Aerie e ey eed whet i τὸ backs «αγένεψφαι ὑπ PA, Lhe ene ΤΗΣ bed ιϑυυϑόνοον beteked eee verte δ, ΓΝ ΚΜ ΤΗΝ abe ΠΗ δ, peed yet με Mire Pet riers deny λυδάφ ἐν abated dbeeberisd ite t ἡσε φερνε. ἢ ΚΟ υδόλννν μοι γεν χόν᾿ ἐσσι > art ATE NY At ere peanaynssenarat ahegneenepnerl δι γε pda haere rt δόμα δῦ γόνα eet νον νμυλνα λοϑ μενα, your yeatote pagetapr renee 4 ete ooh ree φως 0 oO eee eee dedenedebsh shen wa rbenemenenentt 4 ἣν badsere =o! viviatanacenepebiival chagyeanes ἐγρυόνν ὁ φφούδι εν ὧν Jade Huet ἐφφηδτῳ He Noaipensieletesspanetetcgebees eect aes ΝΜ Sibel φγεφο. 47" het φυγὴ δῷ HO eT etae ah eer weeny δ tar MMH TRE A ΚΗ petaih (ee deeers er cateye tr, ribor φωγενεφοὶ. ἀφ λεδη φίλ γυνή Ψ Ὁ κόγτῦν ν EK) ri OO] ° 3 ; : ; ered .) Vs ᾿ ¥ ‘ Ye bese £ ineelhethobefted ΤΉ ΠΟ Ὁ πῇ ἡμὴ Στ Ἢ i ; : inet ἈΜῊΝ ' Pesantieg' 44 chek t ων x . d ey Fen ou poet b-boes vf Ae ἀν ΑΨ» Ὁ atest ὡς mh ei habeys ΣΝ outta Ah aia hinnandehataeeahs gen ee pity elegans siehesancbart echt etae ΝῊ ΜΗ ΝΜ 4 4 Ἢ ὃ ψ ie planaerenanae Paver ted it nts Me bey bet Beater st dey Ray yt sith : pitcentise ts Peri μα ; ᾿ ᾿ , Y t Pine tds tbs ᾿ Η ἡ Sid ha hemes eakesbene τὴ } ἘΝῚ iv) ν sexi Cerda bits x. ὑμὴν rite Net ΡΝ ‘ ‘Pe ΟΝ ᾿ ΣΑΙ ΝΣ Mature Dadirityial Υ ty ᾿ ᾿ μ ἢ ὅν erst titabisbonennseaonal bye yeyt i ae ἣν prise Patisteet f δον ταν δ λον τ σὸν Πόθεν ας peta Bebo pod oo) bi b + ᾿ ἀγα γι} εὐθὺν a ϑαϑ νυ λα, οὐ ϑοϑο ba tepeiadetates ΣῊ νυ ξυῤο νῇ aban t beds} piney Shed NaN beg: 4 ἐν A rp-etelp ΠΗ he ᾿ f ον ον ΠΩ renee ΜΗ ΨῚ pet ie ais boi vte gpevereteta ven ὃ; oy + Abb Ue vivre 4} ἰδ. rip bier! ν δά νε δὴ νὰ ὅν, ἮΝ |. Tonal + ΠΗ ΜῈ ΡΝ iotaeet Η epee any Hele ition ΜΝ Ἢ ont ΤΡ heard tte fal ἀέρι fi Hosen tt ity Peer? Saat ἐσόξαψεχνὸνενενὸν : wey ribs hee shat oP ppsbebed δ Wap tise t HUE em δεν + ce haan hd a ἘΆΝ ay ἐν Font Δ δ be 4 ΧΗ ΜΝ ῃ τ ἩΜΜΉ Re μφοϑε ΜΝ ep phgy ne ead 9}}. are nee δὶ bee) ΠΝ ht vb oped prada bead Bade e 2h ah Ep as 9 Apap bhi ΝΗ ΜῊΝ ‘ oat ἘΔ θυ} poner Ὁ janet ΠΩΣ Pap δ 2. i} ᾿ ὑνγήϑενθν eb oeeh eee yah ΩΝ ΨΥ Abide νὴ βν >! ca + AD 4 (03 obs 9) T Deedee 4 ΠΣ ΠΣ italien? Le be i ; op a dred ᾿ ἩΜ Θὸν ἰῷ ᾿ rasa eta 3 ἡ ἀφ ΜῊ ὲ ἘΝ τ υορας ΠΩ ey ἐγ ννν th elt eet ieeeerite et sy ! iit at iy ears aii ig ipa mit av sie: ΗΒ ΉΜΉΩΝ aya ad ΝΗῚ A shih ai δ τε pe Πα Πα γον aii pasate: ait ΠΗ Line pnmpaaimammnanrinain Gay sey Ai hi ΠΗ Ne Nae te see ἈΝ πα a habe aiaees Santa ath : rth aad bah vawainadlopeinedrsbrists 2% bbe ssabpecceseeiwtve eb 4 : ἐνὶ hia) ala Fb oped βαρ aa Tae) a eed τὰ ’ meee rr ὁ Ὁ ὁ γ τῇ ἡ eae γὴν νἀ ἢ ΜΠ] aie Eee err VY bee ἡ» νην τὸ οὐαὶ Ἷ ἩΡΗ ΠΕ ΠΗ ἡ ΜῊ ἣν ih iret ἢ ; were? ἡ "ὦ. * watt haha : Gait } Bann) i aeistnpeseuagy δὴ iataticdsnr sed ateiniarcaragadainn ot ΡΟΣ ἐπ δον ooh ἈΝ Ἷ πάχνη ; + ΔΝ ἃ τϑ Ὁ δὴ ἢ εὖ bal 4 τ " : a i ΠΥ ΜΉΗΡ ΝΣ; via ted pret : hen λα ρ φη9 πος με { διννή αν ᾿ πος 4 path ad atte νῦν ‘ writwryy ; aa ra weit va + ὃ ΜΩ͂Ν ᾿ ἘΡΑΚ ΡΥ ta al Mes beet Linge theron y τ ΤῊ eis vey Ll ΜΕΝ fA Ne 'k s OUTLINE OF NEW TESTAMENT CHRISTOLOGY A STUDY OF GENETIC RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT PERIOD ν᾿ “ἢ Ni RN τ yi ἢ OUTLINE OF NEW TESTAME CHRISTOLOGY A STUDY OF GENETIC RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT PERIOD ἐν JOHN COWPER GRANBERY, PH.D. CHICAGO THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS eo CoryRIGHT 1909 By Tue UnIvERSITY OF CHICAGO Published December 1909 Composed and Printed By The University of Chicago Press Chicago, Illinois, U. S. A. To all his instructors the author makes grateful acknowledgment