perfect through suffering (chap. v. 1 — 10) has after declared by God High Priest been the order of Melchizedek ; by this declaration the Aaronic priesthood is abolished, giving place to a priesthood which abides continually, through which all that the former priesthood sought in vain to attain 270 NEW testa]m:ent introductions. is made sure to man for ever (chap, vii.). This High Priest, seated at God's right hand, is Minister in the heavenly sanctuary, Mediator of the New Covenant (chap, viii.) ; and in Him aU the t^-pes of the first covenant are fulfilled, for by His one offering of Himself He has put away sin, and established the new covenant in which sin is pardoned and man sanctified (chaps. ix. X. 1—18). The remainder of the Epistle is in the main directly hortatory. These being our pri-vnieges, let us not by unfaithfulness fall, short of them, for terrible is the doom of the unfaithful, and glorious the reward of Faith (chap. x. 19—39), which from the beginning has led God's servants on to victory, and of which Jesus is the Author and Perfecter (chaps, xi. — xii. 4). Chapters xii. and xiii, contiaue the exhortations of the earlier chapters, but in a higher strain. We cannot conceive of any ar- gument by which the end contem- plated could be more efl^ectually accomplished, and men more power- fully turned from " the oflience of the cross " to glorying in Christ Jesus. The value which the Epistle has for us and the extent of its in- fluence on our theology it would be hard to over-estimate. Its peculiar importance lies in the exposition which it gives of the earlier revela- tion, showing the meaning of the types and arrangements of the foi-mer dispensation, and their per- fect fulfilment in our Lord, and in its witness to the power and abiding significance of the divine word. JAMES, Br THE Eev. E. G. PUNCHAKD, D D. I. The "Writer. — Questions of Identiii/. — " James, a servant (literally, a slave) of God and the Lord Jesus Christ : " this is all the direct information to be learned from the author concerning him- self. The name James was, of course, a favom-ite with the Jews under the more common form of Jacoh, and is familiar to us in studying the books of the New Testament. We read there of : — 1. James, the son of Zebedee. 2. James, the son of Alpha^us. 3. James, " the Lord's brother." 4. James, the son of Mar}'. 6. James "the Less " (or, " the Little"). 6. James, the brother of Jude. 7. James, the first Bishop of Jerusalem. Is it possible for us to decide between so many, or even feel fairly convinced that we can identify one of these as the writer of our Epistle ? To reject them all, and ascribe it to another James, of whom no fur- ther mention is made, would seem to be the addition of fresh and needless difficulty to a problem ah'cady sufiiciently obscure. The first claimant in the above list may be dismissed at once, from the fact of his early death. James the Great, as he is called, the brother of John, was executed by Herod Agrippa I. in A.D. 44 (Acts xii. 2), a date much too early for this Letter; and no tradition or opinion worthy of con- sideration has ever attributed it to him. The next inquiry must be one of much circumspection, beset as it is with thorns of controversy : in fact, the conflict of authorities must seem well-nigh hopeless to an ordi- nary miud. Apart from the main question, many collateral ones have arisen to embitter the dispute, and by no means the last word has been said on either side. If, then, an attempt be here made to arrive at some conclusion, it must confessedly be with much misgiving, and fuU admission of the almost equal argu- ments against our decision. By comparing St. Paul's descrip- tion concerning numbers "4 and 7 (above) in Gal. i. 19 and ii. 9—12, it is thought he must be referring to one and the same man ; let that be granted, therefore, to begin with. We may identify numbers 3 and 4 by the knowledge that James the son of Mary had a brother called Joses (^latt. xxvii. oQ), and so also had James "the Lord's brother" (Matt. xiii. 55) ; and further we may consider num- bers 3 and 6 identical, because each was brother to Jude (Mark vi. 3 ; 272 NEW TESTAMENT INTBODUCTIONS. Jude, verse 1) ; James the Little, I number 5, is clearly the same as ! the son of Mary, number 4. {Comp, \ Matt, xxvii. 56 ; Mark xv. 40 ; : Luke xxiv. 10.) These might, it is true, be coincidences merely, and when we remember the frequency of Hebrew names, seem insufficient for more than hypothesis ; but wo are arguing on probability only, and not to absolute demonstration. Thus far, then, numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are thought to be one and the same person — the Apostle James, and he the Lord's brother ; the claims of number 1 have been disposed of ; those of number 2, the son of Alphasus, remain. The question, perhaps the greatest of all, is whether the process of iden- tification can be extended further, for on this depends largely the issue of the dispute with regard to the brethren of the Lord and the perpetual virginity of His mother. Further Consideration of ''the Brethren of the Lord^ — We have no need in the present instance to enter on the war-path of this theo- logical quarrel. There seems an intentional silence in Holy Writ concerning the family of our Saviour, to teach us, perhaps, that it stood in no spiritually peculiar position nearer to Him than we may be ourselves, and to remind us of His precious words, " Whosoever shall do the will of My Father which is in heaven, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother" (Matt. xii. 48—50). Bearing this in mind, and with thoughts of peace in our heart for those who truly — and reverently — differ from us, we may soon learn the outlines of this discussion. The terms "brother" and " brethren " meet us so often in the New Testament, as applied to Jesus Christ, that we can hardly pass them by. Do they infer the strict and actual relationship, or one merely collateral ? 1. Uterine, or Helvidian Theory. — The advocates of the natural sense, that these men were-^the you.nger sons of Joseph and Mary, urge the plain meaning of the Greek word adclphos, i.e., *' bro- ther,'' and deny its use figuratively. They point, moreover, to Matt. i. 25, and suppose from it the birth of other children in the holy family. Those who shrink from such a view are charged with sentiment, as im- pugners of marriage, and even with ideas more or less JNIanicha^an con- cerning the impurity of matter. The German commentator Bleek, and Dean Alford and Dr. Davidson amongst ourselves, contend thus for the actual brotherhood, main- taining the theory originally pro- pounded by Helvidius, a writer of the fourth century, answered by the great Augustine. To their first argument we may answer that in Holy Scripture there are four senses of brotherhood, namely, of blood, of tribe, of nation, of friendship, and the three last of these will all apply to the case in point. As for the view based on Matt. i. 25, the words, either in the Greek tongue or our own, authorise it not. To say " he did not do such a thing until the day of his death" does not (as Bishop Pearson has ob- served) suggest the inference that he did it then or afterwards ; and the term " firstborn " by no means implies a second, even in our pre- sent use of language, under similar circumstances. Above all, though it is confessedly no argument, there is the feeling alluded to by Pearson and others, and acquiesced in by JAMES. 273 many, that there could have been no fi'esh maternity on the part of " Her who with a sweet thanksgiving Took in tranquillity what God might liring ; Blessed Hira, and waited, and within her living Felt the arousal of a Holy Thing." *' And as after His death His body was placed in a sepiilchi'e ' wherein never man before Avas laid,' so it seemed fitting that the vromb con- secrated by His presence should not henceforth have borne anything of man." 2. Ag)iatic or Epiphanian Theory. — A second class of di-vones are in accordance vrith the theory of Epi- phanius, who was Bishop of Salamis, in Cyprus, towards the end of the fourth century, and no mean antagonist of the Heh idians. At the head of their modern repre- sentatives, facile princeps for scholarship and fairness, is Bishop Lightfoot. The brethi-en of the Lord are said to be the sons of Joseph by a former wife, i.e., before his espousal of the Vii'gin ]Mary, and are rightly temied adelphoi ac- cordingly. Far from being of the number of the Twelve, they were believers only after Christ's resur- rection. Thus, then, are explained such texts as ]\Iatt. xii. 46, Mark iii. 31, Luke viii. 19, Jolin vii. 5. By this supposition James the Lord's brother must be a distinct person from James the son of Alphseus. But an objection — nay, "the one which has been hurled at the Hehidian theory "^-ith great force . . . and fatal effect " — is strangely thought by Lightfoot to be powerless against his favourite Epiphanian doctrine. It is this : our Lord on the cross commended His mother to St. John : " Behold tlixj mother," " Behold thy son " (chap. xix. 26, 27) ; " and from that hotu'," we are told, "that dis- ciple took her imto his own home." If the Uterine theory be right, she had at least four sons living at the time. "Is it conceivable that our Lord would thus have snapped asunder the most sacred ties of natural affection ? " Nor could the fact of His brethren's unbelief " over- ride the paramount duties of filial piety " ; and the objection is weakened further by otrr know- ledge that within a few days " all alike are converted to the faith of Christ : yet she, their mother, liv- ing in the same city, and joining with them in a common worship (Acts i. 14), is consigned to the care of a stranger, of whose house she becomes hencefoiih an inmate." Xow, all this argument, forcible and fatal as it unquestionably is to the idea of real and full relation- ship, is hardly less so against that of step-sons. For, seeing they were borne by a former wife, they nTust have been older than Jesus : and, on the death of Joseph, the eldest would certainly have become head of the family, in full dominion over the yoimger children and the widow herself, and with chief re- sponsibility for their protection and weKare. The custom prevailed under Roman law as well as Jewish, and exists in the East still : being, in fact, a relic of immemorial anti- quity. Nor can we conceive, for other than the weightiest reasons, such as immorality or crime, that our Lord, who came " not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil," wouJd thus openly have set one of its firmest obligations aside. It seems clear 18 274 KEW TESTAilENT INTEODUCTIONS. that the widowed mother watching- by the cross, and soon to be child- less among women, with the sword of separation piercing to and through her own soul (Luke ii. 35), had none to care for her, except the beloved disciple into whose charge she was given by her dying- Son. 3. Collateral^ or Hieronymian Theory. — There remains one pro- position more, known, from the name of its foremost champion, Jerome, as the Hieronjanian theory ; and this, on the whole, presents fewest difficulties to the religious mind. The sons of Alphajus (or Cleopas : the name is the same in different dialects) were the cousins of our Lord, their mother and His being sisters ; and such a relation- ship would entirely justify the use of the word " brethren." The balance of evidence seems to the jjresent wi-iter to incline to- wards this venerable belief; and, identifying '• the son of Alj)hyeus " with "the brother of the Lord," he considers him to have been the James of the Epistle. Unless this solution of the difficulty be allowed, we are committed to the recogni- tion of a third James an Apostle, and one so called in only a second- ary sense. It is true the term was not strictly applied to the original twelve, and therefore might have been applied to a third James as well as to a Barnabas ; and we will further admit that, if James were one of the unbelieving- brethren mentioned in John vii. 5, he could hardly have been the early convert enrolled by our Saviour in His apostohc band : though Bishop Wordsworth, on the contrary, thinks that he, like Peter, might have fallen away for a time. A better account fpr such a statement may be sought in the reflection that, although it is recorded " neither did His brethren believe in Him," there is no evidence against them all ; and in the absence of nega- tive proof it seems safer — at least, not inconsistent with the charity which "hopeth all things" — to think of James and Jude as happy exceptions to the family jealousy and mistrust. Again, unless we consider the son of Alphseus the brother of our Lord in the tribal sense of Jerome, we must admit the existence of two men, strikingly similar in life and calling, evidently related, each with a mother named Marj', and brethren Joses and Jude ; and to which of these two, if they were not one and the same, can the Epistle be best ascribed ? Opinions of Theologians. — These problems, hard assuredly, seem fairly sucn as may best be solved by the ingenuity of ancient writers, well acquainted with contempo- rary ideas. The opinions of moderns, such as Lightfoot, Bleek, Alford, and Davidson, are grounded on no discovery of facts hidden from theologians who were at least as able and honest as themselves ; and the old testimony has been so thoroughly sifted that, until more be brought forward, we had better remain undecided if w^e cannot hold a conclusion fortified by tho consensus of Clement of Alexandria and John the Eloquent, in the Greek Church ; Jerome and Augus- tine, in the Latin ; Pearson, Lard- ner. Home, Wordsworth, and Ellicott in our own; and by German writers, such as Lampe, Hug, Meier, and Lange, Conclusion. — Thus we see the best ecclesiastical authority and traditions have pretty constantly JAMES. 275 assigned the authorship of the Catholic Epistle to the third name on our list (above), and identified hiin with the second, fourth, fiJth, sixth, and seventh, in accordance with what we venture to affirm is the plainest path out of the maze. Further History of James. — So much externally ; for interval evi- dence we have a singular agree- ment between the fervid abrupt style of the Letter and the cha- racter of its reputed writer, known as " the Just " by the Jews, and termed by them (in honour, not reproach) the " Camel-kneed,' from his long and frequent devo- tions. In no way conspicuous amongst the disciples, he comes into prominence only after the Re- surrection ; perhaps that witness to the Lord Christ was specially needed in his case to perfect faith, and to transform the silent man of prayer into the strong and fearless leader of the infant Church. As the first Bishop of Jerusalem, we find him (Acts xv.) presiding in a solenrn assembly to hear the mis- sionary reports and to arrange for the requii-ements of Gentile con- verts. The pristoral letter (Acts XV. 24—29) may be compared wdth the catholic one now before us, as it was probably written by the same hand. The last Scriptural notice of James is (Acts xxi. 18) on St. Paul's final visit to the Holy City, when, again, a synod of the elders seems to have been held. A Greek Christian writer, named He- gesippus, himself a convert from Judaism, tells us more of the fate of this " bulwark ' ' of the fold. Comparing his highly artificial account (preserved for us in the history of Eusebius : too prolix for insertion here) with the narrative in Josephus, the plain truth seems that James the Just was hurled from a pinnacle of the Temple, and finally despatched by stoning, as a believer in Jesus of Xazareth, about the year 69, immediately be- fore the siege of Jerusalem by the Roman emperor Yespasian. Jo- sej-jhus {Aid. xx. 9) accuses the high jjriest Ananus, a Sadducee, of the judicial murder, and declares that the "most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, dishked what was done," and com- plained to King Agrippa and Albinus the procurator, w^ho, in consequence, removed Ananus fron\ his office. Many authors, ancient and modem, have been of opinion that the martyrdom of James was the " filling up of the sins of Jeru- salem, and made its cup of guilt to overflow." "Thougli the mills of God grind slowly, yet tliey grind exceeding small : Thougli with patience He stands waiting, with exactness grinds He alL'' H. His Epistle. — To whom ivritten. — In the first and chief place, James unquestionably wrote to his countrymen, scattered over the whole earth, though still be- longing to their twelve tribes. But in no sense can the Letter be looked upon as an appeal to un- believing Jews, abounding as it does with references to Christian doctrines held, and Christian works to be maintained, by those who had " the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ." That the majority of its readers would be the poor and meek can hardly be doubted, if we turn to such passages as those in chap. ii. And it would seem that these struggling societies of humble Christians were in a danger more peculiar to the poor — that is, of 276 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. envying and fawning- upon the rich and well-to-do ; forgetting that they themselves were op- pressed hy such, dragged before judgment-seats, and exposed to the blasphemy and contempt out- poured by unbelievers on the " Christian " name (chap. ii. 6, 7). Style and Character. — In his de- nunciation of the rich defrauders, James breaks out into a fiery elo- quence worthy of an ancient pro- phet ; the tender change from rebuke of the wrongers to comfort for the wronged (chap. v. 7, 8) is unsurpassed in the whole roU of inspired utterance ; and in con- demnation of lust (chap. iv. 1 — 4), pride (chap. iv. 5 — 10), evil-speak- ing (chap. iv. 11, 12), and all worldliness (chap. iv. 13 — 17), the fervour and righteous indignation of the Apostle show of themselves the manner of his life and death : for again, as with God's servant of old, " the land was not able to bear all his words" (Amos vii. 10). Sco2}e and Aim. — Nothing can be clearer and simpler than the scope and aim of this Letter; as the Sermon on the Mount compared with the rest of Matthew, so this exliortation of James the Just (or "the Wise," as the G-reeks love to call him) stands forth among its fellow Epistles, a lovely gospel of good works, of Christian steadfast- ness and patience. Some theo- logians, unfortunately, blinded by their own partial apprehension of one side of God's truth, have mis- read its chapters, and found therein an opposition to the doctrine of St. Paul. Luther even could go so far as to call the Epistle "worthless as one of straw." Happily, later criticism has vindicated the teach- ing of the brother of the Lord; and the plaiaest reader may learn for himself that Paul and James were at one, infallibly moved by the same Spirit of the living God. State of Religious Opi)iion : — Ju- daism and Christia)iity. — Let us recollect a little more fully the condition of the faith among those Christians who were first converted from Judaism. With them the adherence to outward forms, the stickling for the letter of the Law, and other like barren principles, had become a belief, which dis- played itself in new shapes, corre- sponding with their altered statj of religion. "Wherever," it hns been well said, " Christianity did not effect a complete change in the heart, the old Jewish spirit natur- ally manifested itself in the pro- fessed converts." It was what om- Pui-itan divines quaiutly, but cor- rectly, termed "the popery of the human heart." The souls that had trusted wnolly and entirety in sacrifice as a bare substitution of victims, and deliverance from an indiscriminate vengeance, now clung to faith as a passive thing, instead. The old idol had, as it were, been torn down by these ardent disciples : a new one was upraised to the vacant niche ; faith in a faith became the leading idea, and the light which was in them turned to darkness, the breath of Kfe to death. Affected hy Oriental Theories. — But perhaps a cause of this confusion is to be found much farther afield. The Jewish Church had become largely affected by the more re- mote Eastern thought; the cap- tivity, while it eradicated utterly all wish for idolatry, influenced the chosen people in a strange and unlooked-for way. The power of the mystical speculations of India, more especially of the devout fol- JAMES. 277 lowers of Gotama Sakj-a Muni, now known as Buddhists, is only beginning to be rightly pondered by Christian scholars and divines. It was not the Persian systems, nor the ChaldEean, but the Hindu (and not infrequently working through, and by means of, them) which perplexed anew the Oriental mind. Here was, doubtless, the origin of the Essenes and other offshoots of Judaism ; and even in the Church itself similar mischief may be traced in the varying forms of heresy which drove her almost to destruction. The ancient theory of sacrifice in India was abandoned by the Brahmans, and in its place faith was everywhere preached ; the sole essential was dependence on God; implicit "reliance on Him made up for all deficiencies in other respects, whilst no attention to the forms of religion or to the rules of morality was of the slightest avail without this all-important senti- ment." * Precisely the same wave of thought seems to have broken on the Jewish Church ; and one not much dissimilar, we know, in later times, has changed the whole set of religious tendencies in West- em Europe. Denounced accordinghj . — It seems, then, that in complete aversion from such innovations, James wrote what }ie did of moral right- eousness, as opposed to cori-ect belief ; in other words, contending for a religion of the heart and not the lips alone ; with him Christi- anity was indeed " a life, and not a mere bundle of dead opinions." " "Wilt thou know, O vain man," pleads the impassioned Apostle (chap. ii. 20, 21), "that faith Avith- * See Elphinstone's India, Vol. 1., Book 2, oliai). iv., quuliiig from the text- book called Bliagwat Gita. out works is dead ? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he had offered Isaac?" And surely here we catch the echoes of a greater than James, who an- swered the Jews when they boasted to Him in the Temple, " Abraham is our father," "If ye were Abra- ham's children ye would do the works of Abraham" (Johnviii. 29). His '• faith, working by love," up- held him through a desolating trial. If we look at the motive, he was justified by faith; if we look at the result, he was justified by works. No less a faith than Abraham's could have wrought thus mightily before the face of heaven, or can so take the kingdom thereof by violence still ; and the theology which could discern oppo- sition in the plain declarations of God's word herein is fit only for the dust that has buried its volumes on forgotten shelves. "Who are we that with restless feet, And grudging eyes unpurged and dim. Among the eai'thly shadows heat, And seek to question Him?" Bate of the Epistle. — The Epistle has been called " general " — that is, " universal " — chiefly because it was addressed to no body of be- lievers in one place in particular. The absence of all allusion to Gentile converts fairly jjroves an earlier date than the circular letter preserved in Acts xv. 24 — 29, that is, somewhere about the year a.d, 44. And, if such be correct, we miist look on this as one of the oldest writings in the canons of the New Testament. Genuineness and Canonicity. — I It does not seem to have been ; known at first to all the early ! Church, no direct quotation being i found till the time of Origan, 278 NEW TESTAMENT INTEODUCTIONS. though indirect references may he traced in the Apostolic Fathers. In the list of sacred hooks univer- sally acknowledged, or the con- trary, drawn up hy Eusehius, Bishop of Cfesarea (in Palestine), at the beginning of the fourth cen- tury, the Epistle of James is amongst the latter — the " antilego- mena," or " those spoken against," along with the Epistles of Jude, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John. The un- certainty was with regard to its author ; little doubt ever being felt concerning its inspiration. The great Greek Fathers of the fourth century all quote it as canonical, and are suj^ported by the 'Latin. Some of the divines of the Refor- mation, however, mistrusted it, chiefly on account of internal and doctrinal evidence ; and, of course, the German rationalists have eagerly attacked the Epistle from such a ground of advantage. But it has thus far well survived the storms of controversy, and will as surely remain unharmed, to be the help and delight of the patient souls who trust still that " the coming of the Lord draweth nigh." " Hora novissima, tempora pessima sunt, vigilemus : Ecce miuaciter imminet Arbiter lUe supremus : Imminet, imminet, ut mala terminet, sequa coronet. Recta remuneret, anxia liberet, sethera donet." So wrote Bernard of Morlaix, seven hundred years ago, with the words of James (chap. v. 8) above quoted in his heart. It were well to grave them on our own : " For yet a little while, and he that shall come and will come, and will not tarry" (Hebrews x. 37). The free transla- tion appended is the familiar one, by Dr. Neale : — " The world is very evil ; the times are waxing late ; ;Be sober and keep vigil ; the Judge is at the gate: The Judge that comes in mercy, the Judge that comes with might, To teiminate the evil, to diadem the right." Analysis of Contents. The Salutation (chap. i. 1). I. Appeals on behalf of— (i.) 1. Patience (chap. i. 2 — 4). 2. Prayer for wisdom ; to be asked in faith (chap. i. 5—8). 3. Lowly - mindedness (chap. i. 9—11). (ii.) a. Endurance (chap. 1. 12 —15. )8. Because of God's good- ness (chap. i. 16 — IS). (iii.) 1. Meekness (chap. i. 17 — 21. 2. Self-knowledge (chap. i. ^22—25). 3. Practical Eeligion (chap. i. 26—27). II. Rebukes on Account of— (i.) a Eespect for persons (chap. ii. 1 — 9). /3. Because leading to a violation of law (chap, ii. 10, 11). (ii.) Faith without works (chap. ii. 14—26.) a. Example of Abraham (chap. ii. 21—24). $. Example of Eahab (chap. iL 25). y. Summary (chap. ii. 26.) (iii.) Censoriousness and sins of the tongue (chap. iii). a. Warnings and examples against (chap. iii. 5 — 12). j8. Exhortations to gentleness or silence (chap. iii. 13 -18). JAIMES. 2?9 (iv.) 1. a. Lust (chap. iv. 1 — 4). /3. Pride (cliap. iv. 5 — 10). 2. Evil speaking (chap. iv. 11, 12.) 3. o. Worldliness (chap. iv. 13—17). ;8. Trust in riches (chap. V. 1—6). III. Conclusion. (i.) Exhortation to patience (chap. V. 7 — 11). (ii.) Caution against swearing (chap. V. 12). (iii.) Advice of various kinds: — a. 1. To the sorrowful (chap. V. 13). 2. To the joyful (chap. V. 13). 3. To the sick and suffering (chap. V. 14, 15). ^. 1. Concerning confes- sion (chap. V. 16). 2. Concerningprayer : example of Elias (chap.v. 17, 18). 