of indebtedness. He desires to make especial mention of the assistance of Associate Professor Clyde Weber Votaw, whose interest, encouragement, and suggestions have contributed helpfully toward this dissertation. “A Ne. Me ἣν itn: ἣ TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION . : ε ds Aim, Explanation of Charts, and Résumé. Charts—Chronological and Genetic. Selected Bibliography. JewisH MESsSIANISM . THE MESSIANISM OF JESUS . JEWISH-CHRISTIAN CHRISTOLOGY THE PAULINE CHRISTOLOGY CHRISTOLOGY IN THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS AND ACTS . COSMOLOGICAL CHRISTOLOGY OF THE EPISTLES TO THE COLOS- SIANS AND THE EPHESIANS . CHRISTOLOGY OF THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS . CHRISTOLOGY IN First PETER AND First CLEMENT . APOCALYPTICAL CHRISTOLOGY (THE APOCALYPSE OF Joun) . . CHRISTOLOGY IN THE PASTORAL EPISTLES . XI. XII. ΧΙΠ. THE JOHANNINE CHRISTOLOGY. THE IGNATIAN CHRISTOLOGY CHRISTOLOGY IN THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS AND IN LATER WoRKS ConcLuDING REMARKS 7] PAGE 109 127 INTRODUCTION AIM, EXPLANATION OF CHARTS, AND RESUME This study surveys the entire period of the New Testament history and literature, ca. 28-160 A. D., and includes the other extant Christian writings of these years that lie outside of the New Testament canon. The effort is to present types of Christology within the New Testament period in such a way that they will stand out with their distinctive features and in their proper relationships, and to denote the character and sources of the conception of Christ in writings not so fully christological. It is not proposed to give an exhaustive study of the several types. Important questions are left unanswered, or the answer is only vaguely hinted at; for example, the character and extent of some of the non-Jewish influences. The study is offered as a contribution to the understanding of the Chris- tology of the period chiefly in its bold, outstanding features and more general relationships. The dates given are not to be taken rigidly; they are intended to be suggestive, and form no essential part of the charts. It is not expected that anyone will find all of the dates acceptable. In many cases the evidence barely makes possible a choice between different dates. The development of Christology does not move along strictly chronological lines, and yet it is so closely bound up with the several periods that an attempt at approxi- mate dating is unavoidable. It is to be noted also that a not unimportant factor in determining the chronology of the literature is the development of the christological thought itself. The charts cannot tell everything, and in some instances may prove actually misleading. The connecting lines in Chart II do not indicate every relationship—only the principal connections. For example, there is indirect Alexandrian influence in the Pauline Christology, but it is compre- hended only under the very general head: ‘‘Gentile Needs and Thought.” Pauline influence is to be found in the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Apocalypse of John, but is not sufficiently direct and prominent to find place in the chart, unless the chart be made so complicated as to destroy its value. The personality of Jesus influenced in some degree all types of Christology, but it is not deemed best to draw connecting lines in every instance. The Matthaean Christology, that of Polycarp, James, etc., are given no visible connections, but this means only that they are products of 9] 9 10 HISTORICAL AND LINGUISTIC STUDIES the period, not sufficiently indebted to any special source to call for connect- ing lines. It is not intended to suggest that Gnosticism as such has made actual con- tributions in every instance where its influence is indicated by connecting lines, but that under the influence of the gnostic controversy the Christology in question took on the given form. Chart I presents substantially the outline of this study. Chart II exhibits the genetic relationships. ‘The succeeding treatment presents the evidence. For convenience a brief résumé of the results achieved is here given: In some of its leading features Christology existed in the form of Jewish messianism before Jesus came. His own ideals were nearer to Hebrew prophetism than to Jewish messianism; nevertheless he gave grounds for the application to himself of the messianic category. His purely personal, ethical, and religious influence is not estimated in this study, save as it bore upon the christological development. That the rich, strong, creative life proceeded from and gathered about Jesus is not denied; the age may well have owed to him first of all, its freshness and power. But where spiritual life is rich and growing, theology will be undergoing corresponding changes of form, and it is only with the christological aspects that we are here con- cerned. The fact is not overlooked that Jesus impressed men as being such a one as to require the use of various categories for the adequate evalua- tion of his person; all that is affirmed is that Jesus did not create those categories, nor explicitly teach their reference to himself, save that of mes- siahship in a modified, transformed, and spiritualized sense. Had Jewish messianism been the only determining factor we might well drop the word Christology altogether in favor of messianism. But when we come, for example, to the Johannine Christology we find little messianism. Paul was the first after Jesus, so far as we know, to experience keenly the inadequacy of the messianic concept. His contribution is discussed under the heads: the pre-existent and incarnate Lord, the crucified Redeemer, the cosmic Savior, the indwelling Christ, and the divine Son of God. An advance upon the Pauline Christology is found in the cosmological Chris- tology of Colossians and Ephesians, which was a further development of Paulinism, but made larger use of Alexandrian thought in the conflict with incipient Gnosticism. Another bold Alexandrian type was that of Hebrews, which was not so close to Paul but was directly dependent on Philo. In the Apocalypse of John, Jesus was interpreted by means of the concepts of apocalyptic, combined with the universalism of the post-apostolic age and a comparatively small Christian element. In First Peter and First Clement 10 OUTLINE OF NEW TESTAMENT CHRISTOLOGY 11 we have edifying epistles containing much Christology, but not sufficient that is distinctive to warrant giving them a place beside the great types already discussed. The explicit emergence of the doctrine of Christ’s saving mission to the world of the dead in First Peter is notable. The Synoptic Gospels present a double problem, but we are at this point concerned with the Christology of the authors themselves and not with their sources. Mark represents the age just succeeding Paul; lying in the background is a high Pauline Christology. Luke-Acts falls at the begin- ning of the second century and moves in the direction of the apologies of the