3. Concerning conver- sion (chap. V. 19, 20). [References. — Much abler and fuller treatment of the suhject may he read in the following hooks, to all of which, and to many others hy way of reference, the present writer is under much obligation : — Alford's Greek Testament, with a Critically-revised Text. Vol. IV. Rivingtons, 1871. Bleek's Introduciion to the New Testament. (Translated hyUrwick). Vol. II. T. & T. Clark, 1874. Davidson's Introduction to the New Testament. Vol. III. Bagstcr, 1851. Home's Introduction to the Holy Scriptures. Vol. IV. Twelfth Edi- tion. By Tregelles. Longmans, 1869. Lightfoot on St. PaiiVs Epistles to the Galatians : Dissertation IL, The Brethren of the lord. ]\Iac- millan, 1869. Me-VT-ick's articles on "James" and '"The General Epistle of James," in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible. Vol. I. Murray, 1868. Wordsworth's Neiv Testament, with Introductions and Notes, The General Epistles, ^c. Rivingtons, 1872.] I. PETER. By the Eev. Canon MASON, D.D. I. The Author.— The author- ship of this Epistle can hardly be called a matter of question. If it he not St. Peter's own, we have no choice hut to set it down as an impudent forgery. It claims directly, and in the simplest form, to he the writing of the chief Apostle of our Lord (chap. i. 1). The author asserts himself to he a "witness of the sufferings of Christ" (chap. v. 1), and yet does it so modestly and with such ab- sence of detail as woiild be incon- ceivable in a forger acquainted with St. Peter's history. The en- thusiastic and impassioned style of the Letter corresponds with the character of St. Peter as we find it recorded in history ; and in several marked points not only the doc- trinal statements, but even the literary style and turn of the sen- tences, recalls the style of St. Peter's speeches in the Acts. The fact that the Letter was written in Greek (for the adjectives alone are sufl&cient disproof of the theory that it is a translation from an Aramaic original) is no objec- tion to the Petrine authorship. Galilee was a half- Greek country, studded with Greek cities ; St. Peter's brother bore a Greek name. No Galilean of the middle classes (to which St. Peter evidentlj' be- longed) could have been ignorant of the language ; indeed, there is sufficient evidence that Greek was as much used in Galilee as Aramaic. It seems that no question was ever entertained until this century with regard to the genuineness of the Epistle by any church, or by any individual, whether orthodox or heretical. The Epistle was, in- deed, rejected by Marcion, but distinctly on the ground that it was St. Peter's. Origen speaks of it as one of the books whose authority had never been disputed. The Second Epistle of St. Peter, which, even if not genuiue, cannot be dated later than the early part of the second century, refers back to it, and refers to it expressly as the work of St. Peter. St. Clement of Rome, wi'iting (probably) a.u. 95, though he does not directly quote from it with marks of cita- tion, has expressions such as " His marvellous light," and several others less marked, which seem certainly to indicate his ac- quaintance with it. St. Polycarp (about 115 A.D.), bishop of one of the churches to which the Epistle was addressed, within the compass of one short letter to the Philippians, cites it again and again — e.ff., " In I. PETER. 281 whom, though ye never saw Him, ye believe, and believing, ye re- joice;" "not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing ; " and many other passages. St. Poly- carp's friend Papias (according to Eusebius) made use of this Epistle too, and seems to have made special comments on the connection between St. Peter and St. Mark. Besides traces of the use of it to be found in Hermas, Theophilus, and others, it is freely quoted, and by name, by Iremieus, Clement of Alexandria, TertulHan, and all sub- sequent writers. In fact, it would be difficult to imagine stronger ex- ternal e\'idence in its favour. M. Renan, to take one example of an historical critic whose theolog}^ is not that of St. Peter, writes : "If, as we are happy to believe, this Epistle is really Peter's, it does honour to his good sense, his straightforwardness, and his sim- plicity ; " and he gives many good reasons for his belief. There is but one argument against the genuineness of the Epistle to which any weight at all can be assigned, and even this loses all its force when it is examined. " As for the eclectic and con- ciliatory tendencies observed in the Epi&tle of Peter," writes M. Renan {Antichrist, p. ix.), "they constitute no objection to any but those who, like Christian Baur and his disciples, imagine the difference between Peter and Paul to have been one of absolute opposition. Had the hatred between the two parties of primitive Christianity been as profound as is thought by that school, the reconciliation would never have been made. Peter was not an obstinate Jew like James." Without necessarily agree- ing in this description of James we may well accept the statement that St. Peter was a man peculiarly susceptible of impressions, and (even putting out of view the two Epistles in our canon) his admira- tion, and indeed his awe of St. Paul, are visible to any reader of the Acts and the Epistle to the Gala- tians. No writer recognises them more frankly than M. Renan [Saint Paul, pp. 85, 86). Now, on the one hand, it is very easy to ex- aggerate the Pauline character of this Epistle. It contains no one doctrine, such as Justification by Faith, which is essentially bound up with the name of St. Paul. On the matter of the free admission of Gentiles into the Church (which indirectly forms a large element in this Epistle) St. Peter had made up his mind long years before he came much under the influence of St. Paul (Acts X. 34 ; xi. 17 ; XV. 11). But on the other hand, there weve special reasons why, in this Epistle, all St. Peter's sympathy for his co- Apostle should come out. He was using, either as his secretary, or as his letter-bearer — perhaps in both capacities — that liberal-minded Silas (chap. V. 12), who, after being chosen by the Church of Jexusa- lom as their own exponent to the Gentiles of Antioch, had attached himself to St. Paul, accomi)anied him in the most momentous of his missionary travels, and had (ap- parently) devoted himself to the edification and extension of those Asiatic churches which the two had founded together. St. Mark, too, dear to St. Peter as his own "son" in the faith (chap. v. 13), had been but recently again (after early misunderstandings) a chosen companion of St. Paul, and was probably not very long returned from a mission on which that 282 NEW TESTA^ilENT INTRODUCTTONS. Apostle had despatched him into Asia l^Iinor (Col. iv. 10). And, moreover, all St. Peter's chivalrous nature would be aroused by the man- ner in which the churches of all that region, or any rate the Jewish element in them, were beginning to revolt (as at Corinth also) against their founder when his back was turned. II. The Place, Time, and Occasion of the Epistle. — The place from which the letter was written was, we may say with- out any hesitation, Rome. If this be not the case, we must understand the "Babylon" of chap. v. 13 to mean the Eastern Babylon ; and it is neither very probable in itself that St. Peter should have visited that city, and there have been met by St. Silas and St. Mark, nor is there any trace of a tradition, however meagre, that he ever travelled in those parts. On the other hand, were it not for the abuse made of the fact by the supporters of the Papacy, no one would ever have questioned the universal and well- authenticated tradition which affirms that St. Peter was, along with St. Paul, co-founder of the Church of Kome. The whole sub- ject has been, of late years, sifted to the bottom by various German and other writers, especially by Dr. Hilgenfeld ia repeated articles between 1872 and 1877 in his Zeitschrift. Though every con- ceivable difference may be found between these authors respecting the dates and dui-ation of St. Peter's sojourn at Rome, very few are so hardily sceptical as to reject alto- gether evidence as strong, early, and wide, as that on which we believe that Hannibal invaded Italy. This fact being then certain. the only question is whether Eusebius is right — or St. Clement of Alexandria, and even Papias, whom he appears to be quoting — in suggesting that " Ba>-ylon " in this Epistle meant Rome.* About this there can be no diffi- culty. Not only is Rome so styled in the Apocalypse, and some few years later in the Jewish Sibijllinc Oracles, but M. Renan quotes pas- sages from various Rabbinical writings where the same name occurs with the same meaning. The Jews delighted in substituting symbolical names and epithets even in plain prose speech (e.g., Jerub- hesheth for Jerub-baal, Haman the Af/agite; St. Peter himself, if the Second Epistle be his, seems to do the same when he calls Balaam " the son of Bosor"); and the detes- tation of Rome, natural to a Jew at all times, and heightened by Christiani^v when once the persecu- tion began, found vent for itself in all manner of names culled from the Old Testament, such as Nineveh and Edom, as well as Babylon. If, then, Rome be the place from which St. Peter wrote, how can we find approximately the time ? It cannot be put earlier than the year 6-1, for two reasons especially : (1) be- cause it shows a deep acquaintance * The words occur in a passage describ- ing the origin of the Gospel of St. Mark, wliich ends thus, " and that [St. Peter] ratified the book for the churches to study (Clement, in the sixth of his HypoU/poses, has put the story in our hands, and his account is substantiated also by the Bishop of Hiorapolis named Papias), and that Peter mentions Mark in his former Epistle, which also they say that he composed at Rome itself, and tliat he means this when he calls the city in a figurative kind of way 'Babylon,' in these words, TM co-elect one in Babylon greetcth you, and Mark my soTi."— (Eus. Hist. Eccl. II. xv. 2.) I. PETER. 28; ■vrith the Epistle (so-named) to the Ephcsians,* the date of which is 62 or 63 ; (2) because direct perse- cution had broken out against the Christians as Christians, and this did not take place until after the great fire at Eome in July, 64. The phenomena of the letter will not hear interpreting by the theory of simple disaffection, however deep and spiteful, of the populace against the Christians. They are liable at any moment, even away in Asia, to be called upon to give an account for their faith in the law couits (chap. iii. 15). If any of them is proved to be a Christian, he will very likely "suffer" — suffer capital punishment — for that crime (chap. iv. 16). The whole piece is burdened with persecution of a most systematic kind on every side. There is, however, one side -question which causes some difficulty. St. Paul is not mentioned as joining in * Compare chap. i. 1, 2 -with Eph, i. 4; chap. i. 3 with Eph. i. 3 ; chap. i. 4, b with Eph. i. 11, 18 ; chap. i. 12 with Eph. ii*. 10 ; chap. i. 14 with Eph. ii, 2, 3 ; chap. 11. 5 with Eph. ii. 20, 21, 22 ; chap. ii. 18 with Eph. vi. 5 ; chap. iii. 1 with Eph. v. 22 ; chap. iii. 22 with Eph. i. 20, 21 ; chap. iv. 3 with Eph. ii. 2 ; and other passages. The connection with Silvanus, and with Mark, is sufficient to explain St. Peter's close familiarity with an Epistle which had been destined (largely) for the same readers as his own. His deep knowledge of the Epistle to the Romans (which is trace- able in very many passages) is a strong argument in favour of the identification of " Babylon " with Rome. There are some indications also of an acquaintance with the Epistles to the Thessalonians, again perhaps through Silvanus. It is note- worthy, as showing the position which St. Peter held amidst conflicting parties, that the document which, next after the Epistles to the Romans and Ephesians, has most influenced this Letter, is the Epistle of St. James ; for instance, compare chap. 1. 6, 7 with Jas. i. 2, 3 ; chap. i. 24 with Jas. i. 10, 11 ; chap. iv. 8 with Jas. v. 20; chap. V, 5—0 with Jas. iv 6—10 ; ct al. the salutation to the churches which he had f otmded. Why so ? No more probable conjecture can be made than that, shortly after writing his Epistles to the Asiatic Churches, St. Paul was tried and liberated, and made that journey into the far West on which he had long set his heart, and which St. Clement of Rome, who must have known well, says that he took. By this journey he escai)ed death in the outbreak of Nero's persecution ; and St. Peter, arriving at Rome about the same time, finds him gone, and Silas and Mark just coming back to head- quai'ters fi'om their work in Asia, with reports of division and dis- order which required immediate attention. Accordingly St. Peter issues this circular Letter which we have before us. Opinions are much di%dded as to whether the Letter was addressed primarily to Jewish or to Gentile Christians, or, again, to both in- differently. Either answer is beset with difficrdties, but the question cannot be fully discussed here, though the present writer adheres to the usually-received opinion that St. Peter keeps to his original in- tention of going to the circumcision only. The pact between the Apostles was, indeed, not of that rigid nature which would preclude the possibility of his writing to the Gentiles, eA^en as St. Paul wrote to Jews ; still, it seems more natural on the whole to suppose that he adhered to the pact. The Letter is throughouc exactly what the author describes it as being (chap. v. 12). He " exhorts and testifies that this is God's true grace." That is, he- insists upon the Jewish Christians recognising fully that St. Paul's 284 KEW TESTAMENT INTEODUCTIONS. gospel was all that it ought to he (chap. i. 12, 25), and exhorts them to consequent unity and to hrotherly love. The presence of persecution hoth increases the temp- tation to fall away and like^sdse heightens the heinousness of such desertion ; therefore every warning together with every encourage- ment is pointed hy the mention of suffeiings as well as of the reward that is coming when Christ returns. [The writer has not only had the usual printed commentaries and hooks of reference, hut every now and then has had the advantage of manuscript notes of lectures (such as will scarcely he heard in Cam- hridge again) "by Bishop Lightfoot, lent to him by the Chancellor of Truro Cathedi-aL] -* 11. PETER, Bt the Eev. ALFRED PLUMMEE, D.D. I. The Authorship. — The question of the authenticity of our Epistle is one of well-known diffi- culty. The objections to its genuineness are more serious than 'those against any other book in the New Testament, and yet are not so conclusive as by any means to have silenced those who defend the authenticity. Before proceeding to a consideration of the arguments on each side, two remarks seem to be necessary. (1.) The Epistle must stand or fall as a whole. It is impossible to reject passages which appear to be open to objection and retain the rest. The thought is eminently consecutive throughout, the style is uniform, and the writer fre- quently glances back at what he has said before or anticipates what is coming. The net-work of con- nected ideas which thus pervades the whole cannot be severed other- wise than violently. Moreover, the singular want of agreement among those who advocate an expurgated edition as to what portions should be struck out and what not, is another reason for refusing to dis- integrate the Epistle. Thus, Gro- tius thinks that the words " Peter " and "Apostle," in chap. i. 1, and chaps i. 18 and iii. 15, 16, are in- terpolations. Boa-Lholt would re- tam chaps, i. and iii., rejecting j chap. ii. Lange (in Herzog) would ! reject all that lies between chaps, i. 19 and iii. 3, i.e., from the words "knowing this first" in chap, i 20, I to the same words in chap. iii. 3. Ullmann surrenders all but chap. i. I Bunsen retains nothing but the first eleven verses and the doxology. I (2.) It is inexpedient to encumber the discussion with an attempted reductio ad horribile of one of the alternatives. A court must not con- cern itself with the consequences of finding the prisoner guilty. Let us, therefore, at once set aside all such notions as this : that if the Epistle is not by St. Peter, " the Church, which for more than four- teen centuries has received it, has been imposed upon by what must, in that case, be regarded as a Satanic device." Satan forging the Second Epistle of St. Peter would indeed be Satan casting out Satan. Or, again, " If any book which she reads as the Word of God is not the Word of God, but the work of an impostor, then — with reverence be it said — Christ's promise to His Church has failed, and the Holy Spirit has not been given to guide her into all truth . . . The testi- mony of the universal Church of Christ, declaring that the Epistles which we receive as such are Epistles 286 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. of St. Peter and are the "Word of God, is not her testimony only — it is the testimony of Christ.'' Every true Christian will sympathise with the zeal for God's Word which is conspicuous in these passages ; but it will he well to keep apart two questions which they combine and almost confuse — («) Is this Second Epistle the work of St. Peter ? [b) Is it part of the Word of God ? The second question is here taken, for granted. The Church answered it in the affirmative fifteen hundred years ago, and it is no part of the present work to question the de- cision. Only the first question will be discussed; and to attempt to settle it by considerations such as the passages jiist quoted suggest, is neither just, nor wise, nor in the deepest sense reverent. It is not just; for how can we give a fair hearing to adv.CTse evidence if we approach it in a spirit which com- pels us to regard it as false or mis- leading ? It is not wise ; for what will be our position if, after all, the adverse evidence is too strong for even our pre-judgment ? It is not reverent; for it virtually assumes that the Almighty cannot exalt an Epistle put forth under a pretended name to the dignity of being His Word ; and that He who spoke to His chosen people by the lips of impure Balaam cannot speak to us by the wiitings of one who may have ill-advisedly assumed the pen of an Apostle. Hos. i. 2, 3 and iii. 1, 2 may warn us to be on our guard against pronouncing hastily beforehand as to what means and instruments it is or is not possible for God to employ for the instruc- tion of His people. These remarks are not made with a view to surrendering the authen- ticity of the Epistle as a thing of no moment, but only that we may be able to weigh the evidence with calmness. The question of the genuineness of the Epistle is one of immense interest and no small im- IDOrtance ; but there is no terrible alternative before us. If, after all, we have to admit that the Epistle is possibly, or probably, or certainly not the work of St. Peter, the spiritual value of the contents, both in themselves and in having received the stamp of the Church as canonical, will remain absolutely unchanged ; although, possibly, our own views of God's providence in relation to the canon of Scripture may requii-e re -consideration and re-adjustment. This, however, is but the common experience both of the individual and of the race. Men's views of God's deahngs with them are ever needing re-adjust- ment, as He hides and manifests Himself in history ; for His ways are not as our ways, nor His thoughts as our thoughts. The objections to the genuineness of the Epistle are of four kinds : being drawn [a) from the history of the Epistle; {b) from its con- ftents inrelationto the First Epistle ; (c) from the contents considered in themselves ; (rf) from the same in relation to the Epistle of St. Jude. In each case it wall be most con- venient to state the adverse facts first, and then what may be said on the other side. (a) External Evidence : The His- tory of the Epistle. — Among the earliest writers there is a remark- able silence with regard to this Epistle. There is no mention of it, and no certain quotation from it or allusion to it, in either the first or second century. Neither the Apostolic Fathers nor Justin Mar- IT. PETER. 287 tyr nor Irenaeus yield anything tiiat can be relied upon as a refer- ence. It is probable that Irenaeus did not know of its existence ; it is almost certain that neither Tertul- lian nor Cyprian did. About Clement of Alexandria there is some doubt, owing to inconsistent state- ments of Eusebius and Cassiodorus. But seeing that in the large amount of Clement's writings now extant there is only one possible, and not one probable, reference to it, and that, in quoting 1 Peter, he writes, " Peter in his Epistle says," the probabilit}'^ is that he did not know it. The Muratorian Fragment {circ. A.I). 170) omits it. It is wanting in the Peschito or old Syriac version (and St. Peter was personally known in Syria, es- pecially at Antioch), and also in the old Latin version which pre- ceded the Vulgate. Thus we are brought quite into the third century without any sure trace of the Epistle. Origen certainly knew it. In those of his works which exist only in the Latin translation of Ivufinus he quotes it as the work of St. Peter. But Rufinus is not a trustworthy translator; and Origen, in works of which the original Greek is still extant, either ex- presses a doubt about it or rejects it by implication, as Clement of Alexandria does. Eusebius cer- tainly rejected it ; Chiysostom, Theodore, and Theodoret probably did so ; and we learn from Didy- mus, Jerome's preceptor, that doubts about it still 8ur\T.ved late in the fourth century, though he seems to have overcome them in himself. At the Reformation these doubts revived again, and have never subsided since. At the pre- i sent time, a large number of the j best critics consider the Epistle suspicious or spurious. On the other hand, there are possible allusions to it in Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Hermas, Justin Martyr, Melito, Theophilus, and Hippoljiius : and some even among adverse critics consider those in the Shepherd of Hermas [circ. a.d. 140) to be certain. These possible allu- sions cannot here be given, but they may be fomid from the following- references : — Clement ii. 5 ; iii. 4; Polycarp, iii. 4 ; Hermas, ii. 13, 15, 20 ; iii. o ; Justin Martyr, ii. 1 ; iii. 8 ; Melito, iii. 6 — 7 ; Theo- philus, i. 19, 21 ; Hippolytus, i. 21. The tirst co-tain reference to the Epistle as by St. Peter is in a Latin translation of a letter by Origen's pupil, Eirmilian of Cajsarea, to Cj^riau (a.d. 256). Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Jerome, Rufinus, and Augustine accepted it, although they knew that it had been much suspected ; and they, of course, had evidence which has not come down to us. The Councils of Laodicea {circ. a.d. 360) and of HijDpo (a.d. 393) formall}'^ included it in the Canon, decisions which have never been reversed. Its omission from the Muratorian Fragment is somewhat weakened by the fact that 1 Peter (about which there is no doubt) is omitted also ; and, as a set-off to its omission from the Peschito, we ha -e the fact that Ephrem Syrus seems to have accepted it. Thus the adverse external evi- dence, serious though it is, is any- thing but conclusive. It can easily be explained. Communication be- tween the churches was fitful and irregular, sometimes slow, some- times very rapid. Accidents might favour the circulation of the First 2S8 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Epistle and delay that of the Second. The very fact of its being- the first Letter from the pen of the chief Apostle would promote the spread of the First Epistle ; and as it was known to have been written only a few years before the death of St. Peter, this would make a second Letter within so short an interval a little improbable. The marked difference of style and language between the two Letters, which Jerome tells us had attracted notice, would increase the distrust. The amount of apocryphal literature which began to appear at a very earty date, and flooded the Church in the second and third centuries, made all churches very suspicious about unknown writings; and several of these apocryphal books bore the name of St. Peter. Every year that the arrival of the Epistle at any j)articular church was de- layed would make its acceptance by that church less probable. The fate of the Fourth Gospel, on account of its appearing after the others had obtained full possession of the field, is an illustration of similar causes and effects. When we remember that manj^ narratives of Christ's life (Luke i. 1, Note) and some letters of St. Paul ha-se entirely perished, we need not be S'lrprised that a short Epistle like this, containing little that ordinary ^ Christians did not know, should ^r have remained for more than a century qmte unknown to many churches and suspected by others. If the external evidence were all, we might admit that the general and authoritative reception of the Epistle in the fourth century, after such full doubt and debate, is more than sufiicient for us. {b) Infernal Evidence : The Con- tents of the Second Epistle in relation to the First. — Very formidable lists of points of difference between the two Epistles have been drawn up, but recent adverse critics have ceased to urge many of these sup- posed differences ; we may, there- fore, content ourselves with somo of the most telling of such argu- ments as specimens, (a) 1 Peter uses Old Testament phraseology, and quotes Old Testament writers ; 2 Peter, with two doubtful excep- tions (chaps, ii. 22 ; iii. 8), does neither. ()8) 1 Peter is mainly about suffering persecution ; 2 Peter is mainlj^ about heresy. (7) 1 Peter speaks of the Death, Re- surrection, and Ascension of Christ ; 2 Peter mentions none of them. (8) 1 Peter represents the return of Christ as near (chap. iv. 7), and calls it a "revelation" (chaps, i. 7, 13 ; iv. 13) ; 2 Peter represents it as possibly distant (chap. iii. 15), and calls it " coming ' (chaps, i. 16 ; iii. 4, 12). (e) 1 Peter caUs our Lord simply " Christ " or " Jesus Christ ; " 2 P^ter always adds "Saviour" (five times; and the word does not occur once in 1 Peter), or "Lord," or both. (Q 1 Peter insists on faith ; 2 Peter on knowledge, (tj) The Greek of I Peter is smooth, with easily- moving sentences, simply con- nected ; that of 2 Peter is rough, with heavily-moving sentences, of which the construction is often harsh and, when prolonged, broken. To these and similar arguments it may be replied that considerable diflrerences between the two Epistles are admitted, but they may easily be exaggerated. Of the above, some are not strictly true ; in par- ticular, (a) and (e) ; others tell rather in favour of the genuineness II. PETER. 