middle of the century. Matthew is strongly christological, representing an advanced stage and moving toward Catholicism. The Johannine Christology is a further development of Paulinism; it is many-sided—mystical, theological, betraying sympathy with the deeper currents of the age, conserving what was most profound in Christianity and at the same time transforming it all into the ripest christological product of the period. The Ignatian Christology, called to expression by gnostic error, represents another bold, though unsystematized interpretation. A Jew could not bring himself to speak of Christ as God in the unreserved manner of this vigorous ecclesiastic. The originality of his thought may be dis- cerned by reading his letters beside that of his conservative contemporary Polycarp. The current Christology appears again in the Pastoral Epistles, affirmed in opposition to gnostic error. A somewhat different and more responsive type appears in Barnabas. About the middle of the second century there arose certain edifying works not strongly christological: James, Hermas, Didache, Second Clement, Jude, and Second Peter. In this period the gnostic systems were fully developed and the real controversy began. The earlier apologists also were putting forth their works. But the discussion of these subjects would take us beyond the New Testament period proper to the age of the Catholic church. It is a singular and significant fact, however, that among those counted heretics there should have been one who was at least partly gnostic, who understood, as did no contemporary of whom we know, the gospel of the Christ who brings spiritual freedom as it was preached by the apostle Paul—Marcion of Pontus. If now we ask to what extent the development of christological thought was in accord with Jesus, anything like an adequate answer would carry us beyond the task we have set ourselves. It may not be amiss, however, to note that although Paul had his gaze fixed on the exalted Lord and not on the earthly Jesus, yet in certain respects he came nearer understanding Jesus than the Jewish Christians at Jerusalem, many of whom had known 11 12 HISTORICAL AND LINGUISTIC STUDIES Jesus in the flesh. In the death of Jesus, Paul saw the principle of self- sacrifice that animated his life. Paul’s universalism was a logical develop- ment of the universalism implicit in Jesus. Paul’s doctrine of the freedom of the Christian man was essentially one with the ideal of ethical and religious freedom for which Jesus lived and died. But it would be a mistake to overlook the fact that at every point the way of arriving at these principles is different. Into Paul’s thought there enter the wisdom of the rabbis, the speculation of apocalyptic, and the popular thought-world of Hellenism. On the other hand, Jesus thinks and speaks in terms that are elementary and universal; his religious ideas are simple, fundamental, and mighty. Although Paul’s liberation of the gospel from national barriers was in accord with the mind of Jesus, Paul did not appeal for support to Jesus’ own attitude of freedom; indeed, in his view, Jesus was born under law and came as a minister of circumcision for the truth of God (Gal. 4:4; Rom. 15:8). The basis of Jesus’ criticism of the law was purely ethical: the law substituted appearance for reality and did not go to the heart of things. Paul’s polemic against the law was practical in motive also, but his conten- tion was for redemption in Christ. The love of neighbor was broader in the thought of Jesus than in that of his followers; for while they were not lacking in the comprehensive Christian virtue of love, they dwelt upon the love of brethren of the church. Where Paul departs most widely from the thought of Jesus is in the sphere of doctrine and not of life; he stakes everything on certain divine acts that entered into human history but tran- scended it—acts which secure for men salvation: the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. Although Paul spoke of the obedience and self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ, he had in mind the exemplification of these virtues on the part of the Son of God who came down from heaven to save men, rather than their exemplification in Jesus as he walked among men. Yet the latter was not absent, and had not Jesus, in Paul’s view, lived that kind of a life, the ascription to him of that character in the larger con- ception would have been an impossibility. Wrede (Paulus, S. 88-97; Eng. trans., pp. 155-69) protests vigor- ously against the statement that Paul understood Jesus, and minimizes almost to the extent of elimination all dependence of Paul on Jesus. Closely as they are related, we must in this connection distinguish between life and dogma, and our study is of dogma. Had Wrede confined to the sphere of doctrine his contention as to Paul’s independence, his position would have had more to commend it. 12 OUTLINE OF NEW TESTAMENT CHRISTOLOGY CHARTS—CHRONOLOGICAL AND GENETIC CHART I CHRONOLOGICAL EXHIBIT OF TYPES OF CHRISTOLOGY WITHIN THE NEw TESTAMENT PERIOD Hebrew Prophetism Jewish Messianism A.D. THE MESSIANISM OF JESUS 30- 40 JEWISH-CHRISTIAN CHRISTOLOGY 40- 50 50- 60 PAULINE CHRISTOLOGY 60- 70 “ (Sources of Synoptic Gospels) 7o- 80 Mark 80- 90 COSMOLOGICAL CHRISTOLOGY (Col. and Eph.) go-100 CHRISTOLOGY OF HEBREWS I Peter I Clement APOCALYPTICAL CHRISTOLOGY (The Apocalypse of John) I0O-1I0 Luke-Acts MATTHAEAN CHRISTOLOGY Pastoral Epistles IIO-120 JOHANNINE CHRISTOLOGY IGNATIAN CHRISTOLOGY Polycarp 120-130 Apocalypse of Peter 130-140 Gospel of Peter Barnabas (Marcion) 140-150 Jude James Hermas GNosTICsS 150-160 Didache APOLOGISTS II Clement II Peter 13 14 HISTORICAL AND LINGUISTIC STUDIES CHART ΤΠ SHOWING GENETIC RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE New TESTAMENT PERIOD ebrew Prophetism Babylonian-Persia Religion A. Ὁ. Jewish Messianism 20 ᾿ Gentile THE MESSIANISM AND PERSONALITY OF JESUS -Needs and 30 Ἴ ν « Thought JEWISH-CHRISTIAN CHRISTOLOGY y 40 [ a Alexandrianism 5° PAULIN RISTOLOGY ϑ6 60 ¥ a + ra) ee ‘| ngsticism 70 | ark CosMOLOGICAL 80 II Thess. CHRISTOLOGY 90 I Peter of Col. and Eph. 7 APOCALYPTICAL CHRISTOLOGY of Apoc. of John 100 Luke-Act | MATTHAEAN Ι CHRISTOLOG 110 JOHANNINE CHHISTOLOGY 120 Polycary IGNATIAN CHRISTOLOGY Apoc. of Peter Gospel o Barnabas 130 Peter Jude James 140 Hermas 150 Didache Marcion II Clement 160 II Peter APOLOGISTS 14 15 OUTLINE OF NEW TESTAMENT OHRISTOLOGY a El tea rmitr 1f1-ol seqeuieg ΟΟΙ ε6-9 2 2 sjoy-ayn'T ἘΝ ΤΩΣ 8 KL 96-01 smoiqayy | —SL -qay ‘seqeuieg ‘“I9}9g 1 SL-ol (suonippe 1918] τ 09-01 meyesniaf Jo uononsyseq GL 9 Ε Seanons YR 2 yey awos Sundaoxs) moyeyy 6L-69 uvisedsa, 69-g9 snTPUA ‘OyIO “eqrey oor—(oL) Sg smaiq €1-99 1eA\\ Ystmof -3FJ 917 0} Burpi0sse jadsoyy |° +: -0L-09 to o19N Aq uonno ol-Sg (Ajqeqoid) x1e ΘΟΙΘ Δα ὍΘΙ οι WEIN -asiod pue suioy jo Suruing tg-6S sayjsidy 1810} 16S ἀ : —LS ¢9S$-SS 10yeind01g snisaq 584 ae Se en 9 1 6S ς Σ a 4 ‘ -L§ goS-SS xyoq 10 {899} tg-'S 5191191 sjneg sae pee ΠΣ ὙΠῸ = 09=05 eee (ἔς ‘