289 of 2 Peter. V\Tiy should a second letter, written soon after the first, on a very different subject, repeat the topics of the first, or even use much of its phraseology ? En- couragement under persecution and denunciation of corrupt doctrine and conduct require very different language. Great similarity of ex- pression under such very different circumstances would have looked like the careful imitation of a forger. Jerome's suggestion, that St. Peter used different " inter- preters" in the two Epistles to put his thoughts into Greek, is a pos- sible solution of many differences ; but it is not likely that St. Peter, though originally an illiterate fisherman, was still, at the end of a long and active life, unable to write the Greek of either Epistle ; and both of them show traces of a writer not perfectly at home in the language. King's theory, that 2 Peter is a translation from an Aramaic original, is another possible solution. But neither theory is needed. Both Epistles are too short to supply satisfactory ma- terials for an argument of this kind ; and neither of them exhibits any such marked characteristics as those found in the writings of St. Luke or St. Paul or St. John. An anonymoiis pamphlet on any sub- ject by Carlyle or Victor Hugo would probably be assigned to the right author at once ; but most writers, even if known by many books, have no such marked style as would betray them in a few pages on a special subject ; and here we are arguing as to the authorship of a tract of four pages from a tract of six pages on a dif- ferent subject. In such a case, similarities, which cannot easily be the result of imitation, are stronger evidence of identity of authorship •' than dissimilarities are of non- , identity. Difference of mood, of j subject, of surroundings, would j probably account for all the dis- I similarities, did we but know all the facts. The First Ej^istle would seem to have been %\T:itten with much thought and care, as by one who felt a delicacy about intruding himself upon communities A\hich St. Paul had almost made his own. Hence the earnest, gentle dignity of the Epistle, which makes one think how age must hav^e tamed the spii-it of the impetuous Apostle. But in the Second Letter, written probably under pressure, we see that the old vehemence is still there. There is a slight indication of it in the way in which he goes at once to the point (chap. i. 3 — 5) ; as he nears the evil which has so excited his fear and indignation, the construction becomes broken (chap. i. 17) ; and whon he is in the full torrent of his invective, feeling seems almost to choke his utterance. Hence the rugged Greek, from which at times we can scarcely extricate the con- struction; hence, too, the repeti- tions, which some have thought a sign of inferiority. They are the natural results of emotion strug- gling to express itself in a language with which it is not perfectly familiar. Similar harsh construc- tions and tautological repetitions may be found in some of St. Peter's speeches as recorded in the Acts (chaps, i. 21, 22; iii. 13—16, 26; \ iv. 9 ; X. 36—40). V Against the admitted differences may be set some very real coin- cidences, both in thought and language, between the two Epistles. These also may be exaggerated and their force over-estimated; but 19 290 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. when soberi_)' treated they are a valuable contribution to the eYi- dence. Ob^aous similarities of language are of no great moment ; for it is admitted by all, whatever their conclusions, that the writer of the Second Letter must have known the First. But subtle coincidences of thought, lying almost beyond the reach of the conscious imi- tator, are worth considering. (See chaps, i. 3, 5,7; ii. 18, 19.) The traces of St. Paul's phraseology, which have been urged against the originality of 2 Peter, may, from this point of view, be counted in its favour, for such traces are very strong in the First Epistle. ^ The arguments, therefore, to be^i drawn from a comparison of the two Letters do not give much sup- port to those who impugn the genuineness of the Second Epistle. A patient consideration of the facts may lead some to the conclusion that, considering the brevity of both Letters, and the different pur- pose of each, the amount of agree- ment, both on and below the surface, throws the balance in favour of both being the product of one mind. The assertion that had the Second Epistle not claimed \ to be by St. Peter no one would ever have dreamed of assigning it to him, is easily made, and not easily refuted; but study of the phenomena will lead to its being doubted. (c) Internal Evidence : The Con- tents of the Einstle considered in themselves. — It is in this section of the argument that by far the most serious objections to the authen- ticity occur. The following have been urged : — (o) It is unlike the simple, practical spirit of St. Peter to enlarge upon the manner of the creation and of the destruction of the world (chap. iii. 5 — 7, 10—12). (j8) It is unhke an Apostle to appeal to "the com- mandment of your Apostles " i (chap. iii. 2). (7) The interchange of future and present tenses (chaps, ii. 1, 2, 3, 10, 12, 13 ; iii. 3, 5) looks like a later writer trying to write like a prophet in an earlier age, and at times forgetting his assumed position. (5) Ideas belonging to an age later than that of the Apostles are introduced. Of this there are four marked instances — (1) The expression "the holy mount" (chap. i. 18) betrays an age which professes to know where the Transfiguration took place (of which the Gospels tell us nothing), and which has a taste for miracles. (2) No such argument as that urged by the scoffers (chap. iii. 4) would be possible in St. Peter's lifetime ; it implies that at least the first generation of Christians has died out. (3) 2 Peter is addi-esscd (chap. i. 1) to all Gentile Chris- tians, and at the same time (chap, iii. 1) to the same readers as those of 1 Peter, which is addressed (chap. i. 1) to particular chm'ches, i.e., the post- Apostolic idea that the letters of Apostles are the common property of all Christians is implied. (4) St. Paul's writings are spoken of as equivalent to Scripture (chap. iii. 16). Let us take these objections in order, (a) That St. Peter .should enlarge upon the details of the creation and of the destruction of the world is not more strange than that he should enlarge upon "the spirits in prison " (1 Pet. iii. 19, 20 ; iv. 6). It would almost seem as if such mysterious subjects had an attraction for him (1 Pet. i. 12). At least it is more reasonable to II. PETER. 291 suppose this, seeing that there are some facts to support us, than to settle precariously what " the simple, practical spirit of St. Peter" would or would not be likely to enlarge upon. (0) Let us grant that an Apostle is often content with insisting on his own authority : this is no proof that he would never appeal to the authority of another Apostle. In 2 Peter the writer has more than once stated his personal claim to be heard (chap. i. 1, 18), and is then willing to sink his own authority in that of the Apostolic body, nay, is anxious to do so ; for, as in the First Epistle, he still feels a deli- cacy about addressing congrega- tions which, in the first instance, belonged to the Apostle of the Gentiles, and so he not only ap- peals to that Apostle'6 command- ment, but points out that his commandment 's at the same time that of Jesus Christ. In Eph. iii. 5 St. Paul makes a similar appeal to the authority of others ; and it may warn us to be cautious in arguing as to what an Apostle would be sure to do in certain cases when we find this passage used to cast doubt on the Apostolic origin of such an Epistle as that to the Ephesians. (7) This plausible argument will not bear close in- spection. The evils which the writer foretells are already present in the germ. ^Moreover, the pro- phetic present as equivalent to a future is very common in pro- phecies ; the future is so confi- dently realised that it is spoken of as present. In similar prophecies in the New Testament there is a similar mixture of future and present (2 Thess. ii. 3, 7 ; 2 Tim. iii. 1, 2, 8). (8) AVe come now to the most weighty group of objec- tions. (1) The expression " the holy mount" does not implj^ that the mount is known ; and the theory that it does is reduced to an absurdity when it is further urged that " the holy mount," as applied to a known spot, must mean Mount Zion. Would any sane Christian, whether of the first or of the second century, represent the Transfigura- tion as taking place on Mount Zion ? " The mount" simply means the one spoken of in the Gospels in connection with this event. Nor does the epithet ** holy " indicate a miracle -loving age. Any Jew would naturally use it of a spot where the glory of the Lord had been revealed (Ex. iii. 5 ; Josh. v. 15). (2) The force of this argument is net so gTcat as at first sight appears. In the Epistle of Clement of Eome (a.d. 95 — 100) the same scofiing j argument is quoted as condemned by "Scripture" (chap, xxiii.). The "Scripture" is probably not 2 Peter. But we here have proof that this scoflSng objection was old enough to have been ivritten against before a.d. 95. The kindred error of Hymenaeus and Philetus was in existence in St. Paul's lifetime. Besides which, it is not so certair; as it is assumed to be that " since the fathers fell asleep " refers to Christians at all . The argument may be a piece of Sadducism, which had found its way into the Christian Church ; the tone of it is not im- like that in Mark xii. 23. (3) The premises here are too vague for so definite a conclusion. To state the premises fairly we must say 2 Peter is addressed in the main to all Gen- tile Christians, and also in the main to the same readers as 1 Peter, which is addressed mainh/ io five or six different churches. From such indefinite data no very clean-cut NEW TESTAMENT INTKODUCTIONS. and decided result can he obtained. Moreover, it is open to question whether the idea that the letters of Apostles are the common pro- perty of Christians was not in existence even in the Apostolic age. The phenomena of the text of the last two chapters of Eomans tend to show that this idea was beginning to arise some years before the traditional date of St. Peter's death. The Epistle to the Ephesians would lead us in the same direction. So that it is doubt- ful (a) whether the idea is implied in 2 Peter ; (b) whether it was not in existence in St. Peter's lifetime. (4) No objection, probably, has had more effect than this. "The other Scri]?tures," it is urged, may mean either Old Testament or New Testa- ment waitings ; in either case, we are face to face with a writer later than the Apostolic age. If Old Testament Scriptures are meant, it is incredible that St. Peter would place Epistles of St. Paul side by side with them as Scripture. If New Testament Scriptures are meant, this indicates a date at which certain Christian writings had begun to be considered equal in authority to the Old Testament, and this date is later than the death of St. Peter. In chapter iii. verse 16 it is quite probable that not Old Testament, but Christian, writings are meant ; not any de- finite collection of waitings, but cer- tain well-known -documents, other than the Epistles of St. Paul just mentioned. We must remember that the Greek words for "other" are sometimes used loosely, and rather illogically, without the two indi^aduals, or two classes, being exactly alike (comp. Luke x. 1 ; xxiii, 32 ; John xiv. 16) ; so that we cannot be sure that the writer means to place these Epistles of St. Paul on precisely the same level with "the other Scriptures." And that " Scripture " was used in the first century as rather a compre- hensive terra is shown by the passage from Clement of Rome al- luded to above, where he quotes (chap, xxiii.) as "Scripture" a passage not found either in the Old or the New Testament. Again, the high authority claimed by Apostles for their own words makes this passage, although unique in the New Testament, quite intelligible. (Comp. Acts XV. 28 ; 1 Cor. v. 3, 4 ; 1 Thess. ii. 13.) Perhaps the nearest parallel is 1 Pet. i. 12, where evangelists are placed on the same level with the Old Testament prophets, a very remarkable co- incidence between the two Epistles. One more consideration must be urged. The date of St. Peter's death is not certain, and the tra- ditional date may be too early. Several of the objections just con- sidered would be still further weakened if St. Peter's death took place not in the third, but in the fourth quarter of the century. But besides answering objections we may observe — (1) that the writer professes to be Simon Peter (chap. i. 1), one Avhose death Christ foretold (chap. i. 14), a witness of the Transfiguration (chap. i. 16 — 18), and the writer of the First Epistle (chap. iii. 1) ; (2) that he speaks with authority (chap. i. 12, 13, 15, 16), yet is not afraid to admit the high authority of pro- phecy (chap. i. 19) ; (3) that there is some trace of the conciliatory position between Jewish and Gen- tile converts which St. Peter occu- pied between the rigour of St. James and the liberty of St. Paul (chaps, i. 1, 2: iii. 15) ; (4) that [T. PETER. 293 the expression "oiu- beloved ■broth.er Paul," so tmlike the way in Avhich Clement of Rome, Ig-natius, Poly- carp, and Clement of Alexandria speak of St. Paul (see chap. iii. verse 15), is a strong mark of an Apostolic author — a writer of the second century woiJld scarcely find his way hack to this ; (5) that some striking coincidences exist hetween thoughts and expressions in this Epistle and passages in St. Peter's speeches as reported in the Acts. On the other hand, no weight can he allowed to the argument that " all motive for forgery is absent." It is quite true that "this Epistle does not support any hierarchical pretensions nor hear upon any of the controversies of a later age." But a motive quite sufficient can bo found, viz., to put down with the authority of an Apostle an alarming corruption, both in doc- trine and conduct. This motive might have induced excellent men in the primitive Church to write in the name of St. Peter, and the moral sense of the community would not have condemned them. Such personations, purely in the interests of religion and virtue, are neither impossible nor unknown ; and the veiy words " forgery" and "impostor," in reference to such acts and agents in primitive times, are fallacious. We must beware of transferring our own ideas of literary morality to an age in which they were absolutely non- existent. {d) Internal Evideiice : The Con- tents of the Epistle in relation to the Epistle of St. Jude. — This subject is discussed in the Introduction to Jude. The conclusion there ar- ' rived at is that the priority of neither Epistle can be proved, but , that the balance inclines decidedly towards the priority of 2 Peter. If the priority of Jude should ever be demonstrated, then we have still more reason for placing the date of St. Peter's death later than A.D. 67 or 68, imless the authen- ticity of 2 Peter is admitted to be more than doubtful. The conclusion, then, to which this long discussion leads us is this — the objections to the Epistle are such that, had the duty of fixing the Canon of the New Testament fallen on us, we should scarcely have ventured, on the existing evi- dence, to include the Epistle ; they are not such as to warrant us in re- versing the decision of the fourth century, which had evidence that we have not. If modern criticism be the court of appeal to which the judgment of the fourth century is referred, as it has not sufficient reasons for reversing that judg- ment it can only confirm it. Ad- ditional evidence may yet be forth- coming. A Hebrew or Greek text of the Book of Enoch might settle the relation between 2 Peter and Jude beyond dispute ; and this would clear the way not a little. Meanwhile, we accept the authen- ticity of the Epistle as, to say the very least, quite the best working Jnjpothesis. II. The place and time. — The suggestions as to the place where the Epistle was written are mere conjectures ; we have no evi- dence of any value. As to the date, any time after the writing of the first Epistle may be right ; prob- ably not long before the Apostle's maityrdom. The fact that the de- struction of Jerusalem is not men- 294 NEW TESTA]\IEXT IXTRODUCTIOXS. tioned is reason for "believing that it had not taken place when the letter was written. If it be said that a writer personating St. Peter would have avoided so ohvions a blunder, we may reply (1) that these are just the pitfalls into which literary personators in an early age fall ; (2) that it is not certain that it would have been a blunder — St. Peter may have been living a.d. 70 ; (3) that the destruction of Jerusalem would have served the purpose of the letter so well, as an argument (more strong than the Transfiguration) for Christ's return to judg-ment, as a fulfilment of prophecy on this subject, and as a signal instance of divine vengeance, that no explanation of its omission is so satisfactory as that it had not yet taken place. in. Object and Contents. — The object of the Epistle is two- fold : (1) warning against the seductions of false doctrine and the licentiousness akin to it; (2) ex- hortation to increase in the gi'ace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. The basis for both is the same — the certainty of Chi'ist's return to judgment. With true tact, the writer begins and ends with exhortation and encourage- ment ; the warning and denuncia- tion lie in between, and strongly as the latter are worded, terrible as are the metaphors and illustrations employed, even here the gentleness and tenderness of one who knew from experience what tenderness could do for those who had gone the length of " dmying even the Master that bought them " (2 Pet. ii. 1 ; Luke xxii. 61) continually come to the surface, and break the flood of vehement denunciation (chaps, ii. 6, 7 — 9 ; iii. 1, 2). The plan of the contents is easily recognised, and the transitions from one division to another are so natural, that (as remarked at the outset) it is impossible to strike out any portion as spurious and retain the rest. I. — Introductory. Address and greeting (chap. i. 1, 2). II.— Hortatory and Argu- mentative. (1) Exhortation to increase in spiritual gTaces, in order to gain eternal life at Christ's coming (chap. i. 3 — 11). (2) Transition to the argumen- tative part; the purpose of this Epistle stated (chap. i. *12— 15). (3) Basis of the exhortation— the certainty of Christ'? coming, which is proved : (fir) B\ the Transfiguration, which was an anticipation of it (chap. i. 16—18). (b) By the utterances of pro- phets, who have predicted it (chap. i. 19—21). III. — Warning. r (1) First Frediction : False teachers shall have great success and certain ruin (chap. ii. 1 — 10) : their im- pious practices described (chap. ii. 10—22). (2) Transition to the second pre- diction ; the purpose of both Epistles stated (chap. iii. 1, 2). (3) Second Prediction : Scoffers shall throw doubt on Christ's return (chap. iii. 3, 4) ; their argument refuted (chap. iii. 5—9). (4) Basis of the warning — ^the certainty of Christ's coming (chap. iii. 10). IT. PETER. 295 IV. — Hortatory. (1) Concluding; exhortations (chap. iii. 11—18) ; (2) Doxology (chap. iii. 18). IV. The False Teachers and the Scoffers. — We are prohahly to regard these as in the main identical ; but in spite of the %'igor- ous language in which they are described, it is difficult to say what particular heresy is indicated. As in many of the Old Testament prophecies, the picture is painted in strong, lurid colours ; but the outlines are not sufficiently defined to enable us to specif}' any distinc- tive characteristics. The spirit of heresy, capable of developing into endless varieties, rather than any one of the varieties themselves, is placed before us. Cavilling, pride, iiTeverence, impatience of re- straints, impatience of mysteries — these form the corrupt atmosphere in which heresies are generated, and these are just the qualities that are depicted here. The indefinite- ness of the description has been pointed out by critics on both sides of the question of authenticity. It is a strong argument in favour of an early date for this Epistle. A writer of the second century, with the full-blown Gnosticism of Basi- lides, Carpocrates, Valentinus, and Marcion around him, could scarcely have divested himself of his experi- ence, and given us, not the details of what he saw and heard, but the germs that had developed into these after a growth of half a century. Historic divination, by means of which the essentials of an earlier age are discovered and separated from what is merely accidental — his- toric imagination, by means of which these essentials are put together in a lifelike picture — are powers of modem growth. The divination of the second century was exercised on the future, not on the past ; its imagination on the possibilities of the unseen world, not on the reali- ties of the world of sense. The disagTeement of critics as to the time in the second century at which the letter was probably written makes us all the more disposed to doubt whether the second centurj^ is right at all. Bleek suggests A.D. 100—150 ; Mayerhoff, circ. A.D. 150 ; Davidson, circ. 170 ; Schwegler and Semler, a.d. 190 — 200. The view here taken of the false teachers and scoffers, that they are the forerunners of the Antinomian heretics of the second century, is confirmed when we turn to St. Paul's Epistles. There we find indications of these evils at a slightly earlier stage. - We see him contending against corrupt prac- tices, which were on their road to being established, inasmuch as some tried to justify them on prin- ciples which were a caricature of his own teaching. His Christian liberty is stretched to cover the detestable maxim, " Let us do evil that good may come," participation in idolatrous feasts, incestuous marriages, intemperance at love- feasts, &c. (Piom. iii. 8 ; 1 Cor., passim). A sclf'-sati-fied knowledge is intruding itself (1 Cor. viii. 1 — • 4). The resurrection of the dead is being denied (1 Cor. xv. 12 ; 2 Tim. ii. 18). In 2 Peter the cor- rupt practices and the corrupt principles are more defiinitely com- bined. St. Peter predicts that still greater abominations than those against which St. Paul wrote will not only be justified, but taught upon principle. Going beyond those who denied the resurrection, 296 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. men will mock at the coming of Christ and the day of judgment. Thus the false teachers of 2 Peter are just a step nearer to the sys- tematised Antinomianism of the second century than the evil-doers denounced by St. Paul. St. Jude shows us in active operation the mischief of which St. Paul and St. Peter had seen the beginning and foretold the development. Tertiil- lian, Irenseus, and Hippolytus tell us to what hideous proportions and fantastic variety the development eventually progressed. It is well known that the f ramers of our Authorised Version, while on the whole making an enormous advance on previous English ver- sions, sometimes went back. In some instances the changes Ihcy made in the translations on which they worked- were the reverse of improvements. Perhaps no portion of the New Testament is more full of cases of this kind than the Second Epistle of St. Peter. In a large number of such cases it will be foimd that the earlier versions which are superior to the Author- ised Version are Wiclif's and the Rhemish; and not unfrequently that the version which has led our translators astray is the Genevan. None of these three versions was among those which the translators were instructed to use ; and of Wiclif's they probably made very little use ; of the other two they made a great deal of use. Wiclif's version and the Rhemish were made from the Latin Vulgate, not from the Greek; so that we have what at first sight seems to be a startling fact, that versions made from a Latin translation are often superior to the best version made from the Greek. The explanation is simple. The Vulgate is a good Latin translation of excellent Greek texts ; our version is a good Eng- lish translation of A'ery defective Greek texts. "The errors in the text of our English Testament in- herited from them are considerably more important than the existing errors of translation" (Westcott). The late Dr. Routh, when asked what commentary he considered to be on the whole the best, is said to have answered, " The Vulgate." The facts just noticed are a striking illustration of his meaning. [In writing the Introduction to this Epistle, use has been made of the Commentaries of Alford, Bengel, Briickner's edition of De Wette, Hofmann, Huther, Reuss, Schott, and Wordsworth, together with the Introductions of Bleek and Da-sddson, and the articles in Smith and Herzog. A much better use might have been made of them had time permitted. But it is only just to the editor and the reader to say that the commentator on 2 Peter and Jude was asked to undertake the work at very short notice, and to complete it within a very short time. If he is found to have imdertaken a task beyond his strength, he must plead in excuse the attraction which the work had for him, and the wish to render help to a far abler but over-worked contributor to this Commentary.*] * The work here referred to is, of course, the "New Testament Commentary for English Readers," from wliich, as stated in Bishop EUicott's Preface to these books, the Introductions have been ex- ti'acted. I. JOHN. Br THE Yen. W. M. SINCLAIE, D.D. I. Who WAS THE Writeu? IT. AVho wehe the Reaueus ? III. What were the Circtm- STAXCES OF THE ChURCHES ? IV. Is THE Writing an Epistle ? I. Who was the Writer?— Three Epistles come before us in the Xew Testament bearing- a very strong- family likeness to each other and to the Fourth Gospel. The_v carry no superscription in their text, but "the elder,'' or "the old man." ^VTiose are they ? The manuscripts from which they are derived have always said " John's," and in some is added " the Apostle." We will here consider the First. The Second and Third will be treated separately. The evidence for the First is as strong as any- thing could be. It was accepted as the Apostle's by the whole Church. Eusebius, the historian (born about A.D. 270), places it among the writings ^'universally admitted {homolocfoiimena) " ; and Jerome states that it received the sanction of all members of the Church. The only exceptions were such sects of heretics as would be likely to re- pudiate it as not harmonising with their theological errors ; the Alogi, or " L'nreasonables," an obscure and rather doubtful sect in the second century, who rejected St. John's Gospel and the Revelation, and therefore, probably, these Y. AVhen was it written ? YI. Where was it written ? YII, \Yhat is its Scope ? YIII. Notes on Difficult Pas- IX. Literature. [sages. three Epistles ; and Marcion, in the same century, who chose such parts of the New Testament as suited him best, and altered them at pleasure. The eWdence of quotation and reference begins early. Polycarp, the disciple of St. John, became a Christian a.d. 83. In the epistle which he wrote to the Philippians, occur these words : " For every one that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is anti- christ." The likeness to 1 John iv. 2, 3, is marked ; and it is far more probable that a loosely written letter, such as his, should embody a well-known saying of so senten- tious and closely -worded a treatise as the First Epistle of John than the other way. Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, flourished in the first half of the second century. Irenseus, who was born about the end of the first century, says that he was a hearer of St. John. This is contradicted by Eusebius en the evidence of Papias' own writings {H.E, III. 39, 1,2); but he wrote a work called. An Explanation of the Oracles of the Lord, in which he bore witness to 298 >i F^V TKSTAIMEN r IXTrvODUCTIOXS. the authenticity of Christian doc- trine. The account of his work is derived from Eusehius, the his- torian, who says that " he used testimonials from the First Epistle of John." By halancing the name of St. John in this sentence with that of St. Peter, Eusehius evi- dently understood the Apostle. Ahout A.D. 100 was born Justin Martyr. In his time was written the anonymous epistle to Diognetus. Six of its chapters contain indis- putable reminiscences of the First Epistle. The epistle of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons was wi'itten in A.D. 177. It quotes I John iii. 16. Carpocrates, the Gnostic, , lived at Alexandi'ia at the beginning- ' of the second century. lie tried to pei-vert 1 John v. 19, " The whole world lieth in the evil one." Iremous cites three passages from the First Epistle, mentioning its author; and Eusehius mentions this piece of evidence in exactly the same manner as that from Papias. Clement of Alexandria was born about a.d. 150. Like Irenseus, he quotes passages from the First Epistle, naming the author. So Tertullian, bom about the same time, Origen, and the succeeding Fathers. About a.d. 170, a Canon of the New Testa- ment was drawn up by some teacher for the use of catechumens. This is now known by the name of Mural ori, who discovered and printed it a.d. 1740. (See Tregelles' Canon Mtnrfforianus, pages 1, 81 — 89 : Oxford, 1867.) "What wonder," it says, "that St. John i makes so many references to the ! Fourth Gospel in his Epistles, say- ing of himself, ' that which we have seen with our eyes, and have heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, that have we written ? for thus he professes himself not only the eye-witness, but also the hearer and the writer of all the wonders of the Lord in order." And after cataloguing St. Paul's Epistles, it continues : " The Epistle of Jude, and the two which bear the name of John as a title, are considered General." The writer evidently means the Second and Third Epistles, which might not have been considered general from their shortness and slightnes.s. The Peschito, or Syrian version, of about the same date, gives the same evidence as the Muratorian Canon. We have thus a consentient voice from the churches of East and West, of Syria, of Alexandria, of Africa, and of Gaul. So strong, so clear, is the external proof. On the internal nothing can be better than the words of Ewald. '* As in the Gospel, we see here *he author retire to the background, unwilling to speak of himself, and still less to support anything by the weight of his name and reputation, although the reader here meets him, not as the calm narrator, but as an ejjistolary writer, as exhorter and teacher, as an Apostle, and, moreover, as the only surviving Apostle. It is the same delicacy and diffidence, the same lofty calmness and composure, and especially the same truly Chris- tian modesty, that cause him to retire to the background as an Apostle, and to say altogether so little of himself. He only desires to counsel and warn, and to remind his readers of the sublime truth they have once acquired ; and the higher he stands the less he is dis- posed to humble ' the brethren ' by his great authority and directions. But he knew who he was, and every word tells plainly that he only I. JOHN, 209 could thus speak, counsel, and ■warn. The unique consciousness which an Apostle as he grew older could caiTy within himself, and which he, once the favourite dis- ciple, had in a i;)eculiar measure ; the calm superiority, clearness, and decision in thinking on Christian suhjects ; the rich experience of a long life, steeled in the victorious | struggle with every unchristian element; and a glowing language | lying concealed under this calm- | ness, which makes us feel in- | tuitively that it does not in vain j commend to us love as the highest attainment of Christianity — all this coincides so remarkahly in this Epistle, that every reader of that period, prohahly without any further intimation, might readily determine who he was. But where the connection required it the author intimates with manifest plainness that he stood in the nearest possible relations to Jesus (chaps, i. 1—3; iv. 16; v. 3—6), precisely as he is wont to express himself in similar circumstances in the Gospel; and all this is so artless and simple, so entirely with- out the faintest trace of imitation in either case, that nobody can fail to perceive that the selfsame author and Apostle must have com- posed both writings" (Ewald, Die Johann. Schriften, i. 431). No less than thirty-five passages of the Fourth Gospel are common to the First Epistle. These ex- pressions occur in twenty-three different places, and are used in a way of which only the author of the same two treatises could be capable. Considerably more than half of the parallel places in the Gospel belong to the farewell dis- courses of John xii. — xvii. There the tender, loving, receptive, truth- ful, retentive mind of the bosom- friend had been particularly neces- sary ; at that great crisis it had been, through the Spirit of God, particularly strong ; and the more faithfully St. John had listened to his Master and reproduced Him, the deeper the impression was which the words made on his own mind, and the more likely he was to dwell on them in another work instead of on his own thoughts and words. The style may be his own both in Gospels and Epistles, modified by that of our Lord ; the thoughts are the thoughts of Jesus. An examination of the following list of parallels will illus- trate this : — First Epistle of John. Gospel of John. Char . 1. 1, 2. Chap. i. 1, 2, 14. " i. 4. „ XV. 11. „ xvi. 24. ,^ i. 10 V. 38. " ii. 1, 2. ,, xiv. 16. xi.51, 52. ,, xiii. 15, 34, 35 " ii. 4^-6. ,, xiv. 21-24. „ XV. 10. ,, ii.8. „ xiii. 34. ii. 11. „ xii. 35. '■ ii. 23. „ XV. 23, 24. V. 24. ii. 27. „ xiv, 26, iii. 1. ,, xvii. 25. iii. 8. „ ^iii. 44. iii. 10. „ viii. 47. " ui. 13—15. V. 24, 38. „ XV. 18, 19. iii. 16. ,, XV. 12, 13. - iii. 22. ix. 31. ,, xvi. 23. " iv. 5, G. iii. 31. „ XV. 19. „ Viii. 47. ,, iv. 9. iii. 36. iv. 16. vi. 69. " v. 3, 4. ,, xiv. 15. ,, xvi. 33. V. 9. V. 36. '' V. 12. iii. 36. ,, xiv. 6. J, V. 13. „ XX. 31. " V.14. „ xiv. 13, It. „ xvi. 23. 500 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. . The proof that the Fom-th Gospel was the work of St. John is given in the Introduction to that Gospel, in this volume. On internal grounds alone, without the strong external evidence already sketched, an unbiassed mind would find it very difficult to believe that the First Epistle (and the Second and Third also) are not by the same author. Even the style and construction have an identity which could not easily be spurious or ac- cidental. This is seen in the habit of thinking in periods the limbs of which are parallel and co-ordinate instead of progressive : the junc- ture of these by "and " instead of by particles, expressing consequence or movement : the peculiar use of four special particles : the general Aramaic framework of the diction : and the constant reappearance of special words and jjlirases. The identity of ideas in both wiitings is of the same character ; they bear no sign of imitation, but are the free production of the same spirit. Light, life, darkness, truth, the lie, propitiation, doing righteous- ness, doing sin, doing lawlessness, life and death, loving and hating, love of the Father and love of the world, childi'en of God and children of the devil, the spirit of truth and the spirit of error : all these notions underlie the thought of both Gos- pel and Epistle. The writer of each, too, has the same charac- teristics : love of the background for himself ; absorbing devotion to his Lord ; faithful rectptiveness and faculty for sympathetic repro- duction of His thoughts and spirit ; pure unruffled, unfaltering move- ment among the very inmost facts of life and being ; intense unhesi- tating indignation (like thunder from a clear sky) for wilful de- i pravers of spiritual truth ; and the absolute tranquillity of that certainty which comes from long conviction and demonstrable expe- rience. So, again, the particular dogmatic notes of each are the same: the Spirit already marking off the true from false believers, and so preparing the way for the final judgment; the manifestation of the sons of God already by the presence of the Father and the Son in the Spirit ; the actual present beginning of everlasting life, and the safety from future judgment ; the present existence of the last hour ; Christ the actual Paraclete, the Divine Spirit being another. It would, indeed, be difficult to find a more structural and pene- trating identity between the works of any author whatever than there is between the Gospel and the First Epistle. It was Soaliger (1484—1558) who first announced "the three Epistles of John are not by the Apostle of that name." The tradition men- tioned by Eusebius that there was living at Ephesus at the same time as St. John a presb}i;er of the same name, to whom great weight was attributed because he was a hearer of our Lord, seems to have given rise to the notion that " the elder " of the three Epistles was this tra- ditional person. Those who take this view are guilty of the fallacy that if this man existed he must have had all the characteristics of the Apostle because he had his name and was contemporary. It is far more probable that the beginning of the three Epistles gave rise among the ignorant to the tradition. In modern times, S. G. Lange w^as the first who questioned the Epistle on internal grounds. His I. JOHN. 301 argument rests on the assumption that it is destitute of all character- istic individuality and personality; that the affinity of the Epistle to the Gospel is an imitation ; that the Epistle exhibits marks of senile decay; and that if it was written after the destruction of Jerusalem mention must have been made of it in chap. ii. 18. Few sound critics will think these assumptions worth refutation. The next opponent, Bretschneider, lived to recant his doubts. The unreasonableness of Claudius, Horst, and Paulus, is even more arbitrary, iniag-inative, and groundless than that of Lange. The Tiibingen school have a pre- conception of their own to support. As, according to them, there can be no miracle, so there can be no direct revelation ; the beginning of Christianity must have been the natural consciousness of an indi- vidual, such as Jesus of Nazareth, developing gradually through a much longer period than the ac- cepted Christian history ; they hold that Christ only slightly modified Judaism ; that in the hands of St. Peter and !St. John in the Apoca- h-pse, His teaching took an Ebion- ite form, in the hands of .St. Paul was adapted to the Gentile world at large ; thence arose contentions, in reconciliation of which the greater part of the writings of the New Testament were composed, as party-writings without strict his- torical value. The Epistle is there- fore treated by different members of the school as it will best suit their special theory. KcstKn and Georg-ii think the author of the Gospel the same as of the Epistle ; Zeller supposes it possible that they may be by different hands. Baur pronounces the Epistle a weak imitation of the Gosoel; Hilgen- feld a splendid product of it. Thus they contradict each other. The main arguments of Baur are five, and may be given as a specimen : — (1) Studious anxiety of the writer of the Epistle in his preface to be considered the same as the author of the Gospel ; (2) vain attempt at drawing a distinction between di-sdne and human testimony ; (3) the eschatology of the Epistle more material than that of the Gospel ; (4) the ideas of propitia- tion and Christ the interceding Paraclete more like the Epistle to the Hebrews than the Gospel ; (-5) the teaching wholly jNIontanistic, because it describes Christians as holy and sinless, mentions the anointing, and draws a distinction between venial and mortal sins. Of these it may be shortly said (1) that an imitation would have been more skilful, and that the intense consciousness of the eye-witness would necessarily produce the same line of thought when St. John was prefacing his moral treatise as when he was writing his history ; (2) that the distinction runs throughout the Gospel ; (3) to a candid reader the dijfei'ence is im- possible to discover ; (4) no ex- pression could be more sacrificial than ' ' the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world;" (5) St. John is describing the ideal, not a class : the anointing is most certainly not that in baptism, men- tioned for the first time by Ter- tullian, but that of " pouring out the Spirit : ' ' and there is no re- ference whatever to the six or seven deadly sins of Tertullian, while there is a very distinct similarity between the idea of the sin unto death and the sin against the Holy Ghost of the Gospels. Baur, in fact, as Diisterdieck says, 302 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. has taken the Gnostic and Mou- tanistic caricatures of the Apostoli- cal teaching as if they were its type and origin. The Epistle, then, has abundant historical evidence ; the internal evidence that it is by the same hand as the Fourth Gospel is par- ticularly strong; and the attacks of hostile critics are peculiarly arbitrary and unfounded. II. Who were the Readers ? — There is in St. Augustine's works — and he often quotes this Ej^istle — a solitary citation of it as written to the Parthians. Whether this was his own opinion, a mere cui-- rent traditional title, or a clerical error, the designation seems to have arisen from the fact men- tioned by Clement of Alexandria that the Second Epistle was some- times called " that to the virgins " (the word in the Greek for " virgin" being parthenos). This title evi- dently became misunderstood, and may have been applied to the First Epistle in error. One critic has discovered in "that which ye heard from the beginning " a proof that the readers were the inhabitants of Judaea ; another, identifying St. John's correspondent Caius with St. Paul's host at Corinth (it was one of the commonest of all classical names), fancies that they must have been Corinthians ; but it was evidently written to no church in particular : probably to a circle of churches in immediate connection with St. John, such as the seven addressed in the Reve- lation. The warning against idol- atry may not unreasonably suggest Gentile Christians, and the contrast of the knowledge of the true God in Jesus Chi'ist, implying eternal life, with the dazzling speculations of innovating teachers, harmonises with the historical notice that St. John resided at Ephesus. III. What were the Cir- cumstances of the Churches? — (1) There is no allusion to per- secutions. The hatred of the world, the victory over the wicked one, the victory over the world, suggest spiritual conflict rather than hos- tile attacks. (2) The internal indications point rather to disunion, want of brotherly love, want of steadfast- ness in the fellowship of the Father and the Son, the seductions of worldliness, the snares of false brethren, the evils of a time of peace, when persecution no longer braces the sinews of faith, and warning is needed rather than con- solation ; or when perversion has lost the moral shock of novelty, and Christian loyalty the fire of its indignation ; a time full of evidence of continued spiritual vitality in old and young, but also when a recognised leader of a church can be so ambitious as to reject the authority of the last of the Apostles, and when heathen si^eculation rather than Jewish prejudice is beginning to corrupt Christian faith. (3) Tlie particular heretics com- bated had a Docetic tendency, nob yet fully developed. Their theory was that the Son of God was a phantom, united for a time with the man Jesus. St. John's con- temporary, Cerinthus, already noticed in the Introduction to his Gospel, held that Jesus was the son of Joseph, to whom the Logos was united from His baptism to His crucifixion. The stress laid on the true knowledge as growth in understanding what had been re- I. JOHX 303 vealed from the beginning, points also to the beginning of Gnosticism, the system which exalted specula- tion into religion, buried Christi- anity imder a heterogeneous jjhilo- sophy, and substituted intellectual athletics for faith working by love. (4) The only division of Clrris- tians recognised is that into mature and young. All alike receive the unction of the Holy Ghost. John himself joins in the confession of sin. He lays on aU the duty of trying the spirits. He makes all alike responsible directly to the Lord. IV. Is the Writing an Epistle ? — As an EncycKcal Letter, it would have no special dedication nor salutations ; the Epistle to the Hebrews is similarly without the one, that of St. James without the other. "I write" occurs seven times, " I have written" six, '*you" thirty-six, "little children" ten, "beloved" six, "fathers" and "young men" twice each, " brethren " once. The introduction is an amplification of the ordinarj^ epistolary address, founded on a reminiscence of the more abstract introduction to the Gospel. Bacon says : * ' An Epistle has more natural feeling than a treatise ; more ripe development than momentary conversation." Diisterdieck says: "The whole writing rests as thoroughly on a li^ing personal relation between the author and his readers, the application of the written exhorta- tion is so absolutely personal, that this ground is enough to make us consider the writing as a genuine Epistle. This epistolary character belongs, moreover, to the whole keeping and character of the short writing. With all logical order ' there reigns in it that easy natural- ' ness and unconstraint of statement I which suits the immediate interest and hortatory tendency of an Epistle ; while the strict, pro- gressive, dialectical development, peculiar to a treatise or a homily, is held back." It may be described, then, as a circular letter of St. John to the churches connected with his ministry, embodying a succinct statement of his principal ■^iews of Christian doctrine. There is no good reason for calling it either with one critic, the "pole- mical," or, with another, the "prac- tical " part of the Gospel; or "a homiletical essay, the readers being present ; " or " a summary," or " a companion letter of the Gospel." V. When was it written ? — (1) As it contains no reference to l)ersecutions, it is less likely to have been written in the time of Trajan (a.d. 98— 117) ; probably before the end of the reign of Domitian, a.d. 96 ; after the reign of Xero and the destruction of Jerusalem, a.d. 70. Thus we get the period between a.d. 70 and 96. A date neiir 70 is less likely, be- cause the breaking up of the Jewish world would have made some refer- ence of the kind probable. " The last hour " is a note of spiritual, not material time. (2) Jewish opposition no longer troubles the apostoUc horizon. (3) The life of individual churches aj)art from Jerusalem seems by this time the natiiral order of the Chris- tian world. (4) The heresies are the seeds of Docotism and Gnosticism : this points to the end of the first century. (5) St. John is not mentioned in the Acts after the Jerusalem Council 304 iS'EW TE8TA:\IEXT ixtroductioxs. of A.D. 51. But he docs not seem to have heen at Ephesus when St. Paul took leave of the elders in A.D. 60. (See Introduction to the Gosjjel.) If St. Paul died in A.D. 64, St. John can hardly have "begun workini? at Ephesus till then. The tone of the Epistle implies a long and ripe pastoral intimacy. St. John was banished to Patmos before the end of the reig-n of Domitian, a.d. 96. He died after a.d. 100. (6) It must always be a matter of opinion whether the Gospel or Epistle was written first. It may be that a comparison of John xx. 31, " These things are written that ye might believe," with 1 John v. 13, "These things have I written unto you that believe," indicates an earlier and more elementary object for the Gospel ; but it cannot be pressed. It is certainly likely that the doctiinal chords struck in the Narrative should afterwards receive their fuller variations in the Exhor- tation. It may even be that some of the churches or their members, aroused by these solemn notes, asked St. John for a doctrinal writing. (7) On the whole, there is no improbability in putting the date about A.D. 90. YI. Where was it -written? — On such a point as this we are left to groundless conjecture, which is useless. An old tradition men- tions Ephesus. VII. What is its Scope?— That the joy which Christians already had might not be dimmed by the world or by error, but might be crowned with completeness even in this life (1 John i. 4), and that they might realitie the assurance of the actual beginning of eternal life within them. Eor this purpose God is held up as Light and Love, both through Jesus Christ. By that exercise of their will, which would make them remain in Christ as they knew Him, both by hearing and by their consciences, they would enjoy the serene dignity of companionship with the Almighty Father and His Son, and so secure these two grand objects. ChristiaES, looked at in the ideal, cannot be wilful sinners ; but when betrayed into sin, they may recover through confession and reconcilia- tion. The proof of the Christian life must be sought in obedience to the will of God, showing itself specially in true brotherly love. The chief dangers are the world and the depravation of Christian doctrine. The light of God is shown in the absolute distinctness from Him of eveiything that is evil. The love of God is shown in that sonship of Christians which is manifested by personal righteous- ness. Its correlative in us is love to God, shown in pure love for one another. The purity of love is measured by the purity of faith. And that faith is irrefragably grounded in the witness of the ( )ld Testament through the Father, culminating in the inaugui'ation of baptism ; in the witness of the New Testament through the Son, cul- minating in the blood of Calvary ; and in the witness of the Spirit speaking through our own con- sciences. Christians cannot be reminded too often that their religious life is a matter of positive, demonstrable, realised facts, to be completed by earnest continual progress. They I. JOIIX. 305 are already in the Father and in the Son; they have eternal life begun within them ; they have passed from doath unto life ; they have the witness of the Spirit. If they are in doubt, they can prove the truth of their life by obedience to God and love to the human family. For those in sin or error they can pray. The sight of the world and the knowledge of the Redeemer make it finally most important that they should hold to the faith in the utmost simplicity, and avoid all substitution of shadow for substance. St. Paul writes now in a storm of argument, then in a humble strain of self -forgetful, self-abasing expostulation and entreaty ; now eloquently on high abstract truths, now in exquisite descriptions, then about the homeliest and simplest duties. St. John moves in a calm sphere of certainty among the very highest, grandest, and largest of Christian truths, raising the gen- eral outlines of human life into the same atmosphere till -they are illuminated and penetrated by the clear rays of Light and Love. x\ll is simple, broad clear, calm, sure. He writes at once with the most commanding authority, and the most loving tenderness ; the pro- foundest wisdom, and the most touching simplicity ; the most searching knowledge of the human heart audits difficulties and failures, and the most elevating and bracing courage and confidence ; the gent- lest att'ection, and the most pitiless and sternest condemnation of wiKul departure from truth in practice or opinion. It is noticeable that in a treatise on the very innermost secrets of religious life, to all Christian souls are attributed the same duties and privileges, and no mention is made of ministerial authority or respon- sibility ; and that, though fellow- ship with the Father and the Son and the witness of the water and the blood are both brought into prominence, no allusion is made to sacraments. VIII. Notes on Difficult (1) Frop'diatio7i. "He is the propitiation for our sins " (1 John ii. 2). " Sent His Son to be the pro- pitiation for our sins " (1 John iv. 10). The same form is used in Luke xviii. 13: "God be merciful {be made proj)itious) to me a sinner ; " and in Heb. ii. 17: "to make re- conciliation for the sins of the people. " In classical Greek the verbal form means " to make a person favourable." From these facts it is clear that Christ is regarded as making God favourable to us. The word " re- conciliation " introduces another idea, and should be kept for another Greek word, which occurs in 2 Cor. v. IS, 19; Eph. ii. 16; Col. i. 20. Although God is kind to the unthankful and the evil, yet for the sake of eternal Order and Righteousness He is rejsresented to us as unable to pass over rebelhon without punishment, as a warning and a secuiity as well as a discip- line. In this sense He could not look favourably on the world until His Son had bought it back by becoming sin for us. Thus He is the saciifice on behalf of the sins of the whole world, which enables the Father, whoso name is Love, to show the full scope of His favour. Divine love then can have 20 306 XEAV TESTAMENT TXTKODrCTIOXS. its perfect operation in reconciling man, or bringing him back. Ex- piation appeases that wrath, with- out which God would not be j ust ; Reconciliation breaks down the enmity of man in his state of sin, (2) Brotherly love. The unflinching truthfulness and courage of St. John are nowhere more remarkable than in the per- tinacity with which, amongst the perversions of human affection which are the blot of all societies, and were especially flagrant in the ancient world, he urges his friends to brotherly love. Love is the fulfilling of the law, the proof of union with God, the sign of having passed from death unto life, the great commandment of Christ, the outcome of birth from God, the witness of God's presence, the per- fection and crown of our love to Him : the absence of it is the mark of spiritual death. It is that desire for the good of others, temporal and eternal, without which self- denial and self-sacrifice are but barren pride. Like St. Paul, it knows no man after the flesh — that is, for mere fancy, pleasure, or advantage — but is the instant re- cognition of merit and of God's good gifts wherever they may pre- sent themselves. Foimded on faith and measured by it, it is ab- solutely pure and imselfish; it would lay down life itself for the good of others. And because it is that attitude of the human mind towards its fellows which is the reflex of God's mind towards us, it embraces and implies all human Aortues. (3) The last hour (chap. ii. 18). This phi-aseology occurs first in Gen. xlix. 1, "That I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days ; " where it means " the sequel of days," "far-off times." So Num. xxiv. 14, ''What this people shall do to thy people in the latter days : " Deut. iv. 30, " AMien all these things are come upon thee, even in the latter davs ; " and Deut. xxxi. 29, " Evil "will befaU you in the latter days." In Isa. ii. 2, it has begun to mean the new age of the world ; a vague indefinite time, dm-ing which, or before which, Messiah's kingdom would be established. " It shall come to pass that in the last days the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established." So Micah iv. 1. In Matt. xii. 32, our Lord dis- tinguishes between this world (or rather, age) and the world to come. So " this time '' is contrasted with "the world to come " in Mark x. 30 and Luke xviii. 30. In our Lord's usage, then, the beginning of the kingdom of Messiah belonged to the present age, and the coming age would not be till the comple- tion of that kingdom. So the day of resurrection and final judgment, the beginning, that is, of the coming age, is "the last dav " of the pre- sent (John vi. 39, 40, 44, 54 ; xi. 24 ; xii. 48). St. Paul also speaks of the pre- sent age and the coming, the sufferings of the present time and the glory that shall be, and of things present and things to come (Rom. viii. 38). In Tit. ii. 12, 13, those who live "in this present world " are " looking for the glori- ous appearing of the great God and our Saviour." He says that " in the last days " before that final period there "shall come perilous ! times" (2 Tim. iii. 1); and that " in the latter times some shall de- part from the faith (1 Tim. iv. 1). Although actually in this present I. JOHN". 307 a2:e, yet, according to St. Paul, Christians have more or less entered on the coming age proportionally to their degrees of progi'ess. 80 the present age is regarded as tainted with sin and alienated from (^od (Kom. xii. 2 ; 1 Cor. ii. 6, 8 ; iii. 18; 2 Cor. iv. 4; Gal. i. 4; Eph. ii. 2; 2 Tim. iv. 10). Since the first advent of Christ, he re- garded the present age as begin- ning to draw to its close ; *' our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come" (1 Cor. x. 11)- St. Peter identified his age with the " last days " of the prophets (Acts ii. 17), and considers the date of the first advent as " in these last times" (1 Pet. i. 20). But as, a few verses before (verse 5), he speaks of " Sfilvation ready to be revealed in the last time " ; and again (2 Pet. iii. 3), "There shall come in the last days scoffers" (comp. Jude, verse 18), he evidently looked to a still more definite close of ,the already closing age. St. James, too, looked forward to such a period : " Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days" (Jas. V. 3). The Epistle to the Hebrews, like the first usage in St. Peter, treats the existing times as "these last days " (Heb. i. 1, 2); " now once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself " (Heb. ix. 26). As well as this, it looks j forward to the future age of which ' Christians ah-eady, in varjdng de- ! grees, partake : " Have tasted the I powers of the world to come " j (Heb. vi. 5) ; " Christ being come ' an high priest of good things to I come " (Heb. ix. 11). This tasting is only a beginning, not an actu- ■ ahty, till the second coming (Heb. xiii. 14). 1 St. John, then, having, like the other Apostles, the notion that the first age was drawing to its close, and that the latter days were already upon the earth, and believ- ing — or, at the very least, fiiTuly hoping — that the second advent was not far off, did not hesitate, espe- cially in view of Matt. xxiv. 22, 24, to speak of the time of his old age as " the last hour." Of the date of the second coming even the Son was to be ignorant; but at any rate, since the death of the last of the Apostles, and the closing of the Canon, there had been no change in the Christian dispensation ; it has been a constant repetition of re- pentance, forgiveness, watching. (4) Antichrist. " As ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists" (1 John ii. 18). " He is the antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son " (1 John ii. 22). " Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God ; and this is that spii'it of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come : and even now already it is in the world" (1 John iv. 3). " For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist" (2 John, verse 7). Our Lord foretold false Christs and false prophets, who "shall show great signs and wonders ; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect " (]\Iatt. xxiv. 11, 24; Mark xiii. 22, 23). St. Paul spoke of the growth of the antichristian "lie," especially in the cities of Asia ]\Iinor. " After my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing 308 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw awav disciples after them" (Acts xx. '29, 30; and 2 Tim. iii. 1—9). These would be but anticipations of that concen- trated force of opposition for which (St. Paul looked immediateh^ before the second coming. " For that day- shall not come, except there 'come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdi- tion; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped ; so that be as God sittetb in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God . . . Then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall con- sume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the bright- ness of His coming : even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish ; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved" (2 Thess. ii. 3—10). St. John meant by the antichrists what St. Paul meant by the grie- vous wolves ; the individual mani- festations of "the si^irit of anti- christ," which St. Paul describes as " he whose coming is in them that perish." There is a difference, however, in the application of the idea, for the opposer in St. Paul's view is rather from without, St. John's principle of evil rather from within. Just as St. John noticed the same tendencies showing them- selves in the same way in different individuals, and called them spirits, so in looking forward to a more formidable and final apostasj^, he calls it "the spirit of antichrist," which has already declared itself in so many personal antichrists. St. Paul's "man of sin "must be of the same spiritual character, for no human being could ever be power- ful and dangerous enough to answer the description. (5) The three witnesses (I John V. 7. 8)s The authority for the words, " in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one ; and there are three who bear witness in the earth," is a copy made in the sixteenth century, of Codex 173, which dates from the eleventh. The words are wanting in all the Greek Codices, including the Codex Sinaiticus, and in all the ancient versions, including the Latin, as late as the eighth century. Since then they are found in three varia- tions. Had they been known they must have been quoted in the con- troversies about the Trinity ; but they are not cited by any Greek or any of the older Latin Fathers. A quotation from Tertullian {adv. Frax. 25) and a parallel quotation from Cyprian [Ep. ad Jub.), where each is establishing the doctrine of the Trinity, refer to John x. 20, and xvi. 5 ; and another from Cyprian [de Unit. Heel. p. 79) refers to 1 John V. 8, where the spirit, the water, and the blood, were interpreted patristically as direct symbols of the Trinity. The words probably crept into the text gradually from Greek notes on the passage, and from the expression of Cyprian, which would be placed alongside to show how he interpreted St. John's meaning. The second place in Cyj^rian runs thus : " The Lord says, ' I and My Father are one ' ; and again, con- cerning the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, it is written : ' And these three are one.' " I. JOHN. 309 Their first appearance is in a | work ascribed to Yigilius, of Thapsus, at the close of the fifth centurj'-. They afterwards occur in Latin translations. They first appeared in print in the earliest Greek edition, the Complutensian, published a.d. 1522. (See Dr. Scrivener's Introductio7i to the Critical Study of the New Testa- ment, on this passage.) Erasmus at first refused them, but at last ^aelded to pressure, when he heard that they were in the Codex Britannicus. But that manuscript is only of the fifteenth or sixteenth century. Stephanus, Beza, and the Textus Receptus followed his lead. Luther never translated them ; in his first com- mentary he pronounced them | spui'ious, in his second he com- ' mented on them. We owe them ! solely to the reluctant deference paid by Erasmus to unlearned ! cm-rent opinion. There is hardly I a passage in all literature more demonstrably spurious. On the internal evidence, after such adverse criticism, it is hardly necessary to speak, but it may be well to quote Sir Isaac Newton. After writing of the fulness and strength of the argument as it stands, without the inserted words, he says : " If you insert the testi- mony of the three in heaven, you spoil it, for the whole design of the Apostle being here to prove to men by witness the truth of Christ's coming, I would ask how the testi- mony of the ' three in heaven ' makes to this purpose ? If their testimony be not given to men, how does it prove to them the truth of Chi'ist's coming ? If it be, how is the testimony in heaven distin- guished from that on earth 'r It is the same Spirit which witnesses ! both in heaven and in earth. If in both cases it witnesses to us men, wherein lies the difference between its witnessing in heaven and its witnessing in earth? If in the first case it does not witness to them, to whom does it witness ? And to what purpose ? And how does its witnessing make to the design of St. John's discourse? Let them make good sense of it who are able; for my part I can make none." (Paraphrastic expo- sition.) IX. Literature. — I am in- debted chiefly to Dr. Karl Braune, The Epistles General of John, in Dr. J. P. Lange's series (an Eng- lish Translation is published by T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh) ; to Dr. H. A. Ebrard's Die Briefe Johannes, Konigsberg, 1859 (an English translation was published by T. and T. Clark in 1860) ; and to Dr. Friedrich Liicke's Commentar i'lber die Briefe des Evangclisten Johannis, Bonn, 1836 (an English translation was published by T. and T. Clark in 1837). Perhaps the best authority of all is Erich Haupt, BerErste Brief des Johannes, Colberg, 1870; London, Williams and Norgate. There are also Dr. J. E. Huther's Handbuch iiber die Brei Briefe des Apostel Johannes, 3rd Edition, Gottingen, 1868, in Meyer ; De Wette in his Commen- tary on the N'ew Testament ; and Diisterdieck's Bie Brei Johannei- schen Briefe, Gottingen, 1852 — 54. Of the Greek commentaries, those of Diodorus of Tarsus and Chrysostom have been lost ; a few fragments remain from Clement of Alexandria, a few more fi'om Didy- mus of Alexandria. Catena have been preserved from Oecumenius, Theophylact, and two Scholiasts. 310 NEW TESTxVMENT IXTliODUCTIONS. Among Latins, an Expositio re- mains by Augustine, and one by Bedc. The epistle was also com- mented on by Erasmus, Luther, Cahan, Beza, Zwingli, and Bul- linger. Calovius, Grotius, and Bengel are often quoted in modern editions. Besides tho commentaries of Wordsworth and Alford should be mentioned A. Neander's The First Epistle of John practically explained, Berlin, 1851 (translated by Mrs. Conant, New York, 1853), and F. D. Maurice's The Epistle of John: Jectureson Christian Ethics, Macmillan, 1867 ; also the able but posthumous edition cf W. E. Jelf. II. AND HI. JOHN. By the Vkn. W. M. SINCLAIR, D.D. I. AVho wrote them ? II. Date. III. Chakacter and Scope. I. Who wrote them?— It is difficult to imagine why any should suppose these two Epistles to be by dilferent hands. Was this author the Apostle ? (1) £xter)ial Evidence. — This is not nearly so strong as for the Fii'st. It is natural that it should be so, for the two Epistles seem to have been regarded as of far less general interest ; and, therefore, there was less ob-v-ious propriety in placing them in a collection of important Apostolical literature, and little reason why they should be quoted at all. The main argument for. them is, indeed, their unaffected, inartificial kinship to the First. I The oldest authority for the Second ' is the Muratorian Canon, composed before a.d. 170. Origen speaks of St. John's Epistles in the plural, and his disciple, Dionysius, cites the Third by name. The Muratorian Canon speaks of two Epistles of John, apparently distinct from the i First. The ^luratorian writer ex- plains the principle of his arrange- ment of the Canon distinctly : say- j ing that the Epistles of Paul to ' TV. Where were they written ? V. Literature. Philemon and Timothy, although addressed only to individuals, were placed in the Canon on account of their character. And even if the two Epistles of John mentioned were the First and Second, the fact that the Epistle to Philemon has precedence of those to Timothy (and Titus), probably because it is addressed also to Apphia and Ar- chippus, and the church in Phile- mon's house, makes it very easy to understand that the Second Epistle of John (early supposed to be ad- dressed to a church under the symbolic form of a lady) would be received into a canon, while the Tliird, addressed to an unknown indiAddual, and dealing with special circumstances, might not be con- sidered sufficiently general for such a position. In early days there must have been many fugitive writings of the Apostles ; and the discretion of the churches in selecting from them for an autho- rised collection would be guided probably more by usage than by deliberate valuation. Clement of Alexandria (a.d. 190 — 220), says, 312 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. " The Second Epistle of John, written to the Virgins, is of the simplest character ; it is written to a certain Babylonian, called Electa, but that means the election of the holy Church" {Opera, p. 1011, ed. Potter), Orig-en, in addition to what has been quoted from him above, is alleged by Eusebius (Uccl. Hist. vi. 25) to have said, " Not all consider these Epistles to be genu- ine," without endorsing the doubt himself. Dionysius of Alexandria, pupil and successor of Origen, makes use of the Second and Third Epistle to illustrate St. John's diction; he says that they were generally received as St. John's by tradition. Irena?us, disciple of Polj'carp and of Papias (he died A.D. 202), quotes 2 John, verse 7, by a mistake of memon^, as belonging to the First Epistle ; the words of 2 John, verse 11, he cites as by John the disciple of the Lord. Ephrem the Syrian knew both Epistles, but it is easy to understand why two small fragments of such a private character were not translated iu early days, and therefore did not appear in the Peshito version ; for that contains only three general Epistles (James, 1 Peter, 1 John'. Cyprian shows that the Second Epistle was received as Apostolical and Canonical in the North African Church, by the fact that he men- tions a quotation of the tenth verse by Aurelius, Bishop of Chullabis. Eusebius by speaking of St. John's Epistles in the plural number {iJc- monstratio Evangelica, iii. 5) shows that he himself recognised some other Epistles as well as the First ; but, as from their shortness and small range there had been very slight occasion to quote them, he put them among the highest class of those writings which were not placed by absolutely universal con- sent in the authoritative Canon, and w^ere therefore called Antilegomena. Jerome gives the "opinion of seve- ral writers," not as his own, that they were by the traditional John the Presbyter ; a view rejected by Oecumenius and Bede. In the Middle Ages they were received without question as the Apostle's ; then Erasmus took up the opinion mentioned by Jerome, and was fol- lowed by Grotius. Most modern commentators recognise them as Apostolic. The Tiibingen writers are, of course, obliged to consider them as later, referring them to Montanistic, or at any rate, sub- apostoUc times. (2) Internal Evidence. — ^The term "elder": The fact that St. John does not give his name is in favour of authenticity. As in the Gospel and the First Epistle, he prefers to retain a dignified incog- nito, intelligible to all whom it con- cerned. Even if the messengers did not know whose letters they were carrying, even if the corre- spondents did not know the hand- writing, they would be perfectly aware from the style and matter, and the promise of a -^nisit. It is doubtful w^hether by " elder " he meant "aged," or an official posi- tion. In classical Greek these words would have a different form, but St. John's Greek is that of a man who had become accustomed to a provincial form of the language late in life, and quite admits of slight irregularities. If he means an office, there is nothing to show that all the Apostles always used the apostolic title. St. Peter called himself " feUow-presbyter " (1 Pet. V. 1), and Eusebius called the Apos- tles Presbyters {Eccl. Hist. iii. 39). The Apostles and *' Overseers " II. AND III. JOHN. 313 were, in fact, only a specially re- sponsible and important branch of the Presbji;erate. As the last re- maining Apostle, St. John might prefer not to insist on a designation now unique; or, as the name " elder " was origiaally adopted with reference to mature age, he may have used it as a hint of his own advanced years ; or the dan- gers of the times may have made it advisable for him, for his messen- ger, and for his correspondents, to drop the higher title. The only authority for the existence of another John at Ephesus, at the same time as the Apostle, called *' the elder," and *' the disciple of the Lord," is Papias, quoted by Eusebius. Is it not possible, that, as Eusebius says that he was "very small in mind," there may be some con- fusion in some of these details r ]\Iay not even the confusion itself have arisen from these anonymous Epistles beiag misunderstood by the unintelligent ? But, even admit- ting the existence of such a second John, it is too much to ask us to believe that he resembled the Apostle not only in name and history, but also in style, cha- racter, and thought. And where it was extremely reasonable that the Apostle should leave out his name, it becomes most improbable that this alternative John should have left it out. The Second and Third Epistles are full of peculiar forms, common also to the First. Notice 2 John verse 1, "knowing the truth"; verse 2, "abide in " ; vei'se 3, "in truth and love"; verse -i, "walking in"; verse 5, "the commandment which we had from the beginning " (1 John ii. 7) ; verse 6, " this is love, that " ; " as ye heard from the beginning" (1 John iii. 11, 23); verse 7, "deceivers are gone forth " (1 John ii. 18) ; " confessing not Jesus Christ coming in the flesh " (1 John iv. 1, 2); "the anti- christ": verse 9, "abideth not in the doctrine, hath not God " (1 John ii. 23) ; " hath the Son and the Father"; verse 12, "that our joy may be full " (1 John i. 4) ; 3 John, verse 1, "in truth"; verses 3, 4, " walkest in truth " ; verse 11, "is of God, hath not seen God" (1 John iii. 6, 10; iv. 8). There are five or six expressions in the two Epistles which do not occur elsewhere in St. John's ^suitings, but it would be in the highest degi'ee absurd to confine any writer exclusively to the lan- guage used in a former production: Additional reason for variety here would be found in the simple collo- quial character of the writings. Accordingly, while there is every reason to hold that the Second and Thii'd Epistles are by the author of the First, and the First by the Author of the Gospel, it is difficult to find any valid reason to the contrary. II. Date. — In the absence of all evidence to the contrary, it seems probable that the circumstances and time were not very dissimilar in all three Epistles. III. Character and Scope. — In the Second, the Apostle, who is probably staying at the same place as some of bis correspondent's children, writes to a mother and her other children to express his sympathy and delight at the faith of the family, and to warn them against admitting false teachers to their circle. It contains notice- able definitions of love, antichrist, 314 NEW TESTAMENT INTKODUCTIONS. and of true and false Itelievers. It also has a general lesson on the treatment of wilful depravers of divine truth. In the Third, he recounts how some missionaries had been hadly received by Diotrephes, who had ambitiously obtained for himself the chief influence in a certain church, but notwithstanding Gaius had been courageous and kind enough to entertain them hospit- ably. Gaius is exhorted to help them still further. The Letter gives us an idea of the high impor- tance of hospitality at the time as a Christian virtue ; and brings out the fact that St. John's authority was no less disputed in certain cases than St. Paul's. It is pro- bable that the church of Diotrephes had not been founded by St. John ; and St. John had special claim to be obej'ed ; and that ecclesiastical influence seems to have by this time become vested in a single head. IV. "Where were they written ? — Probably at Ephesixs, before a tour of inspection. Had the>' been written in Patmos, some notice of the captivity might be expected. V. Literature. — To the autho- rities mentioned in the Introduction to the First Epistle, add the Articles in Smith's Bictio}iary of the Bible, and a paper by Professor Salmon on the Third Epistle in the Christian Observer, April, 1877. I should mention again my obligations to Dr. Karl Braime. JUDE. By the Ket. ALFRED PLUMMER, D.D. I. The Author. — "^Tiatever may be our opinion witli regard to 2 Peter, sober criticism requires us to believe that this Epistle was written by the man whose name it bears. To suppose that Jude is an assumed name is gratuitous. It remains to determine who the Jude is who addresses us. He tells us that he is a " servant of Jesus Christ " and " brother of James." Had he been an Apostle he would probably have said so, (C'omp. l\om. i. 1 ; Titus i. 1 ; 2 Pet. i. 1.) Had he been an Apostle he would not have claimed attention by calling himself " the brother of James," when he pos- sessed so very much stronger a claim. The fact that (verse 17) the writer appeals to the words of Apostles proves nothing ; an Apostle might do so. But at least such an appeal is more natural in one who is not an Apostle : there being no reason why he should keep his Apostleship in the back- ground if he possessed it. Our Jude, then, is the Judas of Matt, xiii. 55, and the Juda of Mark vi. 3 ; not the Judas of Luke \i. 16 and Acts i. 13, where " brother of James " should more probably j be " son of James." The author of i this Epistle is rightly described as \ the brother of James, " brother '' being expressed in the Greek. The James indicated is James " the Just," the brother of the Lord, and first Bishop of Jerusalem, who, though not an Apostle, was never- theless a person of such dignity as quite to account for this writer thinking it worth while to mention his near relationship to him. The present question is mixed up with the vexed question as to thf brethren of our Lord, already dis. cussed on p. 272 seg. The view here taken is that they were not the sons of Alphaeus — i.e., cousins — but in some real sense brethren : either the children of Josej)h and Mary, or of Joseph by a fonner wife, or by a levirate marriage, or by adoption. "SMiich of these foui' alternatives is the right one will probably never bo determined. Jerome's theory that they were our Lord's cousins, children of Alpha?us, is contradicted by John A'ii. 5. It owes its pre- valence in the West mainly to Jerome's influence. The identifi- cation of James the Lord's brother with James the son of Alphaeus, which it invohes, has never pre- vailed in the Eastern Church. Our author, then, together with his better-known brother, James, were 316 NEW TESTAIVIENT INTRODUCTIONS. in some sense our Lord's "brethi-en," and not Apostles. If it be asked, Would not Jude in this case have appealed to his relationship to Christ rather than to his relation- ship to James r we may securely answer " Xo." As the author of the Adiimbrationes centuries ago remarked, religious feeling would deter him, as it did his brother James in his Epistle, from men- tioning this fact. The Ascension had altered all Christ's human relationships, and His brethren would shrink from claiming kin- ship after the flesh with His glori- fied Body. This conjecture is supported by facts. Nowhere in primitive Christian literature is any authority claimed or attributed on the basis of nearness of kin to the Eedee ner. He HimseK had taught Chi-istians that the lowliest among them might rise above the closest of such earthly ties (Luke xi. 27, 28) ; to be spirituaUy " the servant of Jesus Ckrist " was very much more than being His actual brother. Of this Jude very little is known. Unless he was an exception to the statement in John \i\. 5 (of which there is no intimation), he did not at fii'st believe on Christ, but joined the Apostles after the convincing fact of the Eesurrection (Acts i. 14). That, like his brothers, he was mairried, appears from Hegesippiis, who tells us (Euseb., H. E.Ul. xx.) that two gTandsons of Jude were brought before Domitianas descend- ants of a royal house, and therefore dangerous persons ; but on their proving their poverty, and explain- ing that Christ's kingdom was not of this world, they were contemptu- ously dismissed. This story almost implies that the relationship to Christ was very close; for Hegesippiis remarks, by way of explanation, that Domitian was afraid of Christ, just as Herod was. Statements of St. Jude's preaching in various parts of the world rest upon late and untrustworthy e^ddence. That he was an Evangelist, is implied in his writing this Epistle ; but nothing is known respecting his labours. II. Authenticity. — The au- thenticity of the Epistle has been questioned by some from very early times, but without sufficient reason. The evidence against it is mainly this. External. — The Epistle is not contained in the Peshito or ancient Syriac version ; Eusebius classes it among the disputed books (III. XXV. 3 ; II. xxiii. 25) ; Theo- dore of Mopsuestia seems to have rejected it ; few references to it are found ii: early writers. Internal. — It cites apocryphal books, has a suspicious relationship to Romans and 2 Peter; is difficult in style. Against this we may urge that Ephrem Syrus seems to have recog- nised it ; the Muratorian Frag- ment {circ. A.D. 170) contains it; the old Latin version contains it ; Tertullian {Be Cult. Fern. I. iii.) accepts it as genuine and Apostolic ; Clement of Alexandria quotes it as Scripture {Strom. III. ii. ; Faed. in. viii. ) ; Origen, though he knew of doubts about it {Comm. on Matt, xxii. 23) fully accepted it (on Matt, xiii. 55 ; x\'iii. 10, et al.) ; Jerome {Scrip. Fccles. iv.) says that many rejected it because it quoted apocry- phal books, but that it ought to bo reckoned among the Scriptures ; the Councils of Laodicea {circ. a.d. 360) and of Hippo (a.d. 393) formally included it in the Canon. The doubts about it are very intelli- gible : it was not by an Apostle, JTJDE. 317 and therefore seemed wanting in authority, and it quoted apocr^-phal -ft'orks. Its brevity fully accounts for its not being often quoted. It is too insignificant to be a forgery ; a forger would have said more, and would have selected some well- known name, and not that of one but little known, to give authority to his production. The difiicult style is natural enough in a Jew wiiting Greek well, but not with ease. As already stated in reference to 2 Peter, a theory that these two Epistles (2 Peter and Jude) are translations from Ai'amaic originals has been advocated. (See Did St. Peter write in Greek ? By E. G. King, Cam- biidge, 1871.) It would be most presumptuous on the part of one who is ig- norant of Hebrew to pronounce an opinion on the arguments used; but the number of them seems to be insufficient. Mere internal e"sidence of this kind ought to be very strong to counterbalance the entire absence of external evidence. Jerome would certainly give information on this point, if he possessed any, when he makes his own suggestion that St. Peter made use of different "interpreters" when writing his two Epistles. in. The Place and Time.— As to the place, we have no evi- dence, either external or internal. The Epistle contains some indica- tions of time. (1) The fact that the destruction of Jerusalem and consequent ruin of the Jewish nation is not men- tioned among the instances of divine vengeance (verses 5 — 7) is a strong reason for belie^ang that the Epistle was written before A.D. 70. (2) The fact that such libertines as are here described are allowed to remain members of the Christian community points to a time when Church discipline is in its very infancy. The evils are \evj similar to those which St. Paxil has to condemn in the Church of Corinth (1 Cor. v. 1, 2; vi. 8—18; xi. 17—22). (3) It seems to be implied (verse 17) that some of those addressed had heard Apostles. rv. Object and Contents. — The object is plainly stated (verses 3, 4) — to urge his readers to con- tend earnestly for the faith which was being caricatured and denied by the libertinism and practical in- fidelity of certain members of the commimity. In what Church or Churches this evil prevailed we are not told; but it would be more likely to arise among converts from heathenism than from Judaism. The plan of the Epistle, short as it is, is evidently laid with consider- able care ; and the writer betrays a fondness for threefold divisions which is quite remarkable. It would scarcely be an exaggeration to say that wherever a group of three is possible he makes one. One or two of the triplets may be accidental, but the majority of them can hardly be so ; and this fact may be worth remembering in discussing the question of priority between this Epistle and 2 Peter. There are ten (or possibly twelve) groups of three in this short Epistle of 25 verses : viz. (1 and 2), verse 1; (3) verse 2; (4) verse 4; (5) verses 5 — 7 ; (6) verse 8 ; (7) verse 11; (8) verses 12—15, 16-18, 19; 318 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. (9) verse 19 ; (10) verses 20, 21 : (11) verses 22, 23; (12) verse 25. Of these, (4) and (10) are perhaps doubtful ; but there can be no ques- tion about the rest, although the last two are obscured in the English version, owing to our translators having followed a defective Greek text. (1) IXTROBUCTION. (a) Three-fold address and three- fold greeting (verses 1, 2). {b) Fnrpose of the Epistle (vei-se 3). (c) Occasion of the Epistle (verse 4). (2) Warning and Denuncia- tion. \ri) Three instances of God^s ven- geance (verses 5 — 7), and application of these three instances to the libertines who are now provoking God (verses 8—10). (b) Three examples of similar loicTcedness (verse 11). (c) Three-fold description corre- sponding to these three examples (verses 12 — 15 ; 16—18; 19). (3) EXHOKTATION. {a) To strengthen themselves in the faith by prayer, godli- ness, and hope (verses 20, 21). {b) To treat these libertines ir ith discrim ination , making three classes (verses 22, 23). {c) Concluding doxoloqy (verses 24, 25). V. The relation of Jude to 2 Peter.— The similarity both in substance and wording between a considerable portion of these two Epistles is so great that only two alternatives are possible ; either one has borrowed from the other, or both have borrowed from a common source. The second alternative is rarely, if ever, advocated; it does not explain the facts very satisfac- torily, and critics are agreed in re- jecting it. But here agreement ends. On the further question, as to which writer is prior, there is very great diversity of opinion. One thing, therefore, is certain, that whichever writer has borrowed, he is no ordinary borrower. He knows how to assimilate foreign material so as to make it thoroughly his own. He remains original even while he appropriates the words and thoughts of another. He eon- ti'ols them, not they him. Were this not so, there would be little doubt about the matter. In any ordinary case of appropriation, if both the original and copy are forthcoming, critics do not doubt long as to which is the orii/inal. It is when the copy itself is a masterpiece, as in the case of Holbein's Madonna, that criticism is baffled. Such would seem to be the case here. The pre- sent writer is free to confess his own uncertainty. A superficial acquaintance with the subject in- clined him to believe in the priority of Jude ; further study disposes him to think that the iD-alance is decidedly in favour of the priority of 2 Peter, although the balance is considerably short of proof. The question cannot be kept distinct from that of the authenticitj' of St. Peter. Every argument in favour of the authenticity of 2 Peter is something in favour of its priority, and vice versa; although many arguments bear more upon one point than the other. If, then, the genuineness of 2 Peter is accepted as probable, this will add additional weight to the considerations now to JL'DE. 319 be urf^ed in favour of the priority of 2 Peter ; and they in turn will strengthen the arguments for its genuineness. This question as to the relation between these two Epistles seems to be one in which the old-fashioned view is not so far wrong after all. And some value may fairly be allowed to the old-fashioned arga- ments for it : (1) that the account of evil-doers in 2 Peter is in the main a prophecy, whereas St. Jude speaks of them as present ; the inference being that St. Jude re- cognised in what he saw the mis- chief which St. Peter had foretold ; and added weight to his own de- nunciations by framing them in the very words of the Apostle ; (2) that St. .Tilde's warning, "re- member the words which were spoken before by the Apostles . . . how that they told you there shall be mockers in the last time walking after their own ungodly lusts " (verses 17, 18), is an obvious re- ference to St. Peter's prediction, " There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts " (2 Pet. ii'i. 3). Of course a forger, with St. Jude's words before him, might frame his own words to fit them ; but in that case we have still to account for St. Jude's warning, " liemember the words which were spoken before by the Apostles," &c. They may refer to such passages as Acts xx. 29 ; 2 Tim. iii. 1 ; or (as some who insist on "how that thej' told you," or " used to till 5'ou," prefer) to warn- ings given orally by the Apostles ; still 2 Pet. iii. 3 is the most obA-ious reference. Xo doubt it is antecedently more probable that a small Epistle should be republished with much additional matter, than that one- i third of a longer Epistle should be republished with very little addi- I tional matter : but what has been ' said above about 2 Peter being a ! prophecy, of which St. Jude saw the fulfilment, is an answer to this. Besides which, we may urge that it is antecedently improbable that a forger should take so much from ' an Epistle that was not only known, but regarded with suspicion in ' some quarters, because of its quoting apocr^^hal books. That St. Jude is quoted by one or two writers who seem not to know or to reject 2 Peter (Tertullian, I Clement of Alexandria, Origen) 1 may be allowed some weight ; but this could easily be accoimted for, and in itself is not very con- vincing. One argument used for the priority of Jude seems to the pre- sent writer to tell strongly for the prioi'ity of 2 Peter. It is this : that the e\'il-doers denoimced by I St. Jude are much more distinctly portrayed than those denounced in 2 Peter. AVe know from history that the eiTors indicated increased rai)idly from the apostolic age on- wards. The later writer, there- fore, would have the clearer pic- I tui-e before his ej/es. Would not the ! clearer description, then, be likely i to be his ? (See above on t/te False Teachers and Hcoffers ; Introduction to 2 Peter.) In connection, with this point it is worth considering whether the careful directions which St. Jude gives as to the way in which different classes of the un- godly men are to be treated does not point to a later stage of the evil. Again, the rather fanciful an-angement into triplets which prevails in St. Jude's Epistle looks more like a second writer working up old material than a first writer 320 NEW TESTAMENT IXTRODUCTTONS. working under no influence from a predecessor. Of the numerous minute arg-u- ments drawn from the wording of parallel passages, only one or two specimens can be given here. Jude, verse 6, contains a telling- piece of irony in the doiible use of " kept," which is wanting in 2 Pet. ii. 4; Jade, verse 10, contains a striking antithesis, very epigram- matically stated, which is wanting in 2 Pet. ii. 12; Jude, verses 12, 13, contains some fine similes, es- pecially the one of "wandering- stars," which would have fitted the "false teachers" admirably; yet most of them are absent from 2 Peter. "Would a writer who is quite willing to borrow anything that will serve his purpose (this is evident, whiche-\^er is the borrower) have wilfully rejected all these good things ? If they are im- provements added by St. Jude, all is natural enough. It is worth mentioning, in conckision, that the arguments urged for an Aramaic original tell decidedly in favour of the priority of 2 Peter. While admitting, therefore, that the case is by no means proved, we may be content to retain the priority as well as the authenticity of 2 Peter as at least the best work' ing hypothesis. THE REVELATION. By the Eight Eev. ^y. BOYD CAEPEXTEE, D.D. I. The Author. II, The Date and Writing. Time of I. The Author.— The general opinion of the Church of Christ has accepted the Apocah-pse as the ■work of John the Apostle, but this general opinion has been called in question. Our space can only allow us to lay before our readers a brief rtvi.iinv of the reasons which have been urged on either side. For con- venience it will be as weU to ask the following questions : — (1) Was the Writer^s name John? — At first sight it would seem that there could be but one answer to this question. The book announces itself as written by a person whose name was John. Four times over does the name occur (Kev. i. 1,4, 9, xxii. 8;. Is there any reason for question- ing the witness thus given by the book itself ? It has been asserted that the writer does not claim to be John, but only " gives a report of a revelation which John had re- ' III. Schools and Prlnciples of Interpretatiox. IV. General Scope of the Book. Y. Literature. ceived " (Scholten). It is perfectly true that a writer might thus dra- matically represent the Ajx^stle John as the seer of the revelation : but such possibility is no proof that it was so, and certainly cannot be entertained in the total absence of all proof. The reiteration of the name four times is out of har- mony with this conjecture: and the theory would not, as Gebhardt h;is remarked, be apphed to any other book of the Xew Testament. "SVould any serious reply be " thought necessary should it occur to some one to reject the First Epistle to the Corinthians, because from such passages as 1 Cor, i, 13, it does not foUow that the author identifies himself with Paul, but gives (i Cor. i. 1, 2;, after the man- ner of an introduction, a report of an Epistle which the Apostle wrote f " We may assume, then, that the writer's name was John. 21 322 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. (2) fFas the Writer John the Apos- tle ? — It is round this question that we meet the most serious conflict. (a) It is admitted on aU hands, even by those who oppose the apos- tolic authorship of the book, that the gi'eat consensus of early opinion regarded the writer as St. John the Apostle. " From the time of Justin Martyr to that of Irenteus and the great Fathers, the Apoca- h^se was recoguised as a produc- tion of the Apostle." Such is the opinion of Keim [Jesu v. Kazara). "AYe find the Revelation rmhesi- tatingly attributed to him (St. John) by the Fathers from the middle of the second century down- wards ; by Justin MartjT, Irena?us, Clement of Alexandria, Tertulhan, and others " (Bleek). The opinion of the third century was the same. Origen, whose opposition to mil- lenarianism adds value to his tes- timony, Cyprian, Lactantius, and others, acknowledge the Apocah-pse as the work of St. John. Setting aside the opinion of Mar- cion, and of the unimportant sect of the Alogi (see Introduction to the First Epistle to St. John), doubts respecting the apostolic authorship seem to have commenced with Dionysius of Alexandria ; these douT)ts which were echoed hesita- tingly b}^ Eusebius, were based not on historical or critical, so much as upon doctrinal groiinds : the dread of millenaiianism created a "SN'ish to discredit the book which appeared to lend such weight to the disEked doctrine. It is need- less to follow the history" ,of this controversy ; it is enough to notice that the first breach of this con- tinuous early opioion in favour of the apostohc authorship grew out of doctrinal prejudice rather than candid examination. ((5-) In later years, the contro- versy has been fought from dif- ferent bases of operation. The conflict respecting the authorship of the Fomth Gospel (see Intro- duction to St. John^s Gospe') has complicated the dispute. It seemed to some impossible to beHeve that the Fourth Gospel and the Apoca- lypse proceeded from the same pen. The divergence in style and lan- guage was, in their view, too great to admit of their being written by the same man, even though that man were an Apos- tle. If the Gospel was the work of St. John, the Apocalypse could not be. The generally ac- cepted opinion that St. John wrote the Apocalypse was assailed by those who, in their wish to pre- serve their faith in the apostolic authorship of the Foiu'th Gospel, were ready to sacrifice the Book of Revelation. This was substantially the view adopted by Neander, Liicke, Ewald, Bleek, Diisterdieck, and others. In opposition to these, others were ready to adopt the other h^-pothesis : they accepted the ^-iew that the two books could not have been the work of one and the same writer ; but they preferred to sacrifice the Gospel : the Apoca- lypse was the work of St. John ; the Gospel, therefore, could not be. Such was the ^-iew of those who, like Banr, aimed at discrediting the Fourth Gospel, or who wished to support the theory of a designed antagonism between the school of St. John, and that of St. Paul. Neither of these parties — those who would sacrifice the Apocalypse to the Gospel, and those who would sacrifice the Gospel to the Apocalypse — represent the most recent phase of the contro- versy. Another class of thinkers REVELATION. 323 arose wTio felt that the witness •which the Fourth Gospel and the Revelation alike gave to the Person of Christ was too strong to be al- lowed the authority of an Apostle by those who had formed other and lower conceptions of the Jesus of the Gospels. They saw no glimpses of His heavenly glory and majesty in the synoptical Gospels. They found that the Book of Re- velation was full of them. The Chiist of the Apocalypse was the j "Word of God, the King of Kings ; the Christ of the Gosj)els was One who came not to be ministered to, but to minister. The portrait given in the Gospels of '* the loving and amiable Sun of Man," as the Divine Son of God was patronis- ;ingly styled, was not to be found jin the Apocalypse ; such a book (Could not have been written by (one who personally knew the rgentle and self-sacrificing Prophet •of Galilee — least of all, perhaps, by 'the beloved disciple. Such is the ndew of the more recent critics, and ■ advanced with varj-ing power and ; arguments by Volkmar, Hokstra, and Scholten. The book was a forgery, or at best the composition of some other John — not of John the Apostle. Besides, it was urged, the Apostle could not have been the author, for it is clear that the " writer lived in Asia Minor, where- • as the Apostle John never was in . Asia Elinor at aU. Such is, perhaps, the most recent ; phase of the controversy. (c) We have not space to do more than touch but briefly, and only upon a few of the arguments advanced against the apostolic authorship of the book. It will, ^perhaps, be best to specify three or (i.) St. John the Apostle, it is | said, never resided in Asia Minor ; he could not, therefore, have been the author of a book which is un- doubtedly the work of one resident there. It is proverbially diflicult to prove a negative : it is increasingly difficult when only negative evi- dence can be adduced, and this is all that can be appealed to. The argument, if argument it can be called, runs thus : the residence of St. John in Asia Minor is not men- tioned by those whom we might have expecced to mention it : there- fore, St. John did not reside there. To use the words of a modem critic pir. Matthew Arnold), " But there is the rigorous and \agorous theory of Prof. Scholten, that John never was at Ephesus at all. If he had been, Papias and Hegesippus must have mentioned it : if they jiad mentioned it, Irenasusand Eusebius must have quoted them to that effect. As if the very notoriety of John's residence at Ephesus would not have disproved Iren^eus and Eusebius from advancing formal testimony to it, and made them refer to it just in the way they do. Here, again, we may be sure that no one judging e\'idence in a plain fashion would ever have arrived at Dr. Scholten' s conclusion ; above all, no one of Dr. Scholten's gi-eat learning and ability " {Contempo- rary Review^ vol. xxv., p. 988). To this also we may add Geb- hardt's words: — *'Xo one in the second century could believe that the Apostle John was the author of the Apocalypse, without at the same time believing that he lived in Asia Minor ; and in like manner, the acknowledgment of the Apoca- lypse as the Apostle's from the time of Justin Martyr downwards, made prominent by Keim, is an acknow- 324 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. ledgment of his residence in Asia Minor, and inferentially at Ephesus." (ii.) There are, it is stated, traces of non-apostolic authorship in the book. (a) The manner in which the Apostles are spoken of (see chaps, xviii. 20 and xxi. 14) is thought to he inconsistent with the opinion that the Apostle wrote it. The Apostles are mentioned with a degree of objectivity, and are as- signed a prominence which is un- likely if an Apostle were the writer. But with regard to the last, if St. John describes the foundations of the heavenly Jerusalem as bearing the names of the twelve Apostles, St. Paul sj^'aks of the Church being built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets (Eph. ii. 20). The imagery is distinctly apostolic ; and if the Apostles are mentioned with " objectivitj^" in the Apocalypse, are they not men- tioned with an equal, if not greater, degree of objectivity by St. Mat- thew ? (Matt. X. 2—4.) (/8) But, it is argued, there is no hint given throughout the book that the writer is an Apostle. If St. John were the writer, would he not betray himself somewhere as the beloved disciple r' Should we not have some allusion to his in- timacy with his INIaster, or to some circumstance connected with the life and ministry of Chi-ist? In reply, it is enough to remark that the nature of the book would not lead us to expect such allusions. lie writes as a Prophet, not as an Apostle. It would be as idle to expect some allusion to the circum- stances of Milton's political life in the Paradise Lost. " The Apoca- lypse declares itself not to be the work cf au Apostle in the same sense as Schiller's poetry declares itself not to be the work of a pro- fessor at Jena " (Gebhardt). But it may be further urged that there are not wanting cer- tain characteristic allusions which reveal the writer. The allusions to the piercing of the Saviour's side (chap. i. 7 ; comp. John xix. 34), and to the washing, or cleans- ing (chaps, i. 5; vii. 13, 14; xxii. 14; John xiii. 8 — 10), are not to be overlooked; and more than these may be detected by a careful student. (7) There is no trace of Apostolic autJwrity. If we are not to expect personal reminiscences, we surely should exjDect the air of otficial authority. But the answer is, Do we not find this ? The language is surely that of one who does not doubt that his name will carry a guarantee with the book. (Comp. Prof. Davidson's article in Kitto's Biblical Cyclo- paedia.) (iii.) The Christology of the book is described as non-apostolic. The pictm-e which the Apocalypse gives of Jesus Christ is not that of the Gospels. In the Gospels we have the loving and gentle Son of Man ; in the Apocalypse we have the Word of God, whose eyes are as a flame of fire, and whose mouth a sharp sword, &c. Is not the whole con- ception of the kingly Christ thus portrayed the product of a later age ? " The picture of Christ which here comes before us seems to pre- vSupposc a conception so perfectly free, that it can only belong to a later Christianity" (Scholten). " The apotheosis of Christ is too strong to be ascribed to a contem- porary and disciple of Jesus" (quoted in Gebhardt). Such objections as these arise REVELAXrOX, 32.*) from a fundamental misconception of the character and work of Jesus Christ. The Christ of the Gospels is not the colourless creation which has been evolved out of the thought of men living eighteen centuries afterwards. The Christology of the Apocalypse is distinct enough, Ijut it does not differ from the Christology of St. Paul : and it is in complete harmony with the lofty and divine utterances of our Loi'd Himself even in the sj-noptical Gospels. Time and space would fail us in illustrating this po^ition; it M'ill suffice to refer to two or three passages, which might be multii^lied : Matt. xxv. 31; xxvi. 13; Luke v. 20; vii. 8, 9, 23, 35 ; ix. 41 ; X. 16—20. (iv.) The divergence in style between the Revelation and the Fourth Gospel demands a few words. "SVe have spoken of those critics, who, in their desire to pre- serve the authority of the Gospel, have been willing to throw over- board the apostolic authorship of the Apocah-pse. Is it necessary to do this ? it has been shown that the external evidence is in favour of the apostolic authorship. In the language of Prof. Davidson, " With the limited stock of early ecclesiastical literatm^e that sm-vives the wreck of time we should despair of proving the authenticity of any Xew Testament book by the help of earh' witnesses, if that of the Apocah-pse be re- jected as insufficiently attested." Is there any reason in the intex'nal character of the book sufficient to reverse this verdict 'r Or, in other words, assuming (and the stormy controversy has rather increased than diminished the right to the assumption — see Introduction to St. J(jh)i')i Gospel) the apostolic author- j ship of the Fourth Gospel, is there ! any ground for believing that the Apocalypse could not have pro- ceeded from the same writer? There are no doubt strongly marked differences. AVe have not space to touch on the whole ques- tion. One or two points call for notice. There are differences of language; there are "anomalies," " awkward dispositions of words," " peculiar constiuctions ; " " the Greek is moulded by the Hebrew tendencies of the writer." This is no doubt largely the case ; but there has been often a want of appreciativeness at the root of some criticisms like these : some viola- tions of grammatical construction have been set down to ignorance on the part of the writer, when it is clear that they were intentional Xotabh', the language of Eev. i. 4 is beyond all doubt designedly un- grammatical ; indeed, as l>ishop Lightfoot has pointed out, were it not so, the writer would not have possessed sufficient literary power to construct a single sentence. Xor has sufficient weight been allowed to the different characters of the two books, or the interval of time which eLapsed between their writing. The highly wrought rap- ture of the seer, when beholding the visions of the Apocalypse indi- cates a mental state in which voli- tional control is at the minimum, and the automatic action of the mind is left free. At such a time the images and associations which have been originally imbedded in the meraorj' are those which rise uppermost to clothe the thoughts. Thus the strong Hebrew colouring is precisely what we should expect from one who, of ardent tempera- ment, has spent the whole of his earlier life in Palestine, and among 326 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. those wlio were constantly talking over Messianic hopes and pro- phecies. (Comp. John i. 38 — 41.) The force of this is not invalidated by saying that the seer did not write the visions as he saw them, hut recorded them afterwards. In the first place, it is merely an as- sumption to affinn this ; in the next, even were it true, the man who records such visions must recall the whole mental condition in which he was at the time of the vision, and would preserve in his record the characteristics of such a state of mind. Nor can much stress he laid upon the fact that the writer was not young. The Aasions of God are given to the old as well as to the young. The loftiest reveal- ings were given to Moses when he had passed fourscore years : and, even from a merely human point of view, it is possilde for a man of sixty to retain the fire and warm imagination of youth. Even in modern life, when the faculties are too often dinidged into imbecility by forced and premature develop- ment, and deprived of their fiill and ultimate power by being made reproductive when they ouglit to be remaining receptive, we may find the powers of imagination sur- vive the strain and incessancy of toil ; indeed, in some cases the imaginative powers have gathered force tiU the line of the three- score years has been passed. Ed- mund Burke was sixty when he wrote his Reflections on the Revolu- tion in France, and none will con- demn him for deficiency in imagi- nation. It was not in the ardour of youth that Dante wrote the Divine Comedy. The conditions of ancient and Eastern life were pro- bably much more favourable to the preservation and quiet ripening of the powers of thought and imagi- nation. The truth is that there is, nothing so deceptive as the com- parison between the ages and. powers of different writers ; there: is no standard which can be used as a measure. Some men of sixty are, in mental force, more nearly allied to men of forty than to those of their own age ; and the addition of twenty or five-and-twenty years brings them to the mellow and! quiet autumn-time of their life. The Apocalypse may be " sensu- ous," full of "creative fancy,"' " objective," and " concrete ; " the Gospel may be " calm," " mystic,"' " spiritual," and delighting in. "speculative depth"; but diflter- ences equally great may be found, in the works of other writers.. Literature supplies numberless in- stances of such varieties. "It is strange," wrote Lord Macaulay, " It is strange that the Essay on the Snblime and Beautiful, and the Letter to a Noble Lord should be the productions of one man ; " yet no one has been found to doubt that they were both written by Edmund Burke. The writings of De Quincey supply examples. Let any one compare the Autobioyraphic Sketches, or The Confessions of an Ojnum Eater, with one of the little flights of fancy — such as the Daughter of Lebanon — written under different conditions, and he wiU find how much diversity may be found in the works of the same writer. And, not to go beyond the Gospels, might it not be said that there is a great separation in tone and thought between our Lord's discourses in Matt, xxiii. — xxv. and the Sermon on the Mount? We have, then, in the two books — the Gospel and the Apocalypse — dif- ferent subject-matter, vision instead REVELATTOX 327 of history ; a -wide interval of time — some twen.t\' or twenty-five years; and, with this interval of time, a changed atmosphere of associations and influences, Greek instead of Hebrew : these in themselves would account for divergences greater even than we find. If we can thus account for the differences we meet with, we have to remember that there are resem- blances in the two books which can scarcely be accidental, and which, found in two independent books, would have suggested to some shrewd critic the theory of a com- mon authorship. There is a strong resemblance in language and imager)- : both books delight in the words " witness " [martyr)^ "to overcome," "to keep" (the word of God), "sign" [scmcion), " dwell," or tabernacle (in this last case the coincidence is lost sight of in the English version, because the word "dwell" is used instead of tabernacle, or " tent "), " true " [aletJnnos), (John i. 9 ; xix. 35 ; Rev. iii. 14; xix. 9). There is a similarity in the terms used to describe our Lord. He is the Word (John i. 1 — 3 ; Rev. xix. 13) ; the Lamb (John i. 29; Rev. v. 6) ; the Shepherd (John x. through- out ; Rev. vii. 17) ; the Bridegroom (John iii. 29 ; Rev. xix. 7; xxi. 2) ; similar images are used — the Living Water (John iv. 10 ; vii. 38 ; and Rev. vii. 17 ; xxi. 6 ; xxii. 17) ; the Hidden Food, bread, or manna (John vi. 32— 5S ; Rev. ii. 17) ; the Har- vest (John iv. 34, 38; Rev.xiv. 15). The same incident — the piercing of our Lord's side — is referred to ; and the word employed, both in the Gospel and in the Apocalypse, is singularly not the word used in the LXX. version of the prophet Zecha- riah. There, is besides, a similar disposition towards a seven-fold arrangement of subjects in the Gospel and the Revelation. (.See Lntrodnction to St. John''s Gospel.) Further resemblances might be pointed out. These, however, will suffice to show that Prof. Davidson, in his candid, impartial, and valu- able article (see above), says no more than truth when he writes : " After ever)- reasonable deduction, enough remains to prove that the correspondences between the Apoca- lypse and the Fourth Gospel are not accidental. They either betray one author, or show that the writer of the one was acquainted with the other. These cogaate phenomena have not been allowed their full force by Liicke, Esvald, De Wette, and Diisterdieck." To conclude. The author repre- sents himself as John in a way, and at a time, that would naturally suggest that he was either John the Apostle and Evangelist, or wished to pass as such. The gene- ral consensus of early opinion be- lieved that the Apostle was the writer. The doubts grew out of doctrinal prejudice ; there is no reasonable ground for disputing the residence of the Apostle in Asia ^Minor. There are not wanting traces of personal reminiscences such as the beloved disciple would have cherished. The portrait of Jesus Christ is in complete har- mony with apostolic teaching ; and the difficulties which beset the theory that there were two Johns — one who wrote the Gospel, and the other the Apocalypse — are greater than those which surround the theory of a common author- ship. It is only necessary to add the attesting language of various and independent critics. " The apostolic 328 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. origin of the Apocalypse is as well attested as that of any other book in the New Testament " (Davidson). " The testimony has been pro- nounced more absolutely con^nncing than can be adduced in favour of the apostolic authorship of anj^ of the books of the New Testament " {Edlnhurgh Meview, October, 1874). TI. The Date and Time of Writing. — The evidence for deter- mining- the date of the Apocalypse is in many respects conflicting-. Any conclusion on the matter should be given with caution and hesitation, and with the full admis- sion that the arguments which can be brought on the other side are entitled to consideration. It has been too much the practice aniong the supporters of different theories to insist with unwise positiveness upon their own view. Briefly, there are practically only two opi- nions, between which the reader must decide. The book was either written about the year a.d. G8 or 69, or about a quarter of a century later (a.d. 96), in the reign of Domitian. The later date was that which was accepted almost uniformly by the older theologians. In favour of this early tradition has been appealed to. The most important witness (in some respects) is Ire- noeus, who says that " the Apoca- lypse was seen not long ago, but al- most in our own age, towards the end of the reign of Domitian." Other writers have been claimed as giving a support to this view by their mention of Patmos as the place of St. John's banishment ; and it is plain from the way in which Eusebius quotes the mention of the Patmos exile by Clement of Alexandria, that he associated it with the reign of Domitian. On the other hand, it must be re- membered that neither Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Origen, or Jerome, state that the banishment took place in the reign of Domi- tian. Tertullian, indeed, repre- sents Domitian as recaUiug the exiles ; and other writers affirm that the banishment took place much earlier. Theophylact, for example, declares that the Apostle was in Patmos thirty-two years after the Ascension ; and the pre- face to the Syriac version of the Apocalypse affirms that the revela- tion was given to St. John in Pat- mos, whither he was banished by the Emperor Nero. Another tradition assigns the writing to the reign of Trajan. Epiphanius, in a passage of doubtful value, places the exile in the reig-n of Claudius. On the whole, then, there is not any very certain conclusion to be drawn from the external evidence. The exile in Patmos receives ample sujjport, but the date of the exile is hardly settled by early tradi- tion. Will the intei-nal evidence help ? The advocates of the later date rely much upon the degenerate state of the Asiatic churches, as described in the Epistles to the Seven Churches. The Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon were written during the captivity of St. Paul at Rome, about the year a.d. 63. If, then, the Apocalypse was written in a.d. 69 or 70, we have only an interval of six or seven j^ears to account for a striking change in the spiritual condition of the Asiatic churches. Can we believe that a Church which is so forw\ard in love as that of Ephesus (Eph. iii. 18) can have in so short a time left its first love ? REVErATION. 329 Can it bo believed that the Lao- dicean Church — whose spiritual condition in a.d. 63 can be inferred from that of Colossae (Col. i. 3, 4) — can have, in six brief years, for- saken their *' faith in Christ Jesus, and their love to all the saints," and become the " lukewarm " Church (Kev. iii. 15, 16) of the Apocalypse ? It may be noticed, in passing, that the above argument assumes that the (so-called) Epistle to the Ephesians was really addressed to the Church at Ephesus ; and this is by no means certain: the weight of evidence appears to in- cline the other way. But allow- ing this to pass, and, for the pur- pose of argument, assuming that the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians afford indications of the spiritual condition of these and kindred Asiatic churches, it does not seem to the writer that the above argument can be sustained. The two propositions on which its force depends are the following : — (1) It is impossible that churches could change much for the worse in six years. (2) A comparison between the Apocalypse and the Letters of St. Paul show a great change for the worse. From these two propositions it is inferred that the interval must have been more than six years : a generation at least being required to account for such degenerac)''. " It bespeaks a change of persons, the arrival of a new generation" (Hengstenberg) . It is believed that neither of the two propositions mentioned above can be sustained. (1) It needs no lono- time for the fii'st ardour of young converts' zeal to cool. The New Testament gives us examples of such rapid changes: the "evil eye " of a perverted teaching be- witched the Galatians (Gal. iii. 1), so that the Apostle marvelled that the disciples were so rapidly turn- ing away to another gospel (Gal. i. 6). Changes quick and real soon sweep over a religious community, especially in districts where the natural temperament is warm, im- pressible, and vivacious. It is not impossible that six years may make changes in the religious condition of chiuThes. But (2) it is more important to consider the second proposition, and to ask whether it is so certain that any such great change had taken place in the instances now before us. A comparison of the Epistle to the Colossians and that to Laodicea rather leads to an opposite conclusion. The learned Bishop Lightfoot has shown that the same truths need enforcing (comp. Col. i. lo — 18, and Rev. iii. 14), the same practical duties are taught (Col. iii. 1, and Rev. iii. 21), the same lukewarmness is the subject of caution (Col. iv. 1 7, and Rev. iii. 19), the same denmi- ciations are heard against the pride of life, in wealth or intellect (Col. ii. 8, 18, 23, and Rev. iii. 17, 18). " The message commimicated by St. John to Laodicea prolongs the note which was struck by St. Paul in the Letters to Colossas. An in- terval of a very few years has not materially altered the character of these churches. Obviously the same temper prevails, the same errors are rife, the same correction must be appl'.ed " (Bishop Light- foot, Epistle to the Colossians, pp. 41—44). A similar comparison might be 330 KEW TERTA:\rEXT IXTRODrCTIOXS. made between the two Ephesian Epistles. The impression left from a perusal of St. Paul's Letter to the Ephesian s, whether addressed to that Church or not, is that he was not without a fear that the warm love which prevailed among the Christians addressed might soon change : it is a love above the acci- dents of time and the powers of change which he desires may be theirs (Eph. vi. 24; Eev. ii. 4). The area of comparison between this Epistle to the Ephesians and the Epistles to the Seven Churches becomes much wider when we re- gard it, in hai-mony with proba- bility, as a circular letter addressed to the Asiatic churches : then the resemblances become more plain, and the so-called great change in spiritual condition disappears. It will be sufficient to mention the following: Eph. i. 18, Rev. iii. 18 ; Eph. ii. 6, Rev. iii. 21 ; Eph. iii. 8, Rev. ii. 9 ; Eph. iii. 1 7—1 9, Rev. ii. 4. Enough has been said to show that the argument from the spiritual condition of the churches lends little or no support to the later date, but fairly strengthens the earlier. The advocates of the earlier date adduce other internal evidence. They lay great weight upon infer- ences drawn from chaps, xi., xiii., and xvii. They argue that the measuring of the Temple and the treading down of the Holy City, described in chap. xi. 1, 2, is a token that Jerusalem had not yet fallen. This argument does not seem to the present writer satisfactory. The measuring of the Temple is symbolical, and it is un- safe to ground an argument upon it. The aim of the vision seems to us to point out the safety of the o;erm -Church during the times of desolation. The external frame- work, the old Jewish polity, might be swept away (chap. xi. 2 ; comp. Heb. \aii. 13) : the true spiritual germ would never die, but spring forth in fuller and freer vigour. Such a vision might indeed have preceded the fall of Jerusalem ; but it might also have been given as a consolation and an instruction afterwards. Hardly more convincing is the argument from chaps, xiii. and xvii. In the account of the seven- headed wild beast we read of seven kings, five of whom are fallen. The seven kings are said to be the emperors of Rome. The five fallen are Augustus, Tiberius, Caius, Claudius, Nero ; the one that is, is Galba. The force of this depends upon the truth of the interpreta- tion. If the seer meant the seven kings to represent seven emperors of Rome, then the date of the Apocah^^se is fixed to the age of Galba; or to that of Nero if we begin to reckon with Julius Caesar. The former is the most correct method of reckoning. To make the sixth head Vespasian, as some would do, is, as Dr. Davidson has remarked, quite arbitrary. There is no reason for omitting Galba, Otho, and Yitellius from the reckon- ing. But the force of the argu- ment for the date here depends upon the truth of the interpreta- tion ; and the foundation passages in the prc>phecy of Daniel, from which the Apocalyptic seer drew so much of his imagery, desciibe under the emblem of the wild beasts, Icingdoms, or world-powers, rather than indi\T.dual monarchs. Still, of course, it is possible that there may be a double interpretation — one more local, the other more general — here as well as elsewhere. REYELATTON-. 331 But the requisite interpretation does not seera to be sufficiently clear for the purpose of argument. Nor can the argument from silence he accepted. There is no allusion to the fall of Jerusalem in the hook ; hut it is scarcely safe to infer that the hook -was therefore earlier than that catastrophe. One other internal (so called) argu- ment respecting date may he noticed here. Liicke cites chap, xviii. 20, where the Apostles and prophets are invited to rejoice because they have been avenged on Babylon, to prove that St. John the Apostle was dead ■when the book was wTitten. This is one of those prosaic errors into ■which even the most learned and trustworthy of literary experts are "betrayed by their owti acuteness. There yet remains another class of evidence : that of language and style. Assuming the common authorship of the Fourth Gospel and the Apocal^-pse (see Introduc- tion to the Gospel, and section on the Author above), we shall have very little doubt that the general probabilit}'- is in favour of the Apocalypse having been written first. Not only is the Gospel marked by the sententiousness of age, and the Apocalypse by the warm colouring of earlier life, but the influence of Jewish Associations is more strongly marked in the latter ; while Greek influences are more distinctly traceable in the former. The e^ddence on this head inclines to the earlier date, but it is not absolutely conclusive : the preva- lence of Hebraic influences notice- able in the Apocalypse might well fit in with the later date. The influences of youth often re-assert themselves with startling vigour in declining years : the provincial- isms and accent of boyhood have been resumed by men in the even- ing of life, after having been kept long in abeyance by the joint powers of control and culture. Illustrations of this will occur to the reader. But, in the instance before us, the probability seems to lie the other way : in the Apostle's case the Hebraic influences did prevail during the early life ; the Greek influences were present during his later life ; and we may well believe that the Apocalypse " marks the Hebraic period of St. John's life which was spent in the East, and among Aramaic-speaking populations" ; and that the Gospel was written twenty or thirty years afterwards, at the "close of the Hellenic period during which St. John lived in Ephesus, the great centre of Greek civilisation." (See Bishop Lightfoot's Article on " Supernatural Religion," Contem- porary Reviexr, vol. xxv., p. 859.) To conclude this brief summary, we may say that the general weight of evidence is in favour of the earlier date, and certainly this sup- position fits in best with all the circumstances of the case. III. Schools and Principles of Interpretation. — Before en- tering upon the general meaning of the book, it is desirable to lay before the reader a brief account of the different schools of Apocalyptic interpretation. (1) Schools of Interpretation. — It is well known that there are three main systems of interi^retation : these are called, from their special tendencies of thought, the Prse- terist, the Futurist, and the His- torical. The Praeterist in general main- tains that the visions of the NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. Apocalypse relate to events and circumstances which are past : the prophecies of the book — at least in their primary intention — have been fulfilled. Among- the advocates of this view may be reckoned the names of Grotius and Hammond, the learned and eloquent Bossuet, Eichhorn, Ewald, De Wette, Liicke, Dlisterdieck, Professor Moses Stuart of Ameiica, and in this country the late lamented Professor Maurice, Prof. Davidson, and Mr. Desprez. The Futurist is at the opposite pole of interpretation, andmaintains that the fulfilment of the book is still future, when our Lord will come again. Professor Davidson has separated the Futurists into two classes — the simple Futurist and the extreme Futurist : the diffe- rence between these classes be- ing that the simple Futurist be- lieves that the prophecies of the book are future in fulfilment, while the extreme Futurist holds that even the first three chapters are prophetic. Among those who have maintained the more moderate Futurist view may be mentioned De Burgh, Maitland, Benjamin Newton, Todd, and the devout Isaac Williams. The extreme Futurist view has been supported chiefly by some Irish expositors. The Historical school holds a sort of middle place between the Prccterist and Futurist. Its advo- cates believe that in the Apoca- lypse we have a continuous pro- phecy, exhibiting to us the main features of the world's history : the visions therefore are partly ful- filled, partly they are in course of fulfilment, and a portion still re- mains unfulfilled. This view has been sustained by men of con- spicuous ability. It was the in- terpretation which commended itself to many of the Reformers, and was favoured by Wiclif, Bul- linger, Bale, and others. It was upheld with more systematic power by such distinguished writers as Mede, Vitringa, Daubuz, Sir Isaac Newton, Whiston, Bengel, and Bishop Newton: more recently it has been advocated by Hengsten- berg, Ebrard, Auberlen, by Elliott and Faber, by Bishop Wordsworth and the late Dean Alford, by Barnes, Lord, and Glasgow. It is, of coiu-se, to be imderstood that there are many varieties of interpretation even among those who belong to the same school of interpreters : but it would quite exceed the limits at our disposal to speak of these varieties. Against these schools of inter- pretations it is not difficult to find objections. It is hard to believe, with the Pi HRterist, that the coun- selling voice of prophecy should have spoken only of immediate dangers, and left the Church for fifteen centuries unwarned; or, with the Futurist, to believe that eighteen centuries of the eventful history of the Church are passed over in si- lence, and that the whole weight of inspired warning was reserved for the few closing years of the dis- pensation. Nor, on the other hand, can we be thoroughly satisfied with the Historical school, however ably and learnedly represented. There is a certain nakedness about the interpretations often advocated by this school : the interpreter is too readily caught by external resem- blances, and paj^s too little heed to inner spiritual and ethical prin- ciples. A mistake into which this system falls is that of bringing into prominence the idea of time. According to them, the visions of the book are pictures of occurrences EEVELATIOX. 333 to take place at a certain fixed date. Now it must never be for- gotten that the question of time — the time when this or that was to happen — was one which our Lord steadily put on one side. It was not for His disciples to know the times and the seasons. The know- ledge of the time of an event is insignificant compared with the knowledge of the forces, elements, and laws which combine to produce it. This seems to he our Master's teaching to His followers all through time. Our study is to know what are the foes we have to contend against, what combinations they are likely to make, in what power they are to be confronted, what difiiciilties are likely to arise, what certainty there is that all difficulties will be surmounted and even," foe overthrown. It matters not for us to know when these things shaU be : it may be at the first watch, or at midnight, or at the cock-crowing : the time is a matter of no ethical importance. It is thus f>t. Peter treats it : " One day is with the Lord as a thousiind years, and a thousand years as one day." It is but the echo of his Lord's warning. It may take a long time or a short time for the moral laws and moral forces at work in the world to bring forth a ciisis period. To take St. Peter's words as lajT^ng down a kind of prophetical " time-measure " is to fall inti that fatal source of eiTor, the conversion of poetry into prose. We are not, then, to look for any indications of tune in the visions of the Apocah-pse : and what might have made this veiy plain is the employment of proportional num- bers to denote the xjrophetic epochs in the book. These carefully-se- lected numbers, always bearing a relationship to one another, and so selected that a literal intepreta- tion of them is almost i)recluded, are beyond doubt symbolical, and thus in harmony with the whole character of the book. " Most numbers in the Kevelation should not be taken arithmetically, but indefinitely, because they are part of the poetic costume borrowed from the Old Testament " David- son). The anxiety respecting the "times and seasons " has led many interpreters into voluminous errors, and has created a Thessalonian restlessness of spirit in many quar- ters. Infinitely more important is it to notice the moral and si)iritual aspects of the book, the e^•il and the good principles which are de- scribed in conflict, and the features which in dift'erent ages the combat will assume. But, though the time-interpreta- tion of the book is thus to be placed in the background, it must not be so done as to imply that the book has no reference to occurrences which will happen in time. If some of the Historical school of interpreters have so forced the question of time into prominence as to ignore the more important ethical bearings of the book, it is no less true that critics on the other side have erred in removing the application of the book wholly out of the si)here of history, and giNing it only the force of a fairy tale with a possible and doubtful moi-al. This is to set aside the value of the book to the Church of Christ as she moves across the vexed and stormy sea of this world's history. The A-isions of the book do find counter- parts in the occuirences of human history : they have had these, and they yet will have these, fulfilments : and these fulfilments belong neither 334 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. wholly to the past, nor wholly to the future : the prophecies of God are written in a language which can be read by more than one generation: what was read here helped the early Christian to whom imperial Rome was the great Babj-- lon which absorbed to herself the wealth, and the wickedness,, the power and persecuting spirit of the world, to whom the emj)eror may have seemed as a wild beast, savage and relentless, rising out of the tumults of peoples and nations, fickle and ruthless as the sea. No less have the visions of this book consoled the mediteval saint or poet, who felt that the most influ- ential seat of the Church had become the metropolis of worldli- ness when '*The Prince of the New Pharisees " was seated in St. Peter's chair, and when out of a professedly Christianised Society had arisen a power aspiring to some religious culture, but fierce, wild, and wanton as the wild beast of ancient days. (Comp. Dante, Inf. xxvii. 85 ; andlvossetti's Anti- papal Spirit of the Italian Poets — passim.) Nor is the force of the consolation exhausted; in the fu- ture, the visions of this book, showing the certain triumph of aU that is good and true, in the final consummation of Christ's kingdom, may hereafter serve to console men and women groaning under a tyranny of ungodliness more terrible and more specious than any which have preceded it, be- cause built up of a pride which worships physical laws, while it treads under foot all moral laws, and spurns contemptuously all spiritual laws. In the past, the book has had its meaning : in the future, its meaning may grow fuller and clearer ; but in the present also there is no doubt that it has its practical value for all who wiU reverently and patiently hear and keep the sayings of this book. We are disposed to view the Apocalypse as the pictorial unfold- ing of great i^rinciples in constant conflict, though under various forms. The Praeterist may, then, be right in finding early fulfil- ments, and the Futurist in expect- ing undeveloped ones, and the^ Historical interpreter is unques- tionably right in looking for them along the whole line of history ;. for the words of God mean more^ than one man, or one school of thought, can compass. There are^ dej)ths of truth unexplored which, sleep beneath tho. simplest sen- tences. Just as we are wont to say that history repeats itself, so the predictions of the Bible are not exhausted in one or even in many fulfilments. Each prophecy is a single key which unlocks many doors, and the grand and statedly drama of the Apocalypse has been played perchance out in one age to be repeated in the next. Its majes- tic and mysterious teachings indi- cate the features of a struggle which, be the stage the human soul, with its fluctuations of doubt and fear, of hope and love — or the progress of kingdoms — or the des- tinies of the world is the same struggle in all. (2) The Frinciplcs of Interpreta- tion. — It will have been seen that the writer does not feel at home under the leadership of any of the three great schools of prophetical interpretation. The Chm-ch of Christ owes much to all of them, . though the cause of truth has suf- - f ered much from many who have ■ sought to be prophets when at the - most they could aspire to be inter- REA^LATION, 335 preters ; but the result even of the errors of interpreters has heen the slow formation of sounder views, and therefore an advance towards a clearer, because a more modest, system. There are certain principles which seem to be now very generally accepted as essential to the right understanding of the book. It is not, indeed, to be sup- posed that the acceptance of these pi'inciples will enable the student to unlock every mysterj', or ex- pound every symbol; but it will certainly save him from following " wandering fires." Of these prin- ciples the chief seem to be the fol- lowing : — (1) the root passages in the Old Testament prophecies must be considered ; (2) the historical surroundings of the writer are to be remembered ; (3) the fact that the book is symbolical must never be forgotten ; (4) the obvious aim of the book to be a witness to the triumph and coming (paroKsia) of Jesus Christ must be recognised. These principles are simple enough, but their neglect has been only too fatall)' evident. The difficulty, in- deed, lies rather in the application of these principles than in their acceptance. It is, perhaps, not too much to say that the Praeterist school has been apt to ignore the first of these principles; the His- torical school has not adequately recognised the second ; and the Futurist school is in constant danger of forgetting the third ; while partial views in all schools have \iolated or weakened the value of the last principle. The " coming of Christ," viewed from the human side, is a phrase which is not always to be held to one meaning : it is, in this respect, analogous to the " kingdom of God." " Holy Scripture, beyond all doubt, recognises potential and spiiitual, as well as personal, ■ comings ' of the Lord." * "There are many comings of Chi-ist. Christ came in the flesh as a mediatorial Presence. Christ came at the destruction of Jerusalem. Christ came, a spiritual Presence, when the Holy Ghost was given. Christ comes now in every signal mani- festation of redeeming power. Any great reformation of morals and religion is a coming of Christ. A great revolution, like a thunder- storm, violently sweeping away evil to make waj^ for the good, is a coming of Christ" (Robertson, Sermons, Fourth Series, p. 73). It is tlius that the sacred writers speak as of Christ's coming always at hand : " The judge standeth at * The whole note from Bishop Walde- grave's Bampton Lectures is wortli quo- ting. " Holy Scripture, beyond all •loubt, recognises (1) potential and spiri- tual, as well as personal, 'comings' of the Lord, See, ifor potential ' comings,' Matt. X. 23; John xxi. 22, 23; Rev. ii. 5, 15, 16, 22—25 ; iii. 3, 10. . . . See, for spiritual ' comings,' Ps. ci. 2 ; Jolm xiv. IS, 21—24 ; Rev. iii. 20. In like manner Holy Scripture recognises (2) a potential and spiritual, as distinct from a ])er- sonal, 'presence' of Christ with His people. See Matt, xviii. 20; xxviii. 20 ; Mark xvi. 20 ; 2 Tim. iv. 17. Now such potential and spiritual comings and presence will natiu-allj'', when trans- lated, jf I may so speak, into the lan- guage of imagery, assume the outward ajjpearance of a personal and visible coming and presence. And this fact wiU abundantly account for the use of lan- guage (expressive of potential and spiri- tual comings) like that in Ps. cii. 13—16 ; Isa. xix. 1, 16, 19—21; xl. 10; lix. 20; Zech. ii. 10—12 : (expressive of potential and spiritual presence) like that in Ps. cxxxv. 21; Isa. xii. 6; xxiv. 23; Ix. 13; Ezek. xxxiv. 23, 24; xli. 22; xhii. 1—9; xliv. 1, 2 ; Joel ii. 27 ; iii. 17, 20, 21 ; Micah iv. 7 ; Zeph. iii. 14, 15 ; Zech. vi. 12, 13 ; viii. 3, without expecting a per- sonal reign of Christ upon earth as itb only adequate counterpart." 336 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. the aooi , " " The coming of the Lord draweth nigh." So, also, our Lord speaks : " I will not leave you comfortless ; I will come to you." Thus, viewed from one aspect, the "coming of Christ" has various applications ; but viewed from another aspect, it will be seen to be a phrase expressive of a simple thought, and free from all perplex- ing ambiguity. The coming of Christ, viewed from the divine side, is as a single act, in which all subordinate api^lications are in- cluded. There is no past or future with Grod. All that is being done, is, in one sense, done. God's deal- ings, as seen by human eyes, are, as it were, projections on the page of history. An illustration may help. A telegraph cable, whether cut straight through or on the slope, will present to view exactly the same combination of cojiper and iron wire, gutta-percha and tarred yarn ; but in the elliptical section the elements will appear in more extended order than in the circular section: so the same features, which to us appear separate and succes- sive, when viewed from the higher level of heavenly thought may be seen as forming parts of one act. The various advents of Christ may thus be viewed as forming elements in one Advent, which is progTcs- sive from one side, but complete from another. The morning spreads itself in every direction over the foreheai of the sky, and yet is but one morning. All the varpng scenes from the First Advent to the Second are but the beatings of the wings of God's new day. " It is," as the prophet expressed it in language of glorious paradox, " It is one day, known to the Lord, neither clear nor dark, but one day, at whose eventide it shall be light." If this be true, thore is no no- cessity for leaping to the conclu- sion that, when the sacred writers warned their hearers that the com- ing of the Lord was near, they were mistaken, or that they sought to sustain the fainting hopes of the early Church by expectations which have proved false. Doubtless some did not understand the full and deep meaning of the words em- ploj'ed : doubtless many still clung to their carnal conceptions : but the apostolic language, whether from the pen of a St. Paul, St. Peter, or St. John, expresses the wider and truer thoughts of the coming of Christ. We find them anxious to remind those to whom they wrote that the idea of an immediate visible per- sonal coming of Christ must not be allowed to gain possession of the mind. There were forces at work which mufe^ have their way before the end would come : seeds had been planted, and these must grow : the sowing and the harvest are linked together as one in the law of growth, and are yet separate, Thus the spirit of wilfulness and impatience is rebuked when men grasj) the true thoughts of God. Yet it must not be supposed that the waiting Church of Christ will be disappointed of her hope, or that the heavenly BridegTOom will not come. He will come again ; and all the preliminary and subor- dinate advents in judg-ment and in comfort will then be seen to have been earnests of the fulness of His coming. The interpreters are as men who stand upon a plain to watch the sunrise. When the first veil of night is withdra^^•n, and the starlight is somewhat paled, the more ardent than the rest will cry, *' The dawn I " REVELATION. 337 "but the rest answer, "Not yet." Then when the mountain peaks begin to flame, another will cry, "The dawn!" and the rest will still reply, "Not yet." And when the landscape around catches its true colours, another will cry, "The dawn ! " but only when the great and glorious orb leaps into view will all be one in crying, " The dawn I the dawn ! " So is the coming of Christ. Some look upon the faint lightening in the moral atmosphere, and say, " Christ comes!" Others look to the re- flected lights of truth proclaimed in the high places of the world, and say, " Christ comes ! " Others look to the general diffusion of knowledge, and say, " Christ comes I " They are right, and they are wrong : right, for it is indeed Christ who is thus enlightening the world ; they are wrong, for there is a coming greater than these, when He will, in fuller manifestation of Himself, tabernacle with His people as their everlasting light. IV. G-eneral Scope of this Book. (1) lis Aim. — What is the aim of this hook ? The answers given, though various, have much in com- mon. Some see in it a prediction of the overtlirow of Paganism; others carry it further, and see the destruction of Papal Eome ; others read in it the rise and fall of some future Antichrist. Thus far the opinions vary ; but in one respect there is agreement : the Eevelation aims at assuring the Chm-ch of the advent of her Lord : it is the hook of the Coming One. Every school of interpretation will admit this. Some indeed will say that the ex- pectation raised was never fulfilled, but all appear to unite in regarding the Apocalypse as the book of the advent. We may take this as a key to its meaning; it pro- claims Christ's coming and victory. But is it the victory of Christ over Paganism, or over degenerate forms of Christianity, or over some final and f utui-e antichristian power or person ? The true answer ap- pears to be, It is the victory of Christ over all wrong-thoughted- ness, wrong - heartedness, and wrong- spiritedness ; the pictures given in the visions find their counterpart not in one age only, but gather ih&xr fidl-Jilm.'en.t as the ages advance : the fall of Paganism is included in the visions, as the downfall of the world-power of Imperial Eome is included ; but the picture-prophecy is not ex- hausted, and will not be till every form of evil of which Pagan and Imperial Eome, of which the \vild beast and Babylon are types, has been overthrown. The ages are seen in perspective; the incidents separated from one another in his- torical sequence, are gathered into one prophetical scene, and the Apocalypse presents us with a variety of these prophetical scenes, which depict the salient features of the conquest of evil, the triumph and advent of Christ — " He comes '' is the key.' He comes when Paganism falls — He comes when brute world force is cast down ; He conies when world- liness falls — He comes, and His coming is spreading ever over the world, shining more and more unto the perfect day. Clouds may gather, and make the epochs which are nearest the full day darker than those which preceded them, but stiU in every epoch leading up to the golden day ; the line of conflict may advance and recede from time 22 338 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. to time, but it is a triumphant battle-field which is pictured. It is thus the book of the advent and victory of Christ. But is it . a book affording false hopes ? Is it an echo of the wish of the early Christian Church, or is it a revelation from Christ to the waiting and perhaps impatient Church ? I believe it is the latter. So far from the book giving colour to the expectation of an immediate personal coming of Jesus Christ, it seems distinctly to caution the early Christians against cherishing mistaken notions : ' ' that day shall not come except there come a fall- ing away first," was the caution of St. Paul ; the caution of St. John, though expressed in pictorial form, is none the less emphatic. Let any one bear in mind the eager im- patience of sufliering Christians in early days, and let them read the Apocalypse, and they will learn that its undertone is, " Not yet, not yet," but still sm-ely is He coming ; not as you think, but as He thinks well, so is He coming. Let the seals furnish an illustration : the first shows an ideal conqueror; Christ, or the gospel of Christ, goes forth to^con- quer — it is the picture of the Church's hope ; the vision tells her that her hope is right, Christ will conquer ; but it is the prelude of visions which tell her that her expectation is wrrong if she expects that the kingdom of Christ will be established without conflict, pain, suffering, and revolution. The succeeding seals are the pictures of the things which must needs be : the wars, the persecutions, the sorrows which will afflict the world because she will not accept her King; the parable of Luke xix. 11 — 27, and the emphatic warn- I ing language of Christ Jesus in I Matt. xxiv. 4 — 14, are not forgotten ' in the Apocalypse. In it we are bidden to remember, that though the victory is sure, the victory is through suffering ; we are shown scenes which betoken the prolonged sorrows of the faithful, the obsti- nate tenacity of evil, its subtle transformations, and the concealed powers by which it is sustained: we are thus, as it were, shown the world's drama from a heavenly view-point, not in continuous his- torical succession, but in its various essential features, it is in this dramatic — that it does not tell its story right on, but groups its episodes round convenient centres, bringing into special prominence successively the principL^s of God's world-government. It is thus an apocalypse unfolding in symbolical forms the ^.hai'acteristic features of the struggle between good and evil, when the power of the gospel enters the field ; it is the revelation of the coming {parousia) of Christ, because it shows not only that He will come, but that He does come : that He who has been rcA-ealed, is being revealed, and will yet be re- vealed. (2) The Form. — It is the sym- bolical form which hinders many in the right understanding of the book. " I am a man of the earth," wrote Gothe ; "I am a man of the earth, earthy ; to me the para- bles of the unjust steward, the prodigal son, the sower, the pearl, the lost piece of money, &c., are more divine (if aught divine there be about the mat- ter), than the seven messengers, candlesticks, seals, stars, and woes." This is only saying that symbolism employed in the one case was simpler than that employed in the REVELATION. 339 latter — simpler, that is to say, to Western minds ; for it may per- haps be doubted whether the sym- bolism which to the Teutonic mind seemed so strange, may not have been simple enough to those who were accustomed to Hebrew sym- bolism. But however this may be, the general symbols of the book are not so difficult as might appear. There is not space at our disposal to enter upon a discussion of this in detail. Certain features, how- ever, are worthy of notice. The geographical imagery needs atten- tion : Jerusalem stands as the type of the good cause, Babylon as the type of the metropolis of the world- power : Jerusalem is thus the Church of Christ (this symbolism is in complete harmony with St. Paul and other apostolic writers, (comp. Gal. iv. 24 — 31 ; Heb. xii. 22, 23). Babylon is the emblem of Pagan Eome, but not only of Pagan Eome, for the Babylon type remains to this day: there are inspiring powers on the side of the heavenly Jerusalem — God is with her; she shall not be moved ; the metropolis of evil has the assistance of evil powers : the dragon, the wild beast, and the false prophet are for a time with her. The family of evil bears a marked parallel to the family of good throughout the book : there is a trinity of evil powers on the side of Babylon the harlot, as the blessed Trinity are with the bride, the heavenly Jerusalem. The scenes in the great conflict arrange themselves round the members of these families of good and of e^dl. The general features and the elements of this struggle are depicted. There are numerical symbols : seven is the number of perfection, six of man's worldly perfection without God, four of the universe, three and a half of a limited period. There are seals, trumpets, and vials ; the seals of the book which could only be opened by Christ betoken that the direction of earth's history and its explanation can be found only in Christ ; the trumpets are the symbols of God's war against aU forms of evil ; the vials are the tokens of the retribution which falls upon those who turn not at the divine summons to righteous- ness. The strong symbolism of the book has a two-fold advantage : when the application of the visions are not to be exhausted in one age, the pictorial form is the most con- venient to embrace the manifold fulfilments. Again, the author has clothed his thoughts in the '* variously limiting, but reverential and only suitable drapery of an- cient sacred language and symbol- ism, in the conviction that the reader would penetrate the veil and reach the sense" (Gebhardt). (3) The General Structure. — The majority of critics see a seven- fold structure in the book. The commentators differ, as might be expected, as to the way in which this seven-foldedness of structure shows itself ; but most of them ar- range the different parts of the book in a seven-fold fashion. This is worthy of note, as the Fourth Gospel (see Introduction to St. John's Gospel) has been shown to have a similar seven-fold arrangement. When we notice the fondness of the seer for such an arrangement in the subordinate visions, it is not to be wondered at that the whole book should fall into seven groups; but we must be careful not to be carried away by our love of symmetry'. The charts and 340 NEW TESTAICEXT INTRODUCTIONS. maps of Apocalyptic interpretation are often very Procrustean. The general structure of the book, however, may be noted. There are : — L The Preliminary Chap- ters. — Christ and His Church. (1) The Vision of the Christ (chap. i.). (2) The Messages to the Ciirr.CHES (chaps, ii., iii.). 2. The Visions, (1) The Vision of the Throned One (chap. iv.). (2) The Visions of the Con- flict, in two main sections. (a) The conflict seen from the world side (chaps, vi. — xi.) : (o) The seven seals (chaps vi. — viii. 1). (/3) The seven trumpets (chaps, viii. 2 — xi.). (i) The conflict, seen from the hcflvenhj side (chaps, xii. — XX.) : (a) The spiritual foes (chaps, xii. — xiv.) . (j8) The seven ^-ials of retribution (chaps. XV., xvi.). (7) The faU of foes (chaps, xvii. — xx.). (3) The Visions of Peace (chaps, xxi., xxii. 1 — 6). 3. The Epilogue (chap. xxii. 6 -21). It will be seen that there is a moving- onward from the more ex- ternal to the deeper and more spiritual aspects of earth's story. The earlier visions (the seals, for example) show the ordinary phe- nomena of the world's stoiy — war, famine, death, revolution. The next series (the trumpets) show us that there is another, even a spiri- tual war, going forward in the world, and that changes and revolu- tions are often tokens of the inner spiritual battle in life. These visions, however, are, so to speak, all in the sphere of earth : in the next series we are shown that the war carried on here is one which has its heavenly counterpart. The con- flict is not simpl)" between good men and bad, but between princi- palities and powers. (See an in- teresting article on " The Ideal Incarnation," by Dr. S. Cox, in the Expositor, Vol. II., p. 405.) There is a heavenly view-point of all things on earth : there are spiritual forces, the ideal Church, the unseen strength of God, and the hidden inspirations of evil. In this struggle all evil will be van- quished. The earthly manifesta- tions of evil, as well as the un- earthly inspirations of it, will fall ; the great and arch-enemy wiU be overthrown; the true spiritual, eternal rest be reached, and the golden age be realised. We are thus taught, in this ever-deepening spirituality of the book, to look beneath the phenomena, to trace the subtle and unmasked principles which are at work, to separate between the false and the true, to believe in ideals which are not mere ideas, but the true thoughts of God, which will one day be made real in the ej'es of men, and which are even now real to the eye of faith. Thus does the Book of Ee relation become the tmfolding of a dream which is from God. In it are painted the scenes of earth's history : the thirst of a nation's life and its passing groan ; the tears and prayers of the un- reckoned holy ones of earth; the KEVELATIOX. 341 agony of half-despair which even the best have felt in the night of conflict, that has so often been the eve of triumph; the sustaining faith which has transfigured the weakling into a hero, and nerved the heart of a solitary saintship to do battle alone against a degenerate Church or a persecuting world; the silent victory of truth, or the unperceived growth of worldliness and falsehood. The book is thus a help and stay — not as yielding fruit to curiosity. It is not a manual of tiresome details : it is not meant to be a treasure-house of marvels for the prophetical archseologist : it is a book of living principles. It ex- hibits the force and fortune of truth as it acts upon the great mass of human society : it shows the revolu- tions which are the result. It shows the decay of the outward form, the release of the true germ, which will spring up in better har- vests. It shows us how the corn of wheat may fall and die, and so bring forth much fiuit. It shows us how evermore, from first to last, Christ is with us — encouraging, consoling, warning, helping, and leading us onward through conflict to rest. V. Literature of the Apo- calypse. — It is perfectly hopeless to touch so vast a subject as this. The mere list of works on the Apocalypse given in Darling's Cy- clopcedia Bibliographica, published in 1859, occupies fifty-two columns. A history of various interpretations is given in Liicke, Einleitung in die Offmharung Johannis ; a similar sketch is given by Bleek, Lectures on the Apocalypse ; and Elliott {Horce Apocalypticm, vol. iv.) has presented us with an exhaustive and impartial account, History of Apoca?yjjticlnferp7-etations,it-]lowed by A Critical Examination and Refutation of tlxc Three Chief Counter- schemes of Apocalyptic Interpretation; and also of Dr. ArnokVs General Prophetic Counter-theory. Dean Alford's article {Greek Test.) on " Systems of Interpretation," is lucid and compact. Of Commentaries, leaving un- noticed earlier expositions, those of Yitringa, De Wette, Ewald, Bleek, Hengstenberg, Meyer, Ebrard, Auberlen, and Diisterdieck ; of Hammond, Bishop Xewton, Elliott, Alford, Bishop Wordsworth, Cun- ningham, Woodhouse, Moses Stuart, De Burgh, I. Williams, besides the works of Faber, Mait- land, and Prof. Birks, are well known ; and Dr. Currey's Notes on Revelation, in the Christian Know- ledge Society's Commentary^ add much to the value of a reaUy use- ful work. Of lectures, the late Professor Maurice's Lectures are full of thought and interest; and many are indebted to Dr. Vaughan (now Dean of Llandaft') for his Lectures on the Revelation of St. John, which are models of what expository lec- tures ought to be. Gebhardt's Lehrbegriff der Apokalypse, now accessible to English readers in Clarke's Foreign Translation Li- brary — (Gebhardt's Doctrine of the Apocalypse) is a valuable addition to the literature of the subject ; it contains a close and careful com- parison between the doctrine of the Apocalypse and that of the Gospel and Epistles of St. John. Of other books may be mentioned — Rev. S. Garratt's Commentary on the Reve- lation of St. John, considered as the Divine Book of History ; Prophet- ical Landmarks, by Rev. H. Bonar ; Dr. J. B-.ToM'sDonnellan Lectures; 342 NEW TESTAMENT INTRODUCTIONS. and Bishop Wordsworth's Huhean Lectures. The Apocalypse, by Rev. Charles B. WaUer ; The Farousia, a Critical Inquiry into the New Testament Doctrine of our Lord's Second Coming ; the Life and Writings of St. John, by Dr. J. M. Macdonald, of Princetown. On special points the following works may be noted : — On the Epistles to the Seven Churches, in addition to Archbishop Trench's indispensable work, and to Stier's well-known one, a valuable contribution has been given by Prof. Plumptre. On the Millennium : Bishop Walde- grave's " New Testament Millen- narianism " {Sampton Lectures), and the Rev. Dr. Brown's work, entitled Christ'' s Second Coming : ivill it be pre- Millennial ? On the Babylon of the Apocalypse : Bishop Words- worth's Rome, the Babylon of the Apocalypse. On the types and symbols : Fairbairn's Typology of Scripture; Rev. Malcolm White's Symbolical Numbers of Scripture ; and the essay on " The Formal Elements of 'Apocalyptics " pre- fixed to Lange's Commentary on Revelation. Of this last book, which has not been mentioned above, it is to be regretted that, with much that is most valuable, it should be disfigured by pedantry of style. Printed by Cassell & Compaxt, Limited, La Belle Saiivage, London, E.G. Date Due ^- 0^^- /c m\i 6. mc * 22 'd/l *'•' *±a '''"'it FEB A 8 '5 7 UAR4 1 i7 MAR la's ^ IT' 